armchairgm
all sports, all you
+ Add Friends
You are not logged-in.
Sign Up - Log In
Main Page
Sports
Write
Articles
Hot Links
Images
Meet People
Fun
Explore
MLB - NFL - NBA - NHL - College Basketball - College Football - Soccer - Nascar - Other
Article - Locker Room Discussion
All Articles - New Articles - Today's Articles
Submit a Link - Approve Links
Picture Game - Ratings - Polls - Pick Game - Quiz Game - Spring Silliness
Random Page - Random Image - Random Fan

About the Author

Coachcarpenter
Born under a bad sign, raised some hell in Tennessee and Texas, married up, had a beautiful baby girl, write about sports every now and then.

More By Coachcarpenter

The Number One Team in the Country - The Tennessee Volunteers
8 votes, 3 comments
The Great Basketball Debates (Part 5) - Q & A
7 votes, 3 comments
The Great Basketball Debates (Part 4) - Whose Game Is This?
7 votes, 3 comments
View All

Other recent voters

If you like the article, vote for it.
Edit
Page history Discuss pageWhat links here

The Great Basketball Debate: Up 3 - To Foul or Defend?

by Coachcarpenter
created February 18, 2008, last edited February 10, 2009
14
Vote

Welcome to a five-part series looking at the greatest debates in the basketball world today. I'll break down the arguments, toss in some basketball history and throw my own two cents into the equation.

Our first topic is one of the most hotly debated topics in basketball among coaches and fans - whether or not to defend the three-pointer when leading by 3 points at the end of the ball game or prevent the potentially tying shot by fouling the dribbler.

It is amazing how often this particular situation plays out, especially in March when so many games come down to the final possession (this situation can also play out in the NBA, but less often because of the ability to move the ball to half court with a timeout).

In last year's NCAA tournament, Xavier decided to defend Ohio State up three points instead of fouling, gave up a game-tying shot and lost in overtime. In my own coaching career, I ordered a foul on the dribbler with my team up 3 only to watch my instructions carried out while the opposing player heaved up a half-court prayer. Sure enough, the kid was awarded three shots and made them all to send us into overtime. Luckily, we won the game in the second overtime period.

People tend to think that coaches ought to foul in this situation, but fail to do so because of the fear that it might go wrong (see my situation). The strategy of fouling is simply this - instead of trying to defend one shot, force the other team to make a free throw, intentionally miss the second, grab the rebound and put it back into the basket to get the necessary three points.

Let's break down the arguments on both sides of this debate:

Why Defend Instead of Fouling

1) Defenses are made to defend shots, not commit fouls.

While the idea of fouling a dribbler sounds easy enough, there is plenty that can go wrong. If the dribbler should suddenly become a shooter in the moment of the foul, he now gets three shots at the line to tie the game. There is no coach in America who would rather give up three free shots from 15 feet to tie to the game vs. one defended 19.9 footer.

There is also the chance that the fouler might be over-aggressive and commit an intentional foul in this situation. That would mean two free throws as well as the basketball. While it is difficult to imagine a college referee making such a dramatic call, high school referees are notorious for being quick with the intentional call and more than willing to make a big call at the end of the game. 2) Trust your defense.

One stop to win the game - that is what you build a defense to do. If you need to resort to trickery to win in this situation, what does that say about your defense? There is not a team in America who, in this situation, would chose to foul instead of defend.

3) You can only go to overtime in this situation - not lose the game.

Here is the scenario that scares most coaches out of trying this strategy: the first foul shot is made, the second is missed, the rebound is tipped out to a three point shooter who buries the shot to win the game.

It is not a likely scenario, but why open yourself up to that possibility. The only way a four-point possession can occur if the team defends is with a foul on the shooter, something that should never, ever happen to a defense.

Why Foul Instead of Defend

1) It takes multiple things to happen to tie instead of one lucky shot.

Even if a team defends well, there is always the chance of a banked three pointer or answered prayer to send things to overtime. By fouling, at least four things must go right for a tie. The first foul shot must be made (#1), the second must be missed properly - it must hit the rim (#2), the rebound must be secured (#3) and the put-back must go in (#4).

