No. St John's was out of timeouts, are not a great three-point shooting team and were without their point guard. You know they need a 3 and you defend it properly. You get the result we got, a really tough shot.
In my opinion you just have to be flexible. Overall. And we all agree that maybe Hurley’s biggest weakness. He is stubborn.I'm on the side of fouling up 3, but not today. We were in great position the whole possession and a foul would have bailed out St John's
Then we don't agree on that. The chances of them making a prayer 3 at all the specific points we could have fouled are significantly lower. It's not like it was a case of a few seconds on the clock either, there were 8-12 seconds which is plenty of time to try and make both and get another possessionIn my opinion you just have to be flexible. Overall. And we all agree that maybe Hurley’s biggest weakness. He is stubborn.
With Whaley, Jackson, Martin in the game rebounding I think there is a much better chance of a prayer 3 going in vs us not rebounding a FT.
You add in how poorly they were shooting free throws and how poor of an offensive rebounding team they are…you foul.
I don’t know if I have the same strategy against say Nova with how good they short their free throws.
But overall point in my opinion is to stay unpredictable. It’s been my concern lately is that we are such an easy scout. Well the whole world knows Hurley will never ever foul in that situation and can plan against that. Compare that to planning if you think they may foul you and you need a 3 maybe you run something different to move the ball quicker?
I look at it differently. St. John's needed a 3. They were 5-21 from 3 yesterday, for 23.8%. We know it's coming, defend it right and it's a low % heave. That's exactly how it played out.In the NBA, this hasn't been a decision for a few years. You foul up three; everyone does it. Of course, there are better shooters in the NBA than in college.
Still, for our team, I'd always foul. We're an elite rebounding team and St. John's was 54% from the stripe yesterday.
In the NBA, this hasn't been a decision for a few years. You foul up three; everyone does it. Of course, there are better shooters in the NBA than in college.
Still, for our team, I'd always foul. We're an elite rebounding team and St. John's was 54% from the stripe yesterday.
But we are a bad inbounding team. I think it's situational. Against some teams you foul. Others you don't. Yesterday not fouling was the clear call because you only have to guard 2-3 guys. People forget the risk of inbounding the ball, especially if you run out of time outs and get a 5 second call. A steal and a layup ends the game. So does an offensive foul. Look at that foul call on Cole late, that very easily could have been a turnover instead.
Are you a coach?Should Hurley have fouled when we were up 3?
Are you a coach?
If so, I feel like coaches have more bias ini favor of that rule. Like, I coach at a level where the likelihood of hitting a miracle three is higher than a player hitting both free throws, gaining possession and then hitting another shot.
However, in D1 and NBA, there's way more strategy to that rule.
In summary, I would have fouled, but a win is a win.
Eh, he begs to differ. Said he was yelling to his guys to "take one".It is a philosophical difference. Some coaches foul up 3, some don't. Others it depends on the opponent... Hurley is never going to foul in that situation, and it was definitely the right call. SJU is not a great 3 point shooting team and we had defended them well all night.
Eh, he begs to differ. Said he was yelling to his guys to "take one".