When Should a Coach "Save a Player?"

[easttexastrash]

I was watching the Phoenix vs NY game Sunday and Brondello was apparently saving Griner for the end of the game after she got into foul trouble. At some point I wondered "what are you saving her for?"

She ended up sitting on the bench with several minutes to go with 1 more foul to give. Seems to me that if you know that you don't have a chance to stay in the game without a certain player on the floor there is no use in "saving" them for the end of the game when the outcome may have already been decided due to her absence.

Thoughts?

 

[Goodgood]

I think it depends on the score. If it gets worse while she is on the bench, then they put her back in and go for broke. If the score remains the same or gets better, then they save her until there is still enough time to win the game and put her back in to get some momentum.

It is always depending on the score at the time. Maybe some coaches do it differently.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

It is formulaic thinking by coaches and it deflects criticism should the player foul out. Remember last season when Katie Lou approached Geno moaning tat she had 4 fouls. He told her something like "don't look at me, that's your problem" and motioned her back to the fray.

 

[UcMiami]

It is time, score, performance of the team and the replacement player, and perhaps the biggest one - the trust the coach has in the player in foul trouble. Some players can make adjustments to their style of play to keep from picking up more fouls while still being effective, others cannot.

Geno trusted Lou in those situations more than he did either Gabby or Napheesa - some of that was because of who they were defending and where on the floor (post players are more likely to lose effectiveness and/or pick up fouls over which they don't have much control) and some of that is maturity and mindset. And Geno tests players in meaningless games to see who he can trust. Lou didn't foul out last year, Napheesa fouled out four times.

 

[BroadwayVa]

I was watching the Phoenix vs NY game Sunday and Brondello was apparently saving Griner for the end of the game after she got into foul trouble. At some point I wondered "what are you saving her for?"

She ended up sitting on the bench with several minutes to go with 1 more foul to give. Seems to me that if you know that you don't have a chance to stay in the game without a certain player on the floor there is no use in "saving" them for the end of the game when the outcome may have already been decided due to her absence.

Thoughts?

Coaches save players to the end of the game --just for the off chance the game gets tight and you may need her. However, men or women,
you estimation of What For? is valid --how many times has this been a successful mode/??
Last year--Napheesa and KLS were saved to mid Second half and that proved to be the right call. Win some/lose some.

 

[BroadwayVa]

It is time, score, performance of the team and the replacement player, and perhaps the biggest one - the trust the coach has in the player in foul trouble. Some players can make adjustments to their style of play to keep from picking up more fouls while still being effective, others cannot.

Geno trusted Lou in those situations more than he did either Gabby or Napheesa - some of that was because of who they were defending and where on the floor (post players are more likely to lose effectiveness and/or pick up fouls over which they don't have much control) and some of that is maturity and mindset. And Geno tests players in meaningless games to see who he can trust. Lou didn't foul out last year, Napheesa fouled out four times.

I agree! Geno does test his players and holds them accountable for committing the "stupid" foul (most are). Then there is the inability at time to judge the REF's --some you can predict which or what foul will be called--others seem to have no method or reason for the calls.
As for Gabby and Precious--they took on the unpleasant and unhearlded job of going against the Bigs of opponents--Jones and A'ja et-al--and coaches and teams went at them--knowing the thin bench Geno had---just dumb thoughts--but fun commenting. Napheesa is Precious in her fathers native tongue. Good luck to the coaches who think they'll win knocking out anyone via fouls this coming season!!!

 

[BroadwayVa]

It is formulaic thinking by coaches and it deflects criticism should the player foul out. Remember last season when Katie Lou approached Geno moaning tat she had 4 fouls. He told her something like "don't look at me, that's your problem" and motioned her back to the fray.