One thing vs. four things - those are easy odds.

2) The foul can work without actually working.

Bruce Pearl uses this strategy at the end of games and got a great break because of it during the Vols' victory over Mississippi State. The Bulldogs were looking for a tying three-pointer down 74-71 and Tennessee was looking to hack the dribbler. Everything went perfectly, except that the referee decided not to call the foul. The Vols were instead able to disrupt the dribbler and force an even worse shot because they were trying to foul instead of defend.

3) Free throw blockouts are the best odds a team can get in basketball.

It is 4 on 3 with one of the three not allowed to rebound until the ball hits the rim. That means it is really 4 on 2 in the paint to avoid giving up the offensive putback. If you cannot win in that situation, you do not deserve to win.

What is the best strategy in this situation?

After hours of breaking down tape, deep meditation and prayers to ever known deity, I am convinced that defending is the best idea in this situation.

For me, it all comes down to this - my job is to put my team in the best position to win the game and not lose it. The only way my team can lose in this situation is to foul the dribbler and potentially give up a four-point possession.

The only time I might change my mind in this scenario would be if my team was depleted for the overtime session. Perhaps I have a few guys disqualified for fouls and expect to lose. I might take my chances on losing in regulation to give myself the best chance of winning in regulation.

The Great B-Ball Debate (Part 2) - Man vs. Zone


Enable Comment Auto-Refresher
KelsdadAll-Star
655 days ago
Score 2+-
Personally, I find using a foul as a defensive technique to be just slightly inside the definition of integrity. Any foul inside the final 30 seconds of the game, or OT, should be considered an intentional foul and result in a three shot foul PLUS the ball for the offensive team. Problem solved.
Permalink | Reply
Steel TownDraft Pick
655 days ago
Score 1+-
Agreed Kels. Although, I feel the same about kneeling on the ball in football.
Permalink
Frank StevensonRed-Shirting
655 days ago
Score 0+-
That's a good point Steel Town. I hate kneeling on the ball. Should be intentional delay of game or something. Kneel the ball I say you go back 10 yards or more each time. At least in baseball and hockey you have to play the game out. Only problem with Kelsdad's thought is now we have to determine what is "intentional" or not which opens up another can or worms.
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
655 days ago
Score 2+-
That's why all games with clocks suck. And baseball is the perfect game.
Permalink
RomiezzoLegend
655 days ago
Score 1+-
COTD That comment is definitely the comment of the day!
Manny, that's 100% true! Couldn't agree more.
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
655 days ago
Score 1+-
FOTD That fanbox is definitely the Fanbox of the Day!
Permalink
Frank StevensonRed-Shirting
655 days ago
Score 0+-
They just need to figure out a way to FORCE the other team to play out the game. Like hockey. If can dick away with the puck but at least the other team has a fighting chance.

But hey, that's the way it is. That's the game. It sucks but somethings you just can't correct.

And to Kelsdad I reread what you wrote. You have it perfect. No problems at all. I like that and do think it could be a great idea.
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
655 days ago
Score 0+-
I love basketball, but then again I never play it with a clock!
Permalink
Frank StevensonRed-Shirting
655 days ago
Score 0+-
Baseball needs more physical contact. What if they changed the rule to you have to tackle the runner while holding onto the ball in order for him to be out.
Permalink
Frank StevensonRed-Shirting
655 days ago
Score 0+-
Just a pair of orange shorts right?
Permalink
KelsdadAll-Star
655 days ago
Score 1+-
Thanks, Frank. What about football. A QB throws a ball downfield and just barely out of play and gets flagged for intentional grounding, but takes a snap and intentionally spikes the ball to stop the clock, and that's not intentional grounding? WTF?
Permalink
Frank StevensonRed-Shirting
654 days ago
Score 0+-
I'm with you there. I don't like the new rules. Intentional grounding is bullcrap now. They should adopt some of the CFL rules on stuff like that. Still I'd rather see them throw the ball away than knee the ball. Make them play and make them FINISH the game.
Permalink
Manny StilesMajor Leaguer
655 days ago
Score 0+-
Good call, coach! Defense, defense, defense.

