To foul or not foul when up 3

[HooperScooper]

Posting this article since we had a big discussion on this after the Marquette game and our game is mentioned in the article. Statistics show you should foul. Unfortunately the statistics they show are only from the 2012-2013 season so that's kind of a small sample size.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-ba...ul-strategy-at-end-backfires-as-it-so-often-d

 

[caw]

Posting this article since we had a big discussion on this after the Marquette game and our game is mentioned in the article. Statistics show you should foul. Unfortunately the statistics they show are only from the 2012-2013 season so that's kind of a small sample size.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-ba...ul-strategy-at-end-backfires-as-it-so-often-d

I know you realize these are small sample sizes, but they are so small that they render the percentages basically statistically identical.

 

[zls44]

46 v 1

 

[caw]

46 v 1

Sample size. There were only 20 attempts at the foul/rebound.

 

[CTBasketball]

Jim Calhoun never fouled. And I agree with him. But when looking at both sides, it depends on the shooters the other team has.

For instance, against Marquette. On the floor at the last possession of regulation were:

Junior Cadougan - 21.2%
Vander Blue - 33.3%
Jamil Wilson - 37.5%
Davante Gardner - 0%
Trent Lockett - 32%

Obviously, Cadougan brought the ball up and took the shot. Once you saw there were no screens/other players moving to get open, Cadougan would have taken the shot. Now if Vander Blue or Jamil Wilson came off a screen or brought the ball up, would you foul then? Who knows. But the difficulty of that shot he took, probably had a 5-10% chance of going in. With good defense that percentage goes down. On a good shooter, it is make-able, but still difficult nonetheless. See Rashad Anderson below:


Against Washington in the 2006 Sweet 16, Rashad Anderson hit a game-tying 3 pointer with <2 seconds in regulation. Would you foul then? On the court were:

Rudy Gay - 31.8%
Marcus Williams - 40%
Denham Brown - 32.6%
Hilton Armstrong - 50% (1-2)
Rashad Anderson - 40.7%

The difference is everybody knew, and I mean everybody, that Rashad Anderson was going to get the ball. The shot he hit was arguably tougher than Cadougan's. Applebee played great defense on him, followed through the screen well, and got his hands up. Anderson basically was shooting over the top of his head. The chances that shot goes in? For an ordinary 33% 3-pt shooter, probably around 5-10%. But we all knew Rashad wasn't bricking that one.

So do you foul in that circumstance, when Rashad Anderson is looking at you in the face, holding bloody daggers? I'd say foul Marcus Williams after 3-4 seconds of full court pressure. But with Cadougan? Let that overweight, overrated point guard take the heave because the chances of him making it are very low. He just hit a good shot. You move on. It's a percentages game. The players need to know who can knock down the 3, and they need to know who can really knock down the 3 (AKA: Rashad Anderson, Ray Allen, Chris Lofton, etc) If one of those players has the ball and has an unfavorable 3-pt shot, let him take it. If he's the next coming rendition of Pistol Pete Maravich, foul him.


My two cents.

 

[UChusky916]

As much as I blindly support just about everything Calhoun believes, I think you foul in that situation. People say "well you can lose if he hits the 3 and makes the free throw."

Do people really think the odds of that happening is greater than hitting a 3 and then losing in OT (basically 50/50?).

I guess it depends on a lot of factors, but if you're going to foul, do it BEFORE they can get a chance to shoot (off the ball/inbounds) or do it so that they CAN'T get a shot off.

 

[bmayuc]

Foul. Every. Time.

 

[bmayuc]

It doesn't "depend on the shooters". Even if every shooter on the team is a 10% 3 pt shooter, fouling makes more sense.

 

[mauconnfan]

Whichever one gets you a win is the one you should always select!!

 

[Gurleyman]

Foul every time is too simplistic, but I think it should be done more often than it is now.

More than five seconds, no - so I don't agree with the seven-second cutoff they did for this study. Then they can just hit both and you really could lose in regulation without anything crazy happening. And if a three-pointer goes in at 7.0, the player was probably starting his shooting motion at 9.5, so I'd like to see which possessions he counted. And if they are struggling to get the ball over midcourt or are hemmed in on the sideline where they have to chuck up a 1-in-100 prayer if they get a shot off at all, don't bail them out (i.e. Trajan Langdon).

Also, if your best big(s) have fouled out or are unavailable, you may not feel comfortable with that defensive rebound. If you knew you'd have to ask Neils Giffey to block out Andre Drummond with the game on the line, for example, you might figure you are better off playing straight-up defense.

