Originally Posted by sehs95
Great game Friday night at Sullivan. Eagles just had no answer for Davet. What a game and what a player he is. That being said, Flannery needs to instruct team to foul, up by 3, with just a few seconds left and the Cats with only 8 team fouls. I don't agree with his reasoning that he let the kids decide whether to foul or not. There is a reason he's the coach and they are the players.
Just noticed this post.
Ignatius has been involved in three of these situations in the last two years...last year's regular season ending game at home against Ed's, where Ignatius was up 3 with a few seconds left and their player was directed to foul Ed's point guard Schmock near half-court. Schmock saw it coming and got off a shot and went to the line for 3 rather than 2. He missed one of the three and Ignatius held on for the win.
The second one was last season's loss to Garfield in the regional. Ignatius, again, up 3, decided to straight up defend...did a poor job of it...and Garfield hits a 3, ties the game at the buzzer and Garfield wins in OT.
Then, the recent Ed's/Ignatius game where Ed's straight up defends and Davet hits the 3 and sends the game into OT, where Ignatius wins.
In Garfield thread last year, someone posted a well-researched article from a guy named Ken Pomeroy, who argues that there are a lot of variables in this decision, but, overall, he argues that, generally, the percentages are in defending straight up when up by 3 and not putting the guy on the free throw line for 2.
"The fact is, chances of losing are close to remote in either case, but execution errors, an inflated offensive rebounding percentage, poor three-point shooting, and the chance of an extra possession are enough to counteract what might otherwise be the advantage of forcing a team to shoot free throws. In cases where the opponent has multiple good three-point shooters and you have confidence in rebounding a missed free throw, fouling may be the better option. But it appears the default decision should be to not foul
. . .
To me, the only conclusion one can make is that the criticism of coaches that choose to defend appears to be misplaced. A small percentage of the time you’ll get burned no matter what you choose to do. We will continue to see teams make game-tying threes near the end of games more often than they get fouled simply because more coaches choose this strategy. In the long run, it’s difficult to prove it’s a bad idea."