I'm not a basketball guy... So, can somebody help me understand why coaches sit players with foul trouble? Why not just let them play and foul out? It seems like when coaches sit them at 2 or 3 fouls it is no different than when they foul out anyways. For example: why not just play Basabe until he fouls out instead of sitting him the majority of the game. You probably could have gotten him on the floor for more total minutes.
Sitting players with foul trouble
- Thread starter andy
- Start date
common basketball theory is the player sits when they have 1 more foul than the qtr. so at the 10 min mark of the 1st half if they have 3 fouls they are sitting. the hope is you can save a player from making a mistake early and therefore having them later when they may be more important to the team. so if gatens has 3 fouls with 5 min left in the 1st half you sit him. this allows him to save 2 fouls for the second half and not play nearly as tentatively. it isnt a perfect system but it is better than letting your best player foul out with 15 min left in the game.
storminspank
Justin VanLaere
The second half is more crucial than the first half, you don't want your players getting that 3rd foul in the first half. If they do, they can't be as aggressive in the second half and that can hurt the team.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
If your best players get in foul trouble, you sit them so they don't foul out. You want them available down the stretch - the last 5 minutes of the game or so. That's when the intensity really starts to rachet up, and you need your best guys out there.
storminspank
Justin VanLaere
It can backfire or it can be brilliant.
For instance, tonight LewJack picked up his 2nd foul but Painter brought him back in towards the end of the first half and Purdue went on a big run. If he gets that 3rd foul, Painter looks foolish, but instead it was gold as the Boilers got going again.
For instance, tonight LewJack picked up his 2nd foul but Painter brought him back in towards the end of the first half and Purdue went on a big run. If he gets that 3rd foul, Painter looks foolish, but instead it was gold as the Boilers got going again.
DFaceHawkeye
Well-Known Member
I usually will sit players with 2 fouls in the first half. However, I will bring that player back in the first if a) he can bring more than someone currently playing and b) I can give him a favorable defensive situation.
Just like anything in bball, situations have to be taken into account.
Just like anything in bball, situations have to be taken into account.
I think a few of you summed it up perfectly. I just wanted to add on and say that you always want your players to have at least a foul to give so (like others have said) they stay aggressive. Going along with that... a very good coach I had once told me: If you go a whole game without picking up a foul... You are not playing aggressive enough.
Obviously there is a difference between fouls from simply being aggressive and just plain dumb fouls.
On a side note: I really liked how aggressive McCabe was tonight. I think he is always aggressive, but tonight he was able to seem in control. He hustled, but wasn't wild and doing a bunch of dumb fouls. I thought he did a great job and deserves some props for that. Hopefully he can keep that up.
Obviously there is a difference between fouls from simply being aggressive and just plain dumb fouls.
On a side note: I really liked how aggressive McCabe was tonight. I think he is always aggressive, but tonight he was able to seem in control. He hustled, but wasn't wild and doing a bunch of dumb fouls. I thought he did a great job and deserves some props for that. Hopefully he can keep that up.