But most of the time, it seems like the safer play. Just teach it properly - be sure your guys don't telegraph it too soon, so the other player can fling a BS shot at the rim as you go for the foul to make it in the act. And, if you have smart enough players, don't be afraid to use it as an ace in the hole - maybe take a gamble on a hard trap or a steal near midcourt where you can always foul if they start to get by you.

 

[Tenspro2002]

People say "well you can lose if he hits the 3 and makes the free throw."

I hate that argument. It displays a complete lack of understanding of probability -- or woefully pessimistic thinking.

Yeah, sure, fouling adds the infinitesimal chance of losing in regulation. It also decreases the chances of losing in overtime. The goal isn't to avoid losing in regulation. The goal is to win the ****ing game!

Let's say you don't foul. Because you know the 3 attempt is coming, you defend it tighter than usual (unless you're Ryan Boatright), and the chance of making it is 20%. Then you have a 50/50 chance of losing in overtime. You lose 10% of the time.

Before discussing what happens when you foul, I'll first estimate that the chances of scoring 2 from either a basket or a foul on rebounding action in under 2 seconds is 10%.

Now let's say you foul. Let's also say there's a 10% chance of doing it "wrong" (while shooting a 3) and a 90% chance of doing it "right" (non-shooting).
1) On shooting foul -- 10% it's a shooting foul * an 80% free throw shooter makes 3 free throws in a row 50% of the time -- 5%, and you lose in overtime 50% of that -- 2.5% losing
+ 10% * 65% chance of making 2 free throws * 20% chance of missing * 10% of scoring on rebounding action -- 0.13% losing
+ 10% * 32% chance of making 1 of 2 * 90% chance of missing on purpose * 10% of scoring on rebounding action * 50% losing in OT -- 0.13% losing
+ 10% * 5% that he makes the 3 while being fouled * (80% of making the free throw + 20% chance of missing * 50% chance of losing in OT) -- 0.5% losing
2) On a non-shooting foul -- 90% it's a non-shooting foul * 80% makes the first * 90% missing on purpose * 10% scoring on rebounding action * 50% losing in OT -- 3.3% losing

Sum all those up, and, with fouling, you lose 6.6% of the time.

You can quibble with the exact percentages, but for the love of God, avoiding the risk of losing sooner doesn't justify doing something that actually increases your overall chances of losing.

When you foul, surely, there are more different things that can go wrong, but the sum of them all occurring are no more probable than if you give your opponent the chance to hit a 3!

P.S. Belichick was right to go for it on 4th down at Indy.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

In it's simplist form, the argument boils down to which one of these is easier to do:

1) Make a 3 pointer, or

2) Make one free throw, miss the second free throw legally (don't make it by accident, don't airball it), rebound the missed free throw, and score another basket before time runs out.

And yes, I know that the 3 pointer is often a desperation one. But a lot of times the defense is so worried about not fouling that they end up not contesting the shot as hard as they normally would.

Honestly, I think the best argument against fouling is that there are too many college players who would screw it up - either by fouling way too early or waiting too long and fouling a guy in the act of shooting. It's just not something that the players are used to doing. So to use our example from the Marquette game, I don't know how realistic it is to expect that Boatright (or anyone else) would instinctively know how to handle that situation without the benefit of a timeout.

 

[Excalibur]

Honestly, I think the best argument against fouling is that there are too many college players who would screw it up - either by fouling way too early or waiting too long and fouling a guy in the act of shooting. It's just not something that the players are used to doing. So to use our example from the Marquette game, I don't know how realistic it is to expect that Boatright (or anyone else) would instinctively know how to handle that situation without the benefit of a timeout.

That is how I feel about it. Players do stupid in pressure situations. Add to that the variable of an idiot official saying that a foul was in the act of shooting, and there is even more uncertainty. Because of that, I think the decision has to depend on the situation. I think you foul in the following situations:

1) the other team is inbounding the ball from halfcourt or closer, with between 4 and 7 seconds remaining. Foul immediately when the ball is caught.

2) Team has to go the length of the court, you've had a timeout to give instructions prior to the other team inbounding the ball, and there are 6-11 seconds left. Foul as soon as they cross half court.

 

[Gurleyman]

I get nervous doing it with more than five seconds left. At that point, they can make both and foul you on the inbounds pass. Now you have to make both, or else you're in the same situation, only up by 2, fouling is off the table, and you can lose.

If your backcourt shoots in the high 80's at the line, and you trust them to make two, then I could see tacking an extra couple seconds on that.