If you listen or read what fans, even here, say about Formulaic practices that were not followed---i.e. 30 seconds to go--down 2 --some fans have a specific choice that must be made--if a coach deviates--whoe be them. Any coach who reads or listens to this--should not be coaching--
A non Basketball coach I loved to watch--Lou Holtz--at games end in a tight games--he was not embarrassed to pull a play ground play out of his play book and use it--sometimes it worked.
That was the best quote/situation of last year. She didn't do that again did she??

 

[Golden Husky]

I was watching the Phoenix vs NY game Sunday and Brondello was apparently saving Griner for the end of the game after she got into foul trouble. At some point I wondered "what are you saving her for?"

She ended up sitting on the bench with several minutes to go with 1 more foul to give. Seems to me that if you know that you don't have a chance to stay in the game without a certain player on the floor there is no use in "saving" them for the end of the game when the outcome may have already been decided due to her absence.

Thoughts?

The whole concept seems to rest on the assumption that the final minutes of a game are more important than any other segment of game time. C'mon, the points are the same no matter when you score them.

Say your top player gets her fourth foul with 10 minutes to play and you put her on the bench until the five-minute mark. If she plays the rest of the game, how many minutes did she waste on the bench? Could she have gone back in with six minutes to play and not fouled out? Seven?There's no way to know that.

Oh, it's probably wise to pull a player for a minute or two if she gets in foul trouble if only to settle her down and explain the situation to her but, for the most part, I say, "Let 'em play."

 

[Golden Husky]

I was watching the Phoenix vs NY game Sunday and Brondello was apparently saving Griner for the end of the game after she got into foul trouble. At some point I wondered "what are you saving her for?"

She ended up sitting on the bench with several minutes to go with 1 more foul to give. Seems to me that if you know that you don't have a chance to stay in the game without a certain player on the floor there is no use in "saving" them for the end of the game when the outcome may have already been decided due to her absence.

Thoughts?

The whole concept seems to rest on the assumption that the final minutes of a game are more important than any other segment of game time. C'mon, the points are the same no matter when you score them.

Say your top player gets her fourth foul with 10 minutes to play and you put her on the bench until the five-minute mark. If she plays the rest of the game, how many minutes did she waste on the bench? Could she have gone back in with six minutes to play and not fouled out? Seven?There's no way to know that.

Oh, it's probably wise to pull a player for a minute or two if she gets in foul trouble if only to settle her down and explain the situation to her but, for the most part, I say, "Let 'em play."

 

[BigBird]

I have always wondered about this. While it is clearly formulaic/traditional/habitual to sit a player when they get three or four fouls, there are, despite my cynicism, some good reasons to do this. In no particular order:

1- Saving the player for an anticipated or probable overtime
2- Player is making silly fouls or not responding to game plan.
3- Player is frustrated by her fouling and as a result isn't concentrating well.
4- Opponents will try harder to foul the player out (where the player with three-plus fouls is guarding opponent's best scorer.
5- Coach feels that the player is fouling due to fatigue and provides rest.

Did I miss anything? It makes me snarky to see my team(s) lose a game, and with the best player guarding the pine. As has been said, "spending" those fouls would make more sense to me. Get what you can while you can from that player.

 

[easttexastrash]

I have always wondered about this. While it is clearly formulaic/traditional/habitual to sit a player when they get three or four fouls, there are, despite my cynicism, some good reasons to do this. In no particular order:

1- Saving the player for an anticipated or probable overtime
2- Player is making silly fouls or not responding to game plan.
3- Player is frustrated by her fouling and as a result isn't concentrating well.
4- Opponents will try harder to foul the player out (where the player with three-plus fouls is guarding opponent's best scorer.
5- Coach feels that the player is fouling due to fatigue and provides rest.

Did I miss anything? It makes me snarky to see my team(s) lose a game, and with the best player guarding the pine. As has been said, "spending" those fouls would make more sense to me. Get what you can while you can from that player.

And by all means, get the player the ball while she is on the court. Don't waste time having her do nothing but play defense and not give her a chance to get her own defender into foul trouble.