More game winning attempts are missed than made...

Kick their ass in OT if they get lucky. You guys won on defense all year anyway. When your guard blocks their 7 foot German inexplicably the whole team will get energized and more confident!
Permalink | Reply
SSreportersLegend
655 days ago
Score 0+-
I would not foul, especially if they try to intentionally miss for a put back attempt. Isn't that right Indiana Pacers?
Permalink | Reply
LASportsblogAAA-er
655 days ago
Score 2+-
I'm all about defensive. Get your hands as high as possible, don't lean forward, and get as close to the dribbler/shooter as you can - and for goodness sake this is the one situation where giving up a lay up is OK, so do it! I see so many teams have a guy in the paint in this situation when 2 points doesn't help the other team. Get out on the 3 point line, trap, get your hands up and force the other team into a turnover or poor attempt. The best a three point shooter is going to be open is about 40% and with a man in his face it's cut nearly in half. So I'd rather take a 20-25% at best attempt over free throws.
Permalink | Reply
The PipDiv-I Stud
655 days ago
Score 1+-
You are 100% correct sir! I hate that when in this situation the offensive teams drives the lane and gets the foul and 3 pt play they were looking for. Clear the darn lane defense and give them the lay-up. If you can't inbound the ball you don't deserve to win.
Permalink
CoachcarpenterJV Squad
654 days ago
Score 0+-
Only problem I have with this is trapping. If you trap in this situation, you leave somebody unguarded. I agree with everything else - it makes no sense to guard the inside when only a three can hurt you.
Permalink
LASportsblogAAA-er
654 days ago
Score 0+-
Coach, Your right, I should elaborate. Trapping is only effective if the dribbler has picked up the ball, in which case you can force a 5 second violation or a turnover. Otherwise, if the dribbler is still dribbling then trapping him would be foolish.
Permalink
Cougar2000All-American
655 days ago
Score 0+-
If you have one or two fouls to give, then why not? Otherwise, play the hardest defense you will ever play. Remember the line in "Hoosiers" when Gene Hackman told one of his players to guard the opponent's best player, even going so far as to find out what kind of gum the kid chews? That's the type of defense I would be playing late in the game, especially if I'm on the road and I want to send the home crowd with a taste in their mouths so bad not even Listerine could wash out.
Permalink | Reply
CoachcarpenterJV Squad
654 days ago
Score 0+-
With fouls to give, it is a little different. There is no reason whatsoever not to foul in the backcourt in this situation because it forces the offense to run more clock. I'm not sure I would trust my team to do it in the frontcourt just because you might accidently foul a shooter. The question here is would you rather take your chance with a three-pointer to tie or putting them on the foul stripe.
Permalink
Add your Comment
ArmchairGM welcomes all comments. If you don't want to be anonymous, Register or Login. It's free
Categories: Opinions | Opinions by User Coachcarpenter | February 18, 2008 | February 2008 | College Basketball Opinions | NBA Opinions | Basketball Opinions

Don't Miss

Phillies World Series 2009: A Year Later, and They Still Don't Want Us
Sorry, But I'm Not Sorry
2009 NHL Preview
In Which Ricketts Wins World Series
2009 Week 3: Let’s Talk About Your Favorite NFL Team

In the News

It's official, Seahawks GM Tim Ruskell has resigned.

Take a Poll

Would you boycott a game with a player who had been caught cheating on the roster?
Yes No

New Articles

SF Giants: No Arbitration Offered to Free Agents
The 1976 Cincinnati Reds: One of Baseball's Greatest Teams
Thai Circle Takraw
Boat racing (Kaeng Ruer)
Kraabi Krabong! thai sport

Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/Article:The_Great_Basketball_Debate:_Up_3_-_To_Foul_or_Defend%3F"

This page was last modified 13:13, 18 February 2008. Content is available under the GFDL.

Main Page About Special Pages Help Terms of Use Advertise