MSaviolives said:
Yes USF. That's what I get for not checking back and also confusing one local Catholic school for another. Now we can talk about the merits of intentionally fouling at the end with a 3 point lead and a few seconds left.
OK, let's talk about it. I don't like calling for the intentional foul with a 3 point lead.
Done
right, I think it increases the odds of winning. But it is too hard to do correctly, and focusing on doing it correctly can too often lead to lousy defense that results in an open look for a 3. Take, for instance, the Kansas-Memphis NCAA final, when Calipari gave instructions to foul up 3, but not until the ball handler got in the front court. The defender didn't want to foul too soon, didn't want to get called for a flagrant, and didn't want to foul in the act of shooting. The end result was no foul and an open look at a 3 that sent the game to OT and Kansas wins in OT. And everybody then wants to know why Calipari didn't have his team foul.
I've seen plenty of other games where the team with the 3 point lead was clearly supposed to foul and the result of trying to do it right was that the trailing team got a clean look. Sometimes, they go in, more often they don't (because 3 point shooting percentages are less than 50%). Still, screwing up the instruction to foul can lead to cleaner looks than playing straight up D.
Yes, there are games where the team that hits the tying 3 was not ordered to foul. But there are others where the coach admits they were supposed to foul, and more where I'm sure the coach won't throw his players under the bus and doesn't say they were supposed to foul even though they were.
And the is the danger of all the things the Memphis player was trying to avoid -- fouling too early, getting called for a flagrant, fouling in the act of shooting (this last one perhaps the biggest problem).
There is also the danger of what happened in the Oregon-UCLA game, but that is rare -- the missed FT and offensive rebound doesn't happen that often. There was a Harvard Sports Analysis Collective study around 10 years ago that that showed the chances of winning were slightly better not fouling, but the difference was statistically insignificant, so they concluded no difference. Deadspin disagreed, emphasizing that the study showed in last second NCAA situations where a team was fouled up 3, only 3 of 52 times did an intentionally missed FT get rebounded and put back for a score, noted that many other of the fouls were in the act of shooting, and therefore concluded that "fouling when up three is the right call, as long as it's done right."
Well, duh. Let the clock get low enough, don't get called for a flagrant, don't foul in the act of shooting, and don't fail to foul, and yeah, fouling is the right call. But doing all that is easier said that done. The reason why fouling up 3 doesn't help the chances of winning is because the coach can't simply say, "Do it right" and have it done right. Too often, it isn't done right.
Someone looked at NBA games from 2005-08 where a team was leading by 3 with under 10 seconds. There were 260 instances of no fouls, the leading team won 91.9% of the time. There were 27 instances of fouls, the team leading won 88.9% of the time. Again, statistically insignificant. Of course, some of those fouls were in the act of shooting, and thus, not "done right." It isn't just NCAA players who don't do it right.
There is one element none of the studies take into account -- when there was an instruction to foul, but no foul, like the Memphis-Kansas game. It is hard to take into account, because the play-by-play won't tell you if there was an instruction to foul, and even if you could review all post-game interviews, people won't necessarily be honest about it. I suspect, however, that if you could somehow include games with an instruction to foul but no foul, instructing to foul decreases the chances of victory in a statistically significant way. But that is just a guess.
I'd rather play straight up D. Perhaps don't defend the 2 when the clock gets below 6 seconds. Otherwise, play straight up D.
