Why we shouldnt foul Up 3 with >10secs to go.

[hyhy]

Many here have been blaming Pop on why we dun foul up 3 with about 10secs to go, or even up 5 with 28secs to go. Let me break it down for you.

Possibilities when you just defend Up 3 with 10secs: 1) Opponent scores a contested three -> DRAW, overtime. 2) Opponent misses a contested 3 -> Win. Simple, unless we lose the rebound, den redo.
Possibilities when you def up 6 with 28secs to go. 1) As with the heat, scores 2 threes, foul and we score 1/2 free throw, overtime. 2) Miss or make both free throws and catch rebound, we win.

Basically, the most important factor: When defending, the clock RUNS.

When you foul up 3 with 10secs. 2 free throws for opponent, opponent fouls you, you make 1, its a 2 point game with ~6secs.
When you foul up 5 with 28secs. Opponent makes 2 free throws, you are up 3 with ~22-25secs left. opponent fouls you, you make 1/2 free throw, thats up 4 with 20secs. and it goes on and on, as the clock STOPS when you foul.

Generally, it should take the opponent <5secs to shoot a 3point when down, means you have to foul fast during the dribble as the opponent will not run the clock down before shooting.

Possible scenarios that may occur when you foul.
1) Becomes a shooting foul -> 3 FTs
2) Becomes a shooting foul and opponent makes the 3point shot -> 4point play
3) opponent makes the first free throw and intentionally miss the 2nd to get the rebound, make a 3 point -> 4 point play.


Basically, the difference, is that when you defend instead of fouling, the worst case scenario is going to overtime. When you foul, there are possible cases that make you lose in regulation. If you can be that unlucky that you opponent makes the contested three, who says that you wun be unlucky that the opponent makes a three while you try to intentionally foul him, or gets the rebound after a missed ft.

Foulers: 122 wins in regulation, 5 losses in regulation, 10 overtimes forced
Defenders: 598 wins in regulation, 2 losses in regulation, 77 overtimes forced from http://thebiglead.com/2013/02/12/ken-pomeroy-has-written-about-fouling-up-three-and-he-says-defend/

the chances of actually losing in regulation is much lesser when you defend than when you foul.


Moreover, defending has less scenarios to play out compared to fouling, and its relatively easier to practice. Are you sure you can trust your players to intentionally foul Lebron without Lebron pretending to take a shot while u foul him?


Just my own take on this, open up for discussion! :toast

[hyhy]

"Internationally, teams foul more, a strategy Manu Ginobili, who played in Argentina, occasionally broaches with Spurs (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/sanantoniospurs/index.html?inline=nyt-org) Coach Gregg Popovich.
“Manu tells me about it all the time,” Popovich said. “I say: ‘Manu, I don’t have that type of guts. I’m not going to do it.’ ”"

Basically, pop chose the conservative way out, whereby its either win or overtime, rather than playing with the possibilities of losing.

[kobyz]

Pop must have chosen to foul in that situation, it's to not let the heat any oportonity to tie the game instead of to let the heat oportonity to tie the game, to foul in that situation it basically to seal the title, if you foul in that situation the heat get 2 ft(under the pressure), than have to foul when you can increase the lead to 4 point game and also the heat with no time out to advance the ball... In that situation it's the most obvious you need to foul, but pop and the team collapsed and make bad decision!

[hyhy]

Pop must have chosen to foul in that situation, it's to not let the heat any oportonity to tie the game instead of to let the heat oportonity to tie the game, to foul in that situation it basically to seal the title, if you foul in that situation the heat get 2 ft(under the pressure), than have to foul when you can increase the lead to 4 point game and also the heat with no time out to advance the ball... In that situation it's the most obvious you need to foul, but pop and the team collapsed and make bad decision!

You basically just said "didnt read" :downspin:

[Leetonidas]

imo you don't foul, trust your defense and it will get the job done 99% of the time

[Captivus]

Basically, the difference, is that when you defend instead of fouling, the worst case scenario is going to overtime.

Agree, at some point is something like this (at least this it what i think you are saying):

Not foul: 40% Win - 10% Lose - 50% Overtime
Foul: 60% Win - 30% Lose - 10% Overtime

The no time outs for Miami, is a plus.

I dont know what the best way is, BUT, I dont know because I dont get paid to know. Now, if im in the Spurs coaching team, I KNOW what to do, at least I would have planned for many scenarios.
So the question is, did Pop make an intelligent decision or not? Was he ready or did he improvise?

Regular season cant start soon enough!!!

[jyra]

I have actually seen European teams foul up 2 at the end of games. It all depends on if you can foul a bad free throw shooter, if the opposing team has very good shooters and if you trust your defense to get that crucial stop. The shorter three point line in international play probably also should be taken into consideration.
As for the Spurs, I think not fouling was the right decision. Lebron is such a big guy that he could pull off a 4 point play.

[Bruno]

The reason why international teams are fouling in these cases is because refs don't call the game the same way:
- In FIBA, refs don't call shooting fouls unless the player is really in his shooting motion.
- In NBA, refs usually grant a shooting foul if the player raise his arms and try to shoot just after the foul is commit.

So in FIBA, you can foul because there are little risk to see the other team getting 3 free throws.
In NBA, you don't foul because it can turn into 3 FT or even a 3 pointer and a FT.

[kobyz]

You basically just said "didnt read" :downspin:

No, I'm just saying you are wrong...

[kobyz]

The reason why international teams are fouling in these cases is because refs don't call the game the same way:
- In FIBA, refs don't call shooting fouls unless the player is really in his shooting motion.
- In NBA, refs usually grant a shooting foul if the player raise his arms and try to shoot just after the foul is commit.

