PDA

View Full Version : Why Didn't they Foul!?



JOneal7
06-09-2004, 12:21 AM
my only question when there was like 5-6 seconds and shaq touched the ball! Kill him! there is no way shaq even if he makes 2 they foul. Go to the other end sink 2 and go the length of the court and hit a 3. NO WAY
just unfrickinreal. I can't believe brown didn't have them foul and let kobe launch that 3 knowing lakers had no TO's......:(!

TheSauceMaster
06-09-2004, 12:31 AM
Ask that Great Coach Larry Brown ...I hated to see the Lakers win but I love seeing Larry Brown squirm like the worm he is :laugh:

Bball
06-09-2004, 12:36 AM
Normally I don't like that strategy... but in this case that is what I would've done as well. No LA timeouts, Shaq on the line, Pistons are solid rebounders.... Game on the road, not a 'must win'. I would've risked the gamble of a funky bounce after a missed FT (assuming Shaq got the first) over Kobe getting a clean 3 off.

-Bball

obnoxiousmodesty
06-09-2004, 12:39 AM
I was yelling at the television for the Pistons to foul anyone let alone Shaq, but they did not. Kobe hit a clutch shot, give him some credit (just a little), but I'm scratching my head as to why he had the opportunity to take it in the first place.

leon
06-09-2004, 12:41 AM
The Pistons really blew the game when they fouled Shaq on the previous possession to give him the three point play. If Rasheed backs off and lets him have the layup its still a two possession game and the Lakers have to foul.

Shade
06-09-2004, 12:44 AM
You'd think after all this time the "great" NBA coaches would be smart enough to see what the Lakers do time and again and try to prevent it, but they don't. :rolleyes:

Unclebuck
06-09-2004, 12:48 AM
I watched Larry's postgame press conference.

He instructed the team to foul Shaq if he got the ball, the players simply did not follow through.

Larry said if they had tried to foul Kobe he would have shot the ball and possibly gotten a 4 point play.


I would have fouled Shaq but I would not have fouled Kobe, too damgerous. Ben should have left Shaq and doubled Kobe

sweabs
06-09-2004, 12:49 AM
When there is a guy by the name of Kobe Bryant on the other team, you HAVE to foul in that situation...plain and simple. You can't afford to take chances...THIS IS THE NBA FINALS.

Nice goin' Larry :unimpressed:

Unclebuck
06-09-2004, 12:53 AM
When there is a guy by the name of Kobe Bryant on the other team, you HAVE to foul in that situation...plain and simple. You can't afford to take chances...THIS IS THE NBA FINALS.

Nice goin' Larry :unimpressed:


You cannot foul Kobe in that situation because he would have gotten the continuation, and at least goten 3 free throws

sweabs
06-09-2004, 12:55 AM
When there is a guy by the name of Kobe Bryant on the other team, you HAVE to foul in that situation...plain and simple. You can't afford to take chances...THIS IS THE NBA FINALS.

Nice goin' Larry :unimpressed:


You cannot foul Kobe in that situation because he would have gotten the continuation, and at least goten 3 free throws

Not Kobe...you foul Shaq.

JOneal7
06-09-2004, 01:09 AM
yeah it's like shaq and i think it was rush or fisher touched the ball as well for like 5-7 seconds...i was like foul! heck even before they came out i was yelling foul.,..if you foul you win because there's no way they hit 2, then you exchange it then they come the length of the floor and hit a 3. Just no way cause you can run almost any 2-3 guys at that guy coming down because you know they need that 3 not some 2. When i saw shaq in i was like wtf? why not fox or someone else? so he could throw that huge pick that got the switch and bam, tie game...:(

beast23
06-09-2004, 10:16 PM
Kobe, Shaq, Walton.... it didn't matter who got the ball, you were going to foul them.

All you have to do is to foul the player as he is receiving the inbound pass. Simple enough. They go to the line shooting TWO, trying to hit the first and trying to miss the second.

With Ben and Sheed with inside position in the lane, I'd take my chances.

One of the dumbest plays I've ever seen. And that one stupid play might be the play that costs them the championship. That game was won and as good as in the bag. Someone just forgot to tell the Pistons what they had to do to assure it.

Unclebuck
06-09-2004, 11:47 PM
Kobe, Shaq, Walton.... it didn't matter who got the ball, you were going to foul them.

All you have to do is to foul the player as he is receiving the inbound pass. Simple enough. They go to the line shooting TWO, trying to hit the first and trying to miss the second.

With Ben and Sheed with inside position in the lane, I'd take my chances.

One of the dumbest plays I've ever seen. And that one stupid play might be the play that costs them the championship. That game was won and as good as in the bag. Someone just forgot to tell the Pistons what they had to do to assure it.


