- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Should basketball coaches be able to decline free throws?
Posted on 1/27/16 at 7:02 pm to ballscaster
Posted on 1/27/16 at 7:02 pm to ballscaster
quote:
Wrong. With one minute left, it behooves the team who is ahead to keep the ball rather than shoot free throws. This creates a scenario far worse than what we currently have. The trailing team inevitably will keep fouling, and the only thing that will happen is a lot of inbound plays. What we have now is way better.
If I'm a coach who is up 2 with a minute left, and my guy who is an 85% free throw shooter gets fouled, there's a damn good chance I have him shoot those and try to stretch to a two possession lead, than risk having to inbound the ball with that slim a lead (remember, if team that's down doesn't foul, and I don't convert, they now have the ball down two...so coaches would not foul on purpose in this situation).
Also, as to your point about "a lot of goons on the bench with zero fouls", that also doesn't make sense...a foul resets the shot clock, so if your strategy is just "foul relentlessly with my bench guys", you will either have all your bench guys foul out without ever gaining possession, or those guys will get torched by the opposition before they can foul.
You have yet to post one thought in this thread where I go "that's actually a good point." Like I said earlier, the only real objection I can imagine would be that there would still be the same number of fouls, just that they'd be followed by inbounds passes. But, as was the point of this thread, the team who is getting fouled should get to weigh the risk/reward of trying to extend with FTs or inbound against pressure.
This post was edited on 1/27/16 at 7:16 pm
Posted on 1/28/16 at 1:53 am to Chucktown_Badger
quote:No shite, especially since players have made about 69% of their free throws for the past 50 years. The 16% difference between the decades-long mean and your hypothetical is, I'd say, pretty significant.
If I'm a coach who is up 2 with a minute left, and my guy who is an 85% free throw shooter gets fouled, there's a damn good chance I have him shoot those and try to stretch to a two possession lead, than risk having to inbound the ball with that slim a lead (remember, if team that's down doesn't foul, and I don't convert, they now have the ball down two...so coaches would not foul on purpose in this situation).
So let's replay your scenario with a 69% ft shooter. Every coach on earth in-bounds it here.
It just isn't a good idea. I know it sounds good, but it's really, really terrible.
quote:I have a better chance of winning by playing the style that will foul all my players out than by playing the "orthodox" style in this case. My point makes complete sense.
Also, as to your point about "a lot of goons on the bench with zero fouls", that also doesn't make sense...a foul resets the shot clock, so if your strategy is just "foul relentlessly with my bench guys", you will either have all your bench guys foul out without ever gaining possession, or those guys will get torched by the opposition before they can foul
quote:Then do more thinking. The idea presented in the op is one I respect because of its initial line of thinking, but the proposed rule is so much worse than what we have now that we currently have a situation where no governing body has ever considered it.
You have yet to post one thought in this thread where I go "that's actually a good point."
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News