Florida International

[NT80]

I think the odds are worse to hit the long-shot 3 and they run out of time.

umm,, no.

[Censored by Laurie]

Free throws are not guaranteed to be made, and it's only two points. By allowing a 3-point shot you have given them a 1-in-3 chance to tie the game vs. a 1-in-1000 chance to tie it the other way. Makes no sense.

Give up the three and the absolute worst possible situation is a tie...foul and there exists the possibility of losing the game...I'm not sure what you're missing here.

[NT80]

Give up the three and the absolute worst possible situation is a tie...foul and there exists the possibility of losing the game...I'm not sure what you're missing here.

think about it a little, why even give them a chance to tie the game?

Edited February 4, 2008 by NT80

[Censored by Laurie]

think about it a little, why even give them a chance to tie the game?

My word...I really hope this is a bit...either way this will be the last time I post the same exact thing to try and explain this to you...

Late game stratgey when you're up 3 is to try and deny their best shooter a touch...however most teams will find a way to get the ball into the right hands, so after that you defend the three point line and try to make it as difficult a shot as possible...true, you are giving them a chance to tie the game...but by giving up the three there is no possible way that you can lose on that play. If you foul...first there is the possibility that the player can get a shot up and earn 3 free throws, or even worse make the shot and have a chance for a four point play and the win. The second, and more common scenerio is that the fouled player will step to the line, knock down the first shot, cutting the lead to 2, and then purposely poorly miss the second, allowing rebounders the chance for a put back, put back and a foul or a tip out to an open shooter.

Giving up a low percentage, contested 3 means the only thing the other team can do is tie...fouling creates way too many variables which could potentially result in a loss.

[NT80]

Late game stratgey when you're up 3 is to try and deny their best shooter a touch...however most teams will find a way to get the ball into the right hands, so after that you defend the three point line and try to make it as difficult a shot as possible...true, you are giving them a chance to tie the game...but by giving up the three there is no possible way that you can lose on that play. If you foul...first there is the possibility that the player can get a shot up and earn 3 free throws, or even worse make the shot and have a chance for a four point play and the win. The second, and more common scenerio is that the fouled player will step to the line, knock down the first shot, cutting the lead to 2, and then purposely poorly miss the second, allowing rebounders the chance for a put back, put back and a foul or a tip out to an open shooter.

Giving up a low percentage, contested 3 means the only thing the other team can do is tie...fouling creates way too many variables which could potentially result in a loss.

Seriously? Lets just to agree to disagree about the odds being better for a single 3-point shot to tie vs. making a free throw then missing the second hard enough for a teammate to get a rebound and a putback to tie.

Edited February 5, 2008 by NT80

[Buford_Julep]

That is exactly what happened.

You're absolutely right, Gillespie is a terrible coach...

I never said that and I don't think Gillespie is a terrible coach. I think your presentation of the facts is not exactly what happened. Your memory malfunctioned. It happens to everyone.

In Gillespie's second year @ UTEP, there was a tourney game down to the wire with the opponent clinging to a 1 point lead. They fouled UTEP (Omar Thomas? Can't recall...) with a couple seconds left on the clock and Gillespie had already coached them in this scenario:

The second the ref hands you the ball - when players are just settling and expecting you to dribble and aim - chuck it up there so badly when your only intent is to aim the rebound toward a teammate. UTEP got it, threw in a two pointer at the buzzer and won the game.

Under Gillespie, UTEP's two tournament wins were by 7 and 12 points. The above scenario has UTEP winning by one point. Gillespie never won a game by less than 3 points during his two seasons at UTEP.

BG's record at UTEP

[Quoner]

I never said that and I don't think Gillespie is a terrible coach. I think your presentation of the facts is not exactly what happened. Your memory malfunctioned. It happens to everyone.

Under Gillespie, UTEP's two tournament wins were by 7 and 12 points. The above scenario has UTEP winning by one point. Gillespie never won a game by less than 3 points during his two seasons at UTEP.

BG's record at UTEP

Did he mean a conference tourney game perhaps?

[Censored by Laurie]

Seriously? Lets just to agree to disagree about the odds being better for a single 3-point shot to tie vs. making a free throw then missing the second hard enough for a teammate to get a rebound and a putback to tie.

I really think you're just being ignorant for fun...and though I said I wouldn't post on the subject again...I'm very bored at work today.

I am not arguing with you that the percentages for a TIE go down by not fouling. But please explain to me how there exists any possible chance to LOSE the game if you don't foul?

[emmitt01]

I really think you're just being ignorant for fun...and though I said I wouldn't post on the subject again...I'm very bored at work today.

