JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
This is an interesting topic and comes up more and more each year.
If your team is ahead by three there are under 10 seconds to play and the other team begins bringing the ball up the court, should you foul them and send them to the line as opposed to letting them attempt a three?
It seems like most coaches choose NOT to foul, while most fans and pundits are just as certain they should have fouled them. The latter arises in an instance like last night where Iowa State was up three late and KU banks in a three to send it to overtime.
Things to consider:
1) There are still far more teams who trail by three who attempt and miss a three and lose than there are those who make it and go to overtime. It's just that those games and situations don't make it on Sportscenter or get written about. You are not going to ask the coach of the team that was leading by three 'Why didn't you foul there? you risked tying the game?' in the post game presser, because he'll say 'We won, didn't we?" Unless your opponent shoots better than 50% from three, your odds of them missing that last shot attempt are greater than them hitting it...and perhaps even better still because many of those last second shot attempts are wild scrambles or taken in a hurry. KU shoots 38% from three; good to let them shoot it? If you foul and they make the first, look at a team's offensive rebounding percentage...KU us just under 32%, but situationally, the Cyclones had a small team on the court there at the end and KU had some big trees. These are not easy decisions
2. Basketball IQ in the heat of the battle. You don't want to foul too early in a situation like this, but you don't want to foul the shooter in the act of shooting, either. So there would be a perfect time to foul someone, once they've gotten the ball across the court and 10 or so feet from the three-point line. Do you trust your team to do this? Will they be in a position to do this? Do you want them thinking of 'Don't foul yet, wait for it, wait for it? Is it reasonable to think that kids on the floor in the heat of the battle can even pull that off? how many times have you seen a team foul the opposition late in a shot clock in a close game when the last thing you want to do at that point is foul because so much time has gone off? It happens all the time. Many players can't think straight in the heat of the moment and you don't want to give them too many things to think about.
There are so many unaccounted for variables if you make the decision to foul and just one if you choose to let them shoot and contest it somewhat...and as long as you can try to keep the ball out of the hands of the opponent's best sniper, you chances of success in letting the opponent shoot a three and it missing seems like a better option to me given all of the variables...and since most coaches choose to let opponents shoot the three, it would seem they feel that way, too.
Your thoughts?
If your team is ahead by three there are under 10 seconds to play and the other team begins bringing the ball up the court, should you foul them and send them to the line as opposed to letting them attempt a three?
It seems like most coaches choose NOT to foul, while most fans and pundits are just as certain they should have fouled them. The latter arises in an instance like last night where Iowa State was up three late and KU banks in a three to send it to overtime.
Things to consider:
1) There are still far more teams who trail by three who attempt and miss a three and lose than there are those who make it and go to overtime. It's just that those games and situations don't make it on Sportscenter or get written about. You are not going to ask the coach of the team that was leading by three 'Why didn't you foul there? you risked tying the game?' in the post game presser, because he'll say 'We won, didn't we?" Unless your opponent shoots better than 50% from three, your odds of them missing that last shot attempt are greater than them hitting it...and perhaps even better still because many of those last second shot attempts are wild scrambles or taken in a hurry. KU shoots 38% from three; good to let them shoot it? If you foul and they make the first, look at a team's offensive rebounding percentage...KU us just under 32%, but situationally, the Cyclones had a small team on the court there at the end and KU had some big trees. These are not easy decisions
2. Basketball IQ in the heat of the battle. You don't want to foul too early in a situation like this, but you don't want to foul the shooter in the act of shooting, either. So there would be a perfect time to foul someone, once they've gotten the ball across the court and 10 or so feet from the three-point line. Do you trust your team to do this? Will they be in a position to do this? Do you want them thinking of 'Don't foul yet, wait for it, wait for it? Is it reasonable to think that kids on the floor in the heat of the battle can even pull that off? how many times have you seen a team foul the opposition late in a shot clock in a close game when the last thing you want to do at that point is foul because so much time has gone off? It happens all the time. Many players can't think straight in the heat of the moment and you don't want to give them too many things to think about.
There are so many unaccounted for variables if you make the decision to foul and just one if you choose to let them shoot and contest it somewhat...and as long as you can try to keep the ball out of the hands of the opponent's best sniper, you chances of success in letting the opponent shoot a three and it missing seems like a better option to me given all of the variables...and since most coaches choose to let opponents shoot the three, it would seem they feel that way, too.
Your thoughts?