So in FIBA, you can foul because there are little risk to see the other team getting 3 free throws.
In NBA, you don't foul because it can turn into 3 FT or even a 3 pointer and a FT.

There is no chance in the world the refs would have called a shooting foul on the spurs if they foul lebron at the half court or while he dribbling..

[RD2191]

Pop must have chosen to foul in that situation, it's to not let the heat any oportonity to tie the game instead of to let the heat oportonity to tie the game, to foul in that situation it basically to seal the title, if you foul in that situation the heat get 2 ft(under the pressure), than have to foul when you can increase the lead to 4 point game and also the heat with no time out to advance the ball... In that situation it's the most obvious you need to foul, but pop and the team collapsed and make bad decision!
:tu:tu:tu

[hyhy]

No, I'm just saying you are wrong...

Nvm, I refuse to get into a discussion with a troll. You basically just said nth in your post, just that you disagree. Whats there for me to argue? :bang

[justinandimcool]

We should've just missed an extra free throw.

If we're up 2, Miami goes for 2. No long rebound, we grab it, we're champs.

Should've just choked even more, but instead we choked just the perfect amount. :lol

[Arcadian]

imo you don't foul, trust your defense and it will get the job done 99% of the time

...Unless the offensive player makes the basket.

Lol, do we have the actual statistics on this?

[spurraider21]

fouling is not a smart way to go.

a) first of all, we missed 2 free throws in our last 4 attempts. why get into a free throw shootout and gift them points when we aren't making ours consistently?
b) free throws can also lead to offensive rebounds. its not like fouling them takes that opportunity away. making 1 free throw, missing the second and getting the rebound isn't out of the realm of possibility
c) you are extending the game, which is exactly what Miami wants anyway. by allowing them to look for a shot, you are also allowing valuable seconds to tick off the clock. or you could wait and try to guess when to foul at which point they could be going up for a 3 point shot. remember in these playoffs, paul george tied a game by making 3 free throws.
d) what if Pop went for the foul strategy and we lost the ensuing free throw shootout. you would all say "oh look its pop overcoaching again per par tbh imo fwiw"

all that being said, fouling them on an offensive rebound would have been a smart idea. you know that if they get an offensive rebound, the defense is likely going to be (and was, twice) in scramble mode. fouling on the rebound is a good last ditch plan. i guess hindsight is 20/20 though. i even understand subbing Duncan out on the first trip. that had been implemented in earlier games throughout the season and in the playoffs, and worked fine. on that first series, bosh wasn't even in the game. it was LeBron, Allen, Wade, Chalmers, and Miller. I understand having Duncan out. in fact, it was on that sequence where the rebound was being tipped all over the place and we had a good opportunity to secure it.

on the second possession though, they replaced Miller with Bosh. in that situation, Duncan should have checked in. it was that second offensive rebound where Bosh ended up with it, simply because he was the only big on the floor. if you watch the replay (it hurts, i know) you can see bosh just go up and get the rebound between 3 spurs because he was too big. if Duncan is in the game, he gets that rebound, or at least prevents bosh from making a clean catch and pass.

end of the day, despite every move you may agree or disagree with, we had some shit luck. Manu missed a free throw that would have iced the game. kawhi missed a free throw that would have iced the game. the shots take a slightly different bounce EITHER time and we come away with a rebound and a chip. some bad bounces, a great shot by allen, and 2-4 free throw shooting in the last 30 seconds.


Have you ever heard in a post-game interview with a player (in a game with shaky officiating) if they ask the player "do you think the refs cost you the game" or something along those lines. the athlete will often answer "we shouldn't have put ourselves in that situation in the first place." i feel the same with how the 4th unfolded. were their mistakes made in hindsight? yeah. but missing TWO free throws, EITHER of which would have iced the title, is what bothers me the most. not the subs/fouls/etc

[kobyz]

imo you don't foul, trust your defense and it will get the job done 99% of the time

That is right to a 2 point game situation, you really didn't understand the different if it's a 3 point game situation? There is nothing to do with the "trust your defense" motto...

[TheGreatYacht]

What kills me about Game 6 and nobody says anything about it is that Kawhi Leonard was not even touched when he got fouled to shoot the two free throws at 20.1 seconds yet the fucking refs still called a foul on Mike Miller.

Seriously, why doesn't anyone ever bring this up? Why?

Why did Pop and Manu have to fuck up this championship???

[Leetonidas]

That is right to a 2 point game situation, you really didn't understand the different if it's a 3 point game situation? There is nothing to do with the "trust your defense" motto...

Nobody fouls with a two point lead moron, no shit. And yes it does, obviously an emo wrist cutter like yourself knows nothing about basketball, but being up 3 and fouling gives the other team a chance to make a free throw and miss the second intentionally for the rebound/tip. Trust your defense to defend the three pointer and 99% of the time your defense wins out. Quit being such a whiny bitch about an outlier that occurred in the finals, get the fuck over it already, you're the biggest crying pussy on this site and that's really saying something

[kobyz]

Nobody fouls with a two point lead moron, no shit. And yes it does, obviously an emo wrist cutter like yourself knows nothing about basketball, but being up 3 and fouling gives the other team a chance to make a free throw and miss the second intentionally for the rebound/tip. Trust your defense to defend the three pointer and 99% of the time your defense wins out. Quit being such a whiny bitch about an outlier that occurred in the finals, get the fuck over it already, you're the biggest crying pussy on this site and that's really saying something

you fucking stupid, you just trying at all costs to justify spurs bad decision(no metter how you want to look at it, foul at that situation is the obviously best decision), your comment is just too pathetic even though you trying to act tough with that language...

