NCAA Championship Game - Calling Shabi

[Reel Deal]

Sorry, I didn't ask that very well... what I'm most interested in is your opinion on what went down at the end of regulation. He's getting hammered for not calling timeout just before KU's final possession when they hit the 3 to send it to OT, to remind his players that they should foul and put KU on the line shooting 2. He's also getting crap for not calling a TO after that 3 when there was 2.1 seconds left and they could have tried to set up some kind of play (long inbounds down the court) as opposed to the despiration half-coirter they took. That's what I was curious about.

[PShabi]

There will always be second guessers.

You always here announcers talking about "fouling and putting them to the line for 2," but you RARELY EVER see a coach use that strategy. I personally don't like it. I would've played that situation the same. He misses that shot and you say, "good defense." He hits a fadeaway 3 with a hand in his face and you (not YOU, RD) second guess the coach. Meh.

I don't like fouling there because:

a) You give them a chance to add points with the clock stopped. If there's enough time left, they can still foul you and get another possesion out of it. How much time was left? Is it feasible that they could've went to the line, knocked down 2. Then you have to inbound. There have been some CLASSIC situations where players have stolen inbound passes late in the game under the hoop. Or you inbound and get fouled. Miss 1 or both and they come down and hit a game winner at the buzzer.

2) Kid may commit a flagrant/intentional foul. We talk about fouling in end of game situations with my team at the high school level. Hell, we even practice situations where it is needed to simulate game situations. You'd be amazed at how many differnt ways kids can fuck that situation up.

I say play defense (which they did) and make them make a tough, contested shot to beat you. That's basically the premise of man to man defense on every possesion. I tell my kids, work hard, don't let them get to the basket (doesn't apply here), and make them shoot a contested jumpshot. If they knock those down, then they're probably gonna beat us!

As far as the 2nd suggestion, I don't mind not calling a TO. Again, I practice time/score situations at my practices with my kids A LOT. Up 2 with :45 to go. Down 5 with 2 min, etc. If I do it, I'm sure Memphis does. I had a very fast guard and we knew that if it came down to several seconds left and the other team scored, I wanted it in to him ASAP and just fly to the other end. He can get there from baseline to baseline in < 4 secs. I told him don't worry about a timeout, if I want one, I'll call it while he's on the fly.
D. Rose is pretty damn athletic. I'd get it to him and see what happens. Remember, while Calipari is in a timeout setting up an offense, there's a pretty good coach on the other side setting up a defense.

On a tangent: Coaching in some ways is like the different levels of thinking in poker. What is he doing over in that timeout? What does he think I'm doing? What does he think, I think he's doing? etc.

Sorry for the ramble!!!!

[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).