NCAA Championship Game - Calling Shabi

[Wes]

I can't believe you are a basketball coach and wouldn't foul there. It seems like such a no brainer situation there to me.

One of your arguments is pretty faulty since no ref will ever call intentional/flagrant foul unless the kid punches/tackles another to decide a game, let alone the National Championship.

The only reason why this is even close is because Memphis was in such a funk that they probably would have missed a free throw on the other end when Kansas fouled them after in bounding (and if you play fucking college basketball and can't in bound the ball against a press, get the fuck out). Setting up to lose the game, but it is going to be a ton harder to set up an easy shot with five seconds left with the length of the floor to go than it is to get a good shot with six seconds left on the scoring side.

Also, lets not forget that the Kansas kid has to hit both free throws (on a 1 and 1 bonus nonetheless. he misses the first one 20-30% of the time, gg you win) in a pressure packed situation if you do foul.

[PShabi]

It's not the NBA. You get the ball at the place where you called the timeout, so it's still a full court situation in the college game. Obviously a timeout in the pro game.

And the timeout is absolutely not a "no-brainer." In fact, the tactic is rarely employed at any level because of the reasons I stated. You don't think a at the college level, lol? The fucking kid from Kansas turned it over falling down, catching the ball, AGAINST THE PRESS IN THIS GAME RIGHT BEFORE THAT!!!!!!! Stranger shit happens than what happened to him in the . I don't want a deadball situation under their basket when I can just play good d and make them shoot a tough one over me, ONE TIME, for all the marbles. Minimize the chances for mistakes, imo. When you're ahead late, you are playing against the clock. Do not lengthen the game by fouling when ahead.

[PShabi]

As I stated earlier, kids do some stupid shit in these situations. At all levels. Do not underestimate that. It's not the sole reason to do it, but is valid nonetheless.

[Wes]

Man I love sports. It promote so much results oriented thinking. Yeah thanks for that one clip 25 years ago where a guy threw in a lazy in bounds pass. That one extreme example really proved me wrong!

I also never even mentioned the time out decision in my last post. So I don't know where you thought I said it was a no brainer. I said it was a no brainer to foul.

I also said that it would be harder to go the length of the floor with 5 seconds left than getting a good shot with 6 seconds left when you are the offensive side. Advantage Memphis.

[Zybomb]

if memphis went to foul couldnt kansas jus throw up a shot quickly and get 3 foul shots? Or is the college rule 2 no matter what still?

[PShabi]

That's another danger. Commiting the foul too late or with the wrong timing as they are shooting a 3. It's 3 shots.

[PShabi]

I meant to say "fouling" is a no-brainer. Not the timeout. It was late and it was a typo.

I showed the clip to show a possibility of what CAN happen when inbounding the ball, since you thought it should be automatic for a college-level player to inbound the ball.

As far as being "results oriented," you're a pretty good example of that. If the kid doesn't knock down the 3, no one says shit about not fouling.

I've already made all my arguments, some of them twice, but in all honesty, I've forgotten more about basketball than you'll EVER KNOW. Not trying to be a dick, but it's true. If you'd like, I'll post a poll at one of my coaching forums and show you the results on the foul / not to foul argument.

Also, when is the last time anybody has seen the "foul when up by 3" strategy used?

[Reel Deal]

As someone that played competitive basketball up through high school (and have also coached junior teams), I can say with a high degree of certainty that inbounding a ball (at any level) is not automatic.

Come to think of it, if you want to stay away from results oriented thinking then playing tough D and letting them take a very low percentage shot (last second, fade-away 3 pointer with a ton of pressure on you), is the right play. The foul the guy strategy brings in many more variables (which Shab did a nice job of listing above).

[omahilo]

I have no problem with the way the game played out... fouling isnt a good decision because so much more stuff is going to have to happen (kansas free throws, memphis inbound, memphis shoots foul shots or inbound gets stolen, kansas another possession) as oppose to letting a kid shoot a tough shot for all the marbles to tie the game and send it into OT.

I would take my chances of just letting him shoot for the tie. Also with the way memphis was shooting free throws and playing in general down the stretch chances are if they get the inbound pass in they would of missed one or both free throws and kansas would of been playing for the win.

[PShabi]

I wrote my last post before I left for work, and in the car, I was immediately thinking I fucked up, by leaving something out.

There is no "right" or "wrong" here. In basketball, the saying goes, "it's not WHAT you teach, it's how you teach it." Boobie is not wrong here, but the OP asked what I thought about Calipari's decisions (or lack thereof) and I personally didn't find fault in them.

I asked a coaching forum for their thoughts and I'll post it here when I get enough responses. I'm guessing it's going to be 50/50.

Last thought:

I've watched a lot of basketball. That's an understatement. I can't remember one instance where a team used the "foul when up by 3 strategy." I've NEVER seen it done. I hear announcers ponder as the team goes to timeout, but I can't remember one time where it was actually used.