[Leetonidas]

Tell us more about how a basketball game ruined your life, turned the world grey, and set you into a deep depression in which you contemplated suicide you whining pussy. Please do ST a favor and end your pathetic life already

[xmas1997]

Tell us more about how a basketball game ruined your life, turned the world grey, and set you into a deep depression in which you contemplated suicide you whining pussy. Please do ST a favor and end your pathetic life already

Chump has asked him countless times why he hasn't ended it yet.

[Skull-1]

What kills me about Game 6 and nobody says anything about it is that Kawhi Leonard was not even touched when he got fouled to shoot the two free throws at 20.1 seconds yet the fucking refs still called a foul on Mike Miller.

Seriously, why doesn't anyone ever bring this up? Why?

Why did Pop and Manu have to fuck up this championship???

[snickles]

fouling is not a smart way to go.

ok i apologize in advance if this comes off as bitchy or attacky or like im taking jabs at you. i'm not, but i just really disagree with almost everything you say here.

a) first of all, we missed 2 free throws in our last 4 attempts. why get into a free throw shootout and gift them points when we aren't making ours consistently?

thats kind of a chickenshit rationale IMO. when you play scared, you lose. that happens in all sports. this is why you sub in your best shooters.

b) free throws can also lead to offensive rebounds. its not like fouling them takes that opportunity away. making 1 free throw, missing the second and getting the rebound isn't out of the realm of possibility

do you have any solid statistics for any of this? yes, it CAN happen, but how often does it really? just working from memory, i'd say the offensive team getting a rebound and scoring on a missed free throw happens less than once every three games.

c) you are extending the game, which is exactly what Miami wants anyway. by allowing them to look for a shot, you are also allowing valuable seconds to tick off the clock. or you could wait and try to guess when to foul at which point they could be going up for a 3 point shot. remember in these playoffs, paul george tied a game by making 3 free throws.

nope, unless you have a foul to give, you take the foul around half court.

d) what if Pop went for the foul strategy and we lost the ensuing free throw shootout. you would all say "oh look its pop overcoaching again per par tbh imo fwiw"

then things would be pretty much the same as they are now....

all that being said, fouling them on an offensive rebound would have been a smart idea.

this is kinda where you lost me. now the odds of them actually getting a decent shot off have gone way up. as well as the odds of an and-1.

you know that if they get an offensive rebound, the defense is likely going to be (and was, twice) in scramble mode. fouling on the rebound is a good last ditch plan. i guess hindsight is 20/20 though. i even understand subbing Duncan out on the first trip. that had been implemented in earlier games throughout the season and in the playoffs, and worked fine. on that first series, bosh wasn't even in the game. it was LeBron, Allen, Wade, Chalmers, and Miller. I understand having Duncan out. in fact, it was on that sequence where the rebound was being tipped all over the place and we had a good opportunity to secure it.

disagree again. i just can't fathom a late game situation where you take your best player out.

on the second possession though, they replaced Miller with Bosh. in that situation, Duncan should have checked in. it was that second offensive rebound where Bosh ended up with it, simply because he was the only big on the floor. if you watch the replay (it hurts, i know) you can see bosh just go up and get the rebound between 3 spurs because he was too big. if Duncan is in the game, he gets that rebound, or at least prevents bosh from making a clean catch and pass.

end of the day, despite every move you may agree or disagree with, we had some shit luck.

ain't that the truth.

Manu missed a free throw that would have iced the game. kawhi missed a free throw that would have iced the game. the shots take a slightly different bounce EITHER time and we come away with a rebound and a chip. some bad bounces, a great shot by allen, and 2-4 free throw shooting in the last 30 seconds.


Have you ever heard in a post-game interview with a player (in a game with shaky officiating) if they ask the player "do you think the refs cost you the game" or something along those lines. the athlete will often answer "we shouldn't have put ourselves in that situation in the first place." i feel the same with how the 4th unfolded. were their mistakes made in hindsight? yeah. but missing TWO free throws, EITHER of which would have iced the title, is what bothers me the most. not the subs/fouls/etc


players miss shots. i don't want to rehash everything out for the 1000th time here, but i'll just say, IMO, while there is a ton of blame to go around, coaching decisions did more damage than anything a player did.

[TheGreatYacht]

fouling is not a smart way to go.

a) first of all, we missed 2 free throws in our last 4 attempts. why get into a free throw shootout and gift them points when we aren't making ours consistently?
b) free throws can also lead to offensive rebounds. its not like fouling them takes that opportunity away. making 1 free throw, missing the second and getting the rebound isn't out of the realm of possibility
c) you are extending the game, which is exactly what Miami wants anyway. by allowing them to look for a shot, you are also allowing valuable seconds to tick off the clock. or you could wait and try to guess when to foul at which point they could be going up for a 3 point shot. remember in these playoffs, paul george tied a game by making 3 free throws.
d) what if Pop went for the foul strategy and we lost the ensuing free throw shootout. you would all say "oh look its pop overcoaching again per par tbh imo fwiw"

all that being said, fouling them on an offensive rebound would have been a smart idea. you know that if they get an offensive rebound, the defense is likely going to be (and was, twice) in scramble mode. fouling on the rebound is a good last ditch plan. i guess hindsight is 20/20 though. i even understand subbing Duncan out on the first trip. that had been implemented in earlier games throughout the season and in the playoffs, and worked fine. on that first series, bosh wasn't even in the game. it was LeBron, Allen, Wade, Chalmers, and Miller. I understand having Duncan out. in fact, it was on that sequence where the rebound was being tipped all over the place and we had a good opportunity to secure it.

on the second possession though, they replaced Miller with Bosh. in that situation, Duncan should have checked in. it was that second offensive rebound where Bosh ended up with it, simply because he was the only big on the floor. if you watch the replay (it hurts, i know) you can see bosh just go up and get the rebound between 3 spurs because he was too big. if Duncan is in the game, he gets that rebound, or at least prevents bosh from making a clean catch and pass.

end of the day, despite every move you may agree or disagree with, we had some shit luck. Manu missed a free throw that would have iced the game. kawhi missed a free throw that would have iced the game. the shots take a slightly different bounce EITHER time and we come away with a rebound and a chip. some bad bounces, a great shot by allen, and 2-4 free throw shooting in the last 30 seconds.