I disagree.

I watched two games this past season where teams fouled in similar situations and the team that fouled lost both of those games. In fact I started a thread on this during the season about how it certainly is not a no brainer

Yes I saw some teams foul and win the game.

I saw team not foul and lose the game, but I saw more teams not foul and win the game.

My point is this, it is not an easy decision, I would love to see a statistical breakdown over the course of a season or a few seasons.

Fouling is easier said then done, players in pressure situations do crazy things especially if they aren't used to doing what they are asked to do. If I were a coach I would practice fouling in that situation, it is not something you don't do all season then all of a sudden in game #2 of the Finals you tell your team to foul, that is a recipe for disaster.


Off the top of my head I would say teams hit the three to tie it maybe 10% of the time. 90% of the time the shot is missed, game is over, and no one ever complains. But if you foul 100% of the games will continue and bad things can happen

So let's say there are 100 games that come down to that situation. I would guess if teams foul 100% of the time, I would say more than 10% of the time it will backfire.

I dare say the %'s are in favor of not fouling. And at the very least it is not a no-brainer as to whether to foul or not


For example here is a scenerio no one ever mentions. If you foul with lets say 10 seconds left, the guy goes to the line, hit both FT's, you get the ball back, they foul you right away, what if you go to the line and miss one, they get the ball back with 6 - 7 seconds left at halfcourt a 2 ties it and a three wins it.

9 out of 10 times I think it is a mistake to foul.

JOneal7
06-10-2004, 12:16 AM
but you don't let kobe get a look! LOL....
if when he ran over that screen...FOUL RIGHT THERE...and how do they get it back at halfcourt? they get it wherever he missess or under there basket. It's a risk you take. extend the game instead of letting kobe kill you with one shot...

Unclebuck
06-10-2004, 12:20 AM
but you don't let kobe get a look! LOL....
if when he ran over that screen...FOUL RIGHT THERE...and how do they get it back at halfcourt? they get it wherever he missess or under there basket. It's a risk you take. extend the game instead of letting kobe kill you with one shot...

Call timeout and you move the ball to halfcourt. I don't remember if the Lakers had any timeouts left.

Bball
06-10-2004, 12:22 AM
I watched two games this past season where teams fouled in similar situations and the team that fouled lost both of those games. In fact I started a thread on this during the season about how it certainly is not a no brainer


9 out of 10 times I think it is a mistake to foul.

In a general sense I tend to agree with you on this UB. OTOH, I think in this case I would've went with the fouling strategy if Shaq got the ball.

I would've worried too much about Kobe doing what he ended up doing.... plus with Rasheed and Ben I feel pretty good about my chances at a rebound of a missed FT. And with Shaq on the line I feel pretty good about that (he might not hit EITHER FT). And I even feel pretty good that he'd possibly to HIT an intentional missed shot.

The onus then shifts to my team having the ball in their hands with scant seconds on the clock. No TO's for LA so if they foul they will be bringing the ball up the court no matter what.

Also going into my thinking is that this isn't a 'must win' and it is a road game I am trying to steal.

More importantly tho... why was Rip on Kobe? My biggest thought in this scenario was keeping the ball out of Kobe's hands as goal #1. Nothing Detroit did really made that hard for LA to accomplish.

-Bball

Unclebuck
06-10-2004, 12:29 AM
In a general sense I tend to agree with you on this UB. OTOH, I think in this case I would've went with the fouling strategy if Shaq got the ball.

I would've worried too much about Kobe doing what he ended up doing.... plus with Rasheed and Ben I feel pretty good about my chances at a rebound of a missed FT. And with Shaq on the line I feel pretty good about that (he might not hit EITHER FT). And I even feel pretty good that he'd possibly to HIT an intentional missed shot.

The onus then shifts to my team having the ball in their hands with scant seconds on the clock. No TO's for LA so if they foul they will be bringing the ball up the court no matter what.

Also going into my thinking is that this isn't a 'must win' and it is a road game I am trying to steal.

More importantly tho... why was Rip on Kobe? My biggest thought in this scenario was keeping the ball out of Kobe's hands as goal #1. Nothing Detroit did really made that hard for LA to accomplish.

-Bball


I agree I would have fouled Shaq in that situation because he is a bad free throw shooter. Otherwise what should have happened is Ben should have simply left Shaq all together, and doubled Kobe. Once Shaq gives the ball up there is no reason to even look at him again. Yes he might get a rebound, but who cares, if you stay with the three point shooters, Shaq can be left alone

Rip was on Kobe because in those situations you switch everything, and Prince and Rip switched on a pick. Rip also backed off of Kobe a half a step that was also a bad move.