I am not arguing with you that the percentages for a TIE go down by not fouling. But please explain to me how there exists any possible chance to LOSE the game if you don't foul?

The 4 point play. Duh!?

:unsure:

[NT80]

I am not arguing with you that the percentages for a TIE go down by not fouling. But please explain to me how there exists any possible chance to LOSE the game if you don't foul?

You do know the guy hit the rim on the 3-point try, right? Another couple inches with that 3-point shot in this game and we go to overtime, and thus the chance to LOSE, or Loose, whichever. The same guy beat us last year with a made 3 pointer. There is roughly a 35% chance he makes it just by allowing him the opportunity to shoot it. Why give him that 35% chance to begin with? Another player took the inbound pass and was dribbling trying to find him open for a pass. Foul this guy on the floor before he passes it, 3 seconds left. The percentage of chance a player making a foul shot, intentionally missing the second, hard enough for an opposing player to get the rebound, and putback, which still only TIEs the game is closer to 1%. 35% opportunity to 1% opportunity. Allowing the 3-point shot is statistically better for the opponent than it is for us.

[greenminer]

I never said that and I don't think Gillespie is a terrible coach. I think your presentation of the facts is not exactly what happened. Your memory malfunctioned. It happens to everyone.

Under Gillespie, UTEP's two tournament wins were by 7 and 12 points. The above scenario has UTEP winning by one point. Gillespie never won a game by less than 3 points during his two seasons at UTEP.

BG's record at UTEP

Relax sir, I was just having fun wordsmithing. I know you don't think anything of Gillespie, but one can have fun with you, right? Apparently not...

Per your request, I'll be happy to click the shiney green button labeled "New Topic" at the top of the page and start a new thread. It's up there, right? If not, I bet you'd be happy to correct me. We can play facts all night! I'll start that thread, "A trip down memory lane, double check my facts" and you can go verify everything if you like!

I'm always the first to admit my memory fails me. But I think my point still stands. 10 years of following the two programs (really, i grew up in EP, so longer for those Miners) including 2.5 seasons of basketball band has affording me the chance to witness great things. Alas, the details are always the first to go.

FWIW, it was a conference tourney game. It was a loss, in 2006, to UAB under now-Nebraska-coach Doc Sadler.

UTEP trailed 62-59 with five seconds to go before UAB's Lawrence Kinnard inexplicably fouled the Miners' Kevin Henderson on a three-point attempt. Henderson missed the first free throw and made the second. He missed the third intentionally and UTEP's Will Kimble missed a putback attempt.

"The last play of the game couldn't have worked any better," Sadler said. "Will made a terrific effort play. He got the rebound and went up twice; it just didn't go in the basket. The little things like that - free throws - it's what separates us from going to the tournament and [uAB] going to the tournament."

recap

let them take the 3 without ever fouling. Just my humble opinion.

Edited February 5, 2008 by greenminer

[UNTLifer]

Miner, that's not even close to what you originally posted.

[greenminer]

Miner, that's not even close to what you originally posted.

Yeah, the analogy doesn't work so well anymore.

But it was a conference game, and he did intentionally miss it. isn't that good for anything?!

Ugh. This is much better story somewhere. I just need to find that place.

[Coach]

I can see both sides.

I have coached in a game where we were up by 2 with time running out, and got called for a foul. The opposing shooter makes the first, misses the second, which takes a 45 degree angle out from the goal past the FT line, the shooter is able to grab the ball as it went over the rebounders in the lane, and throws it back up off balance at the buzzer and gets it to go for the win.

Also, the night before the FIU game, I was in a similar situation with my team. We were up by 3 with about 7 seconds left, and we were shooting two. The other four I just stationed the around the perimeter and if we missed both, had them denying everyone outside the arc hard. Obviously make one and it's over. He missed both, the other four picked up a man and denied, and the FT shooter who had not heard the instructions (I didn't want to call TO and give them a chance for a play, they were out of TO's), ran down the court and swatted the potential game tying three. Had there been less than 5 seconds, I probably would have fouled, but I could just see them making both FT's and then we are having to inbound the ball under their goal with a one score game. They had a good press, so I felt safer letting them try to get an open look against tight pressure with no play drawn up, and it worked out.

The scenario you are talking about NT80, you said there were 10 seconds left. That is a very long time, and I see why Jones did not foul, and if he did, it would make sense too. I don't think there is a right or wrong across the board answer, you have to know the complete picture, personnel for both teams, time left on clock, time outs remaining, the way both teams had shot so far and so on.