Have you ever heard in a post-game interview with a player (in a game with shaky officiating) if they ask the player "do you think the refs cost you the game" or something along those lines. the athlete will often answer "we shouldn't have put ourselves in that situation in the first place." i feel the same with how the 4th unfolded. were their mistakes made in hindsight? yeah. but missing TWO free throws, EITHER of which would have iced the title, is what bothers me the most. not the subs/fouls/etc
Here is Spurstalk in a nutshell:

Popsuckers & Manutards - To defend coach Pop and Manu at all costs. They will come up with creative ways to justify Pop's benching of Tim Duncan on the last 28 seconds of Game 6 and Pop's refusal to bench Manu despite how pathetic he was playing throughout the playoffs. Both facets will attempt to spread the blame on the whole team despite the stats showing the contrary.

They will blame Kawhi Leonard for the missed free throw even though he was A LOT more productive than Manu. They will blame Danny Green for dissapearing in Games 6 & 7 even though he was on God mode blocking shots on the break and shooting at a very high 3pt FG%. They will blame Tony Parker for being selfish and going for the NBA Finals MVP in Game 6 even though he's the reason the Spurs were up by 5 pts with 28 seconds to go. Some go even as far as to blame the Game 6 loss on LUCK. Others are so insane and go as far as blaming Tim Duncan for the missed layups in Game 7 even though THERE WAS NO NEED for a Game 7 had Pop and Manu not shat the bed. Tim Duncan turned back the clock in Games 6 & 7 for God's sake!

Pop & Manu haters - To bash Pop and Manu whenever they see an opportunity. They are angry at Pop and Manu for costing the Spurs a 5th championship. Pop and Manu are RIGHTLYFULLY taking most of the blame because of the high expectations. Coach Pop has 4 titles but unfortunately he has gotten more stubborn over the years, especially during the playoffs. Pop has the tendency to go senile come playoff time.

Manu being the highest paid player on the team is deservedly taking a lot of harsh criticism for shooting below 40%FG throughout the playoffs and turning the ball over time after time. Danny Green, Kawhi Leonard, Gary Neal, and Boris Diaw are all role players and they by far exceeded expectations therefore they deserve little to no blame for Game 6. The same can't be said for Pop and Manu.

Conclusion - Popsuckers & Manutards will blame the Game 6 loss on the whole team and also on bad luck. Pop & Manu haters will probably never forgive Pop and Manu for Game 6 unless the Spurs can win it all next season.
Yup. At the end of day, Pop and Manu are mostly responsible for blowing the championship. Not even writing a whole novel about Game 6 will convince us non-homers Spurs fans that the Spurs lost because of "shit luck" or because Kawhi missed a free throw. People aren't stupid. Thanks God I'm not a blind homer.

[xmas1997]

Yup. At the end of day, Pop and Manu are mostly responsible for blowing the championship. Not even writing a whole novel about Game 6 will convince us non-homers Spurs fans that the Spurs lost because of "shit luck" or because Kawhi missed a free throw. People aren't stupid. Thanks God I'm not a blind homer.

You meant to say bandwagon here today gone tomorrow Spurs fans!
We have your number!

[look_at_g_shred]

Should've fouled James. He would've missed at least one. Oh well...14 days till the first pre-season game. I'm fucking pumped!!! :flag:

[kobyz]

Tell us more about how a basketball game ruined your life, turned the world grey, and set you into a deep depression in which you contemplated suicide you whining pussy. Please do ST a favor and end your pathetic life already

Very relevant! I think i will add you to the list! Another stupid comment by you! You should stop trying to act like a tough guy in purpose to hide your stupidity!

[Leetonidas]

Very relevant! I think i will add you to the list! Another stupid comment by you! You should stop trying to act like a tough guy in purpose to hide your stupidity!

I'm not acting like a tough guy just pointing out that you're a massive, whiny pussy who doesn't have his priorities in life in order. lol crybaby bitch, it'd almost be worth it to see the Spurs fail next season if it led to you offing yourself

[xmas1997]

Very relevant! I think i will add you to the list! Another stupid comment by you! You should stop trying to act like a tough guy in purpose to hide your stupidity!


I believe Chump would really and sincerely like to know, "are you dead yet"? :lmao

[kobyz]

I believe Chump would really and sincerely like to know, "are you dead yet"? :lmao

Chump, Chump, Chump... is Chump is your life? are You eager to suck him? It sound like it!!!

[xmas1997]

Chump, Chump, Chump... is Chump is your life? are You eager to suck him? It sound like it!!!

You're the one who seems to like sucking, you talk about it so much.

[hyhy]

Seriously? The point of this thread was to see whether should we, or should we not foul up 3 with 10secs to go. This has nth to do with Game 6, or whatever. Cant we just talk about basketball, without bringing in who caused us to lose the game etc? I brought up some points, to contradict the popular belief that we should foul, and all I asked for was arguments against my points. I guess ST has basically turned into a forum for pop and manu haters to fight with pop and manu supporters? It used to be lakers fans against spurs fans below, but now its like we have been split into catholics and protestants.

[xmas1997]

I, for one, enjoyed reading the posts on both sides of this issue.
Great points have been made so far.
I am sorry that the thread has to suffer the pollution from the "hate" BS trolls.
I feel partly responsible for feeling compelled to criticize their adverse activity.
For that you have my apology.
However, I seriously doubt anything you, or I, or anyone else does, will stop them.

[kobyz]

Seriously? The point of this thread was to see whether should we, or should we not foul up 3 with 10secs to go. This has nth to do with Game 6, or whatever. Cant we just talk about basketball, without bringing in who caused us to lose the game etc? I brought up some points, to contradict the popular belief that we should foul, and all I asked for was arguments against my points. I guess ST has basically turned into a forum for pop and manu haters to fight with pop and manu supporters? It used to be lakers fans against spurs fans below, but now its like we have been split into catholics and protestants.

You are the one who was ruin your own thread, calling me troll for no reason after I made legitimate comment to prove you wrong!

[xmas1997]

Speak of the devil.
I could have predicted the above post.:lol

[kobyz]

Speak of the devil.
I could have predicted the above post.:lol

What!!

[hyhy]

You are the one who was ruin your own thread, calling me troll for no reason after I made legitimate comment to prove you wrong!

:lol remind me what your argument was again? oh. "They should foul because they should foul." "its stupid not to foul" "If we foul we would have won"

tell me again, what does legitimate comment mean? same way, i called you a troll without explaining. Just following what you did. :lol

[TheGreatYacht]

Seriously? The point of this thread was to see whether should we, or should we not foul up 3 with 10secs to go. This has nth to do with Game 6, or whatever. Cant we just talk about basketball, without bringing in who caused us to lose the game etc? I brought up some points, to contradict the popular belief that we should foul, and all I asked for was arguments against my points. I guess ST has basically turned into a forum for pop and manu haters to fight with pop and manu supporters? It used to be lakers fans against spurs fans below, but now its like we have been split into catholics and protestants.:lol They're called Popsuckers and Manutards. You can also call them homers, Manu worshippers, Manu apologists, etc. The Pop/Manu haters you are referring to btw are not haters. They are non-biased objective Spurs fans.

[kobyz]

:lol remind me what your argument was again? oh. "They should foul because they should foul." "its stupid not to foul" "If we foul we would have won"

tell me again, what does legitimate comment mean? same way, i called you a troll without explaining. Just following what you did. :lol

My argument was that you must foul in that situation cause you can look at this anyway you want but The Percents will be by far in favor of should foul if you want to make the right decision... You can try to think on some slim scenarios of what will happened if we do foul, like you did, but it's just pathetic to think that because of those not to foul is the right decision.

[hyhy]

My argument was that you must foul in that situation cause you can look at this anyway you want but The Percents will be by far in favor of should foul if you want to make the right decision... You can try to think on some slim scenarios of what will happened if we do foul, like you did, but it's just pathetic to think that because of those not to foul is the right decision.

the % have been favoring just defending instead of fouling. There's already a stat in my original post. Thus, you have NO argument and I should stop feeding the trolls.

[kobyz]

the % have been favoring just defending instead of fouling. There's already a stat in my original post. Thus, you have NO argument and I should stop feeding the trolls.

I don't sure about your % stuff but the common-sense and logic are clearly in faver of should foul if you want to secure the win in that situation...

[maverick1948]

Game 6, 5.6 secs on the clock. Heat just scored 3 pt on Allen shot. Spurs immediately inbound the ball and are near half court in less than 1.5 sec. BUT an official who I will not name, stops play to review the 3 pt shot that was obviously behind the line. Before his whistle, the Heat were running back to try to stop the quick advancement of the ball. They are not set in a defensive position. With the FREE timeout, the Heat are allowed to set their Defense. Pop is livid about the call. Without the help, the Heat are open to an easy score by the Spurs. The game changer was not the 3 pt make, but the clock stopage by an official, who could have rotated his finger for review at the next clock stop.

I was surprised by Duncan on the bench like everyone else, but a Bosh 2 pt does not tie. Only the 3 ties. Pop wanted everyone to stay on their man even after the shot. Seems like someone forget about Allen and it wasnt Green.

[hyhy]

I don't sure about your % stuff but the common-sense and logic are clearly in faver of should foul if you want to secure the win in that situation...

Common sense and logic also tells me you are a retarded 5 year old.


See? Does that convince you? No?

[hyhy]

Game 6, 5.6 secs on the clock. Heat just scored 3 pt on Allen shot. Spurs immediately inbound the ball and are near half court in less than 1.5 sec. BUT an official who I will not name, stops play to review the 3 pt shot that was obviously behind the line. Before his whistle, the Heat were running back to try to stop the quick advancement of the ball. They are not set in a defensive position. With the FREE timeout, the Heat are allowed to set their Defense. Pop is livid about the call. Without the help, the Heat are open to an easy score by the Spurs. The game changer was not the 3 pt make, but the clock stopage by an official, who could have rotated his finger for review at the next clock stop.

I was surprised by Duncan on the bench like everyone else, but a Bosh 2 pt does not tie. Only the 3 ties. Pop wanted everyone to stay on their man even after the shot. Seems like someone forget about Allen and it wasnt Green.

On that shot, even though TP went to put his hands up, I was really hoping Leonard could at least jumped and tried. He jumps so high and is so long he could have just blocked off Allen's vision or whatever and maybe altered it a little. Note: I AM NOT BLAMING KL HERE. Just saying, he could have done that thats all.

[kobyz]

Common sense and logic also tells me you are a retarded 5 year old.


See? Does that convince you? No?

If you really think that you are right here about not to foul, then I really don't want to discuss with a retardate human being without common sense...

[cjw]

Possible scenarios that may occur when you foul.
1) Becomes a shooting foul -> 3 FTs
2) Becomes a shooting foul and opponent makes the 3point shot -> 4point play

Agree, other than the fact that you can still lose up 3 and playing defense. It's possible to foul when playing defense (particularly if Gary Neal is closing out on shooters! Not that he was in the game then)

[anakha]

kobyz continuing to act like a retard in the face of numbers proving him wrong? sounds familiar...

[kobyz]

kobyz continuing to act like a retard in the face of numbers proving him wrong? sounds familiar...

Liar!

[anakha]

Liar!

Tell us again how Tolliver is a better defender, shooter, and finisher than Bonner despite the numbers proving you dead wrong.

I could use the laughs.

[kobyz]

Tell us again how Tolliver is a better defender, shooter, and finisher than Bonner despite the numbers proving you dead wrong.

I could use the laughs.
I don't want to return to the bonner-tolliver argument, you can search it yourself if you want to remember, all I will say now is that you keep being superficial thinking numbers in basketball is the all story(what about what the eyes see and personal judgment and interpretation?), and also you keep being a liar take things out of context, that argument was about amnesty your beloved bonner, that spurs could be better bringing tolliver instead after amnesty your beloved bonner cause it also will be good financial wise, will have gave the team better cap situation to work with, and also for the reason that tolliver could not be worst than your beloved bonner who is nothing come playoff time, can't play and worthless...

[anakha]

I don't want to return to the bonner-tolliver argument, you can search it yourself if you want to remember, all I will say now is that you keep being superficial thinking numbers in basketball is the all story(what about what the eyes see and personal judgment and interpretation?)

Translation: you made a bullshit claim the numbers never backed up, now you're resorting to the "eye test" because you have nothing to stand on.


and also you keep being a liar take things out of context, that argument was about amnesty your beloved bonner, that spurs could be better bringing tolliver instead after amnesty your beloved bonner cause it also will be good financial wise, will have gave the team better cap situation to work with

Now you're fucking making shit up. :lmao

You never mentioned finances or cap situation in your original argument. You simply said Tolliver is better. Now you're backpedaling because you exposed yourself as knowing absolutely fucking nothing and spewing horseshit.


and also for the reason that tolliver could not be worst than your beloved bonner who is nothing come playoff time, can't play and worthless...

And you're still assuming I'm a Bonner fan. I'd rather play Pendergraph and Baynes over him.

But anybody trying to argue Tolliver was better is full of shit.

Just like your argument in this thread.

Just like your "woe is me, I'm really gonna kill myself, somebody pay me some fucking attention" routine.

[xmas1997]

Kobyz by far is the worst crybaby troll on this site, followed by TGY right behind him with his tard and sucker and redundant BS! And then come their whole crew right behind them to make them feel brave and credible. But it is just a false sense of bravado and security.
As "ecstatic" said, they are "denizens from downstairs" up here to stir up trouble and make as much mayhem as they can get away with before the mods put them back downstairs.
It's like the inmates are loose and running the asylum right now until the season starts. :lmao

[hyhy]

If you really think that you are right here about not to foul, then I really don't want to discuss with a retardate human being without common sense...

den gtfo

[kobyz]

Translation: you made a bullshit claim the numbers never backed up, now you're resorting to the "eye test" because you have nothing to stand on.
Never claim such thing and not resorting to, the eye test was my main resource at first place...


Now you're fucking making shit up. :lmao

You never mentioned finances or cap situation in your original argument. You simply said Tolliver is better. Now you're backpedaling because you exposed yourself as knowing absolutely fucking nothing and spewing horseshit.

Finance situation aspect should have been obvious part of the argument, not even needed to mention it as the subject of the argument was tolliver for the spurs instead amnesty's bonner...


And you're still assuming I'm a Bonner fan. I'd rather play Pendergraph and Baynes over him.

But anybody trying to argue Tolliver was better is full of shit.

Just like your argument in this thread.

Just like your "woe is me, I'm really gonna kill myself, somebody pay me some fucking attention" routine.
I'm not assuming your love to bonner, just trying to annoy you a little, return a favor in your own childish game... Again you trying to falsify what i said, i didn't said tolliver was better, i said tolliver will be better instead of bonner for the future... But now I see you also prefer tolliver over bonner as now you tell you prefer every scrub over matty...

[anakha]

Never claim such thing and not resorting to, the eye test was my main resource at first place...

So you admit that you made a claim without proof to back up your claim. Good, at least you're admitting you're a dumbfuck.

Quick tip: next time you want to argue a point or present an opinion, have some hard evidence to back it up. You'll look like you actually have a brain when you do that.



Finance situation aspect should have been obvious part of the argument, not even needed to mention it as the subject of the argument was tolliver for the spurs instead amnesty's bonner...

Claiming something was 'obvious' after the fact while not bringing it up in the first place is a common tactic when the argument has failed and the person is backpedaling, desperately trying to salvage anything left of his pride.



I'm not assuming your love to bonner, just trying to annoy you a little, return a favor in your own childish game... Again you trying to falsify what i said, i didn't said tolliver was better, i said tolliver will be better instead of bonner for the future... But now I see you also prefer tolliver over bonner as now you tell you prefer every scrub over matty...


yeah i agree, younger and better overall player at this point...

You can't even keep your lies straight anymore. :lmao

Go back to your suicide routine, attention whore.

[kobyz]

Go back to your suicide routine, attention whore.

go back to have matt bonner's penis in your mouth, you are a joke, an ugly joke!!

[anakha]

go back to have matt bonner's penis in your mouth, you are a joke, an ugly joke!!

LOL got caught making a bullshit claim
LOL caught contradicting himself
LOL making an 'obvious' argument after the fact
LOL still hasn't killed himself

[xmas1997]

LOL got caught making a bullshit claim
LOL caught contradicting himself
LOL making an 'obvious' argument after the fact
LOL still hasn't killed himself

Anakha, shame shame, you're having too much fun! :lol

[kobyz]

LOL got caught making a bullshit claim
LOL caught contradicting himself
LOL making an 'obvious' argument after the fact
LOL still hasn't killed himself

LOL Liar!!

[anakha]

LOL Liar!!

LOL accusing someone of lying when he can't even keep track of the bullshit he posts
LOL "Tolliver is the better overall player" followed by "i didn't said tolliver was better"
LOL can't even keep track of his own lies
LOL has given up on his argument because he knows he was made to look like an idiot
LOL still hasn't killed himself
LOL still an attention whore

[look_at_g_shred]

How about ..why we shouldn't still be bitching about Game 6 3 months later. Yeah..that sounds better.

[Sean Cagney]

How about ..why we shouldn't still be bitching about Game 6 3 months later. Yeah..that sounds better.

Yeah, it is pretty much not going to do any good now since we lost and it's over with for some time now.

[kobyz]

LOL accusing someone of lying when he can't even keep track of the bullshit he posts
LOL "Tolliver is the better overall player" followed by "i didn't said tolliver was better"
LOL can't even keep track of his own lies
LOL has given up on his argument because he knows he was made to look like an idiot
LOL still hasn't killed himself
LOL still an attention whore

You keep being a liar, I'm not an attention whore and not nothing, just being true and telling my honest feeling, truly after the last dissepointment and the way we lost the title my world ended, thanks to god(or Pop and Manu-depend on how you want to look at it) I'm now living in the most cruel life there is for human being, my soul so torn, hurt and in misery... after you will also find yourself one step from being in heaven, had the most amazing bliss already in your hands and than it all taken away from you in an instant, than after that kind of experience you could tell me how you feel and if I'm an attention whore...

[Johnny RIngo]

"Internationally, teams foul more, a strategy Manu Ginobili, who played in Argentina, occasionally broaches with Spurs (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/sanantoniospurs/index.html?inline=nyt-org) Coach Gregg Popovich.
“Manu tells me about it all the time,” Popovich said. “I say: ‘Manu, I don’t have that type of guts. I’m not going to do it.’ ”"

Basically, pop chose the conservative way out, whereby its either win or overtime, rather than playing with the possibilities of losing.

All the all-time great coaches play to win. Pop plays not to lose. This is probably why he retreats into his shell anytiome he has to face a Phil Jackson team. Hell, Avery Johnson destroyed Pop...without homecourt...and without the best player in the series. Not surprising at all that Spo would beat Pop with Lebron and Wade.

[TheGreatYacht]

All the all-time great coaches play to win. Pop plays not to lose. This is probably why he retreats into his shell anytiome he has to face a Phil Jackson team. Hell, Avery Johnson destroyed Pop...without homecourt...and without the best player in the series. Not surprising at all that Spo would beat Pop with Lebron and Wade.Bingo! And that is why Pop has suffered some of the most heartbreaking losses in the playoffs and choked the most championships (gotta do a little research on this one) in NBA history. Pop puts himself in a position to give away a win when the game is on the line.

[xmas1997]

Bingo! And that is why Pop has suffered some of the most heartbreaking losses in the playoffs and choked the most championships (gotta do a little research on this one) in NBA history. Pop puts himself in a position to give away a win when the game is on the line.

Ok, wise guy, name one single available coach who never makes any mistakes and could do a better job than Pop!
Right.
No answer. The silence is deafening.

[anakha]

You keep being a liar, I'm not an attention whore and not nothing, just being true and telling my honest feeling, truly after the last dissepointment and the way we lost the title my world ended, thanks to god(or Pop and Manu-depend on how you want to look at it) I'm now living in the most cruel life there is for human being, my soul so torn, hurt and in misery... after you will also find yourself one step from being in heaven, had the most amazing bliss already in your hands and than it all taken away from you in an instant, than after that kind of experience you could tell me how you feel and if I'm an attention whore...

LOL still attention whoring
LOL still hasn't killed himself
LOL has completely abandoned his earlier arguments
LOL had nothing else to say except the same bullshit
LOL is an emo parrot
LOL Polly wanna cracker and a knife to slit his wrists

[kobyz]

LOL still attention whoring
LOL still hasn't killed himself
LOL has completely abandoned his earlier arguments
LOL had nothing else to say except the same bullshit
LOL is an emo parrot
LOL Polly wanna cracker and a knife to slit his wrists
Recommend you to go to psychological therapist, it looks like you had an OCD or something... Good Bye asshole!!

[anakha]

*squaaaawk* I'm so depressed the Spurs lost

*squaaaawk* Life isn't worth living

*squaaaawk* Won't someone pay attention to me?

*whistle*

Bad parrot.

Learn some new lines.

[Sean Cagney]

Recommend you to go to psychological therapist, it looks like you had an OCD or something... Good Bye asshole!!

Ironic you would say this to anyone else. You have said the same whiney ass hit for months on end. :lol

[hyhy]

bumps~ NBA Dleague select just fouled sixers in summer league up 3. Sixers scored the first and rebounded the second and the game went overtime.

[kobyz]

bumps~ NBA Dleague select just fouled sixers in summer league up 3. Sixers scored the first and rebounded the second and the game went overtime.

The odds are still in favor of fouling in that situation instead of not fouling, especially if you in scenario when you going to lose 5 point lead with 28 sec left against the Lebron Heat and you know that overtime is like a loss...

[SupremeGuy]

Such a hard situation, if it works you're a hero, if it doesn't you're an asshole. Personally, I'd do it.

[Kineto]

The odds are still in favor of fouling in that situation instead of not fouling, especially if you in scenario when you going to lose 5 point lead with 28 sec left against the Lebron Heat and you know that overtime is like a loss...

From the différent studies i read, the odds are pretty similar. Fooling give a little more chance to win or lose in regulation, and less chance to go overtime.

fooling also create extra possession, so you have to shoot more free-throw too. I'm not sure it was in spurs best interest (2 miss in the last 4 attempt, pressure of the crowd, etc...)

[kobyz]

From the différent studies i read, the odds are pretty similar. Fooling give a little more chance to win or lose in regulation, and less chance to go overtime.

fooling also create extra possession, so you have to shoot more free-throw too. I'm not sure it was in spurs best interest (2 miss in the last 4 attempt, pressure of the crowd, etc...)

But how much times we witness teams in the NBA not fouling and than been force overtime with a three(in Europe basketball they always foul in that situation and at least 90% get the win)... About the Spurs case, keep in mind that the Heat had no timeout left, couldn't advance the ball, i also would like to see if LeBron stand in the pressure of two free throws in that situation, much more than to let them oportonity for a three, even desperate one...

[TampaDude]

How about ..why we shouldn't still be bitching about Game 6 3 months later. Yeah..that sounds better.

The Spurs are the fuckin' CHAMPIONS! That sounds even better!

[xmas1997]

The Spurs are the fuckin' CHAMPIONS! That sounds even better!

I think some on here have forgotten about that little known fact.
:lol
:lobt2:
:flag:

[kobyz]

And right on queue with the op bump(fuck you op for jinxing us!) another title lost for the Spurs because they don't foul...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DXmjCjHFNw

[cd021]

The odds are still in favor of fouling in that situation instead of not fouling, especially if you in scenario when you going to lose 5 point lead with 28 sec left against the Lebron Heat and you know that overtime is like a loss...
disagree. up 3 with 28 seconds, you play it out and contest any 3pt attempt. Just putting a hand up drops the probability by 20% the league average for 3pt percentage is around 35%.

Why not force the team into a desperation heave that wastes 5-10 seconds. If they miss and you can board, then 1 FT makes it a 2 possession game. Instead of stopping the clock and giving 2 points and putting pressure on yourself to not miss when up 1.

[kobyz]

disagree. up 3 with 28 seconds, you play it out and contest any 3pt attempt. Just putting a hand up drops the probability by 20% the league average for 3pt percentage is around 35%.

Why not force the team into a desperation heave that wastes 5-10 seconds. If they miss and you can board, then 1 FT makes it a 2 possession game. Instead of stopping the clock and giving 2 points and putting pressure on yourself to not miss when up 1.

Not talking about 28 seconds, but somthing like 14 or less you foul Because the odds are in favor of fouling and let the team 2 free throws without oportonity to tie the game instead of let them oportonity to a three and tying the game...

[therealtruth]

disagree. up 3 with 28 seconds, you play it out and contest any 3pt attempt. Just putting a hand up drops the probability by 20% the league average for 3pt percentage is around 35%.

Why not force the team into a desperation heave that wastes 5-10 seconds. If they miss and you can board, then 1 FT makes it a 2 possession game. Instead of stopping the clock and giving 2 points and putting pressure on yourself to not miss when up 1.

I'm not sure where you're getting your figures from. There is not much difference in percentage between contested 3's and non-contested 3's. Why do you think coaches tell their players to run guys of the 3pt line. Contesting is not enough if you really need to prevent a 3.

[MultiTroll]

Not talking about 28 seconds, but somthing like 14 or less you foul Because the odds are in favor of fouling and let the team 2 free throws without oportonity to tie the game instead of let them oportonity to a three and tying the game...
The odds are greatly in favor of getting the win by doing just as you mentioned, fouling vs letting them hork the game tying trey.
http://www.82games.com/lawhorn.htm

In the case of the Spurs letting LeBron and then Ray Allen shoot the treys, the most glaring strategic failure was all 5 Spurs going for the rebound vs staying home and guarding the arc. Most notably Parker, who left Ray Allen and came in to try to get the rebound, leaving Allen 15 feet open. When a two pointer was meaningless at that point. When the ball was in the air on the 1st 3 point attempt (by Bosh i think), Parker and at least one other Spur should have been glued to the Heat players beyond the arc.

With LeBrons trey at :28 while up 6, it came after a missed shot attempt then Heat getting the O rebound and tossing it back beyond the arc to LeBron. No way in hell he should have been left wide open outside the arc.

[MultiTroll]

disagree. up 3 with 28 seconds, you play it out and contest any 3pt attempt. Just putting a hand up drops the probability by 20% the league average for 3pt percentage is around 35%.

Why not force the team into a desperation heave that wastes 5-10 seconds. If they miss and you can board, then 1 FT makes it a 2 possession game. Instead of stopping the clock and giving 2 points and putting pressure on yourself to not miss when up 1.


I'm not sure where you're getting your figures from. There is not much difference in percentage between contested 3's and non-contested 3's. Why do you think coaches tell their players to run guys of the 3pt line. Contesting is not enough if you really need to prevent a 3.
See above from 82Games.com
In 32 instances of a team electing to foul and thus force the opponent to make one free throw, miss the 2nd, AND get the O rebound AND then make the shot.....it happened 3 times out of 32.

Vs 20% of the time a team makes the Hail Mary trey.

[jon123spurs]

Again I mean really.......