End of game coaching

[KillerB]

I am not questioning the coaching last night. I just wanted to throw out a thought and see how others felt about it.

BU up 2 with 0:13 left and SIU is inbounding the ball.. Why not foul right away (not of course during a 3 point shot) forcing SIU to shoot 2 for a tie and then regardless we get the last shot? At worst we are tied shooting for the win. Best case senario we have the lead and the ball. I would not suggest this strategy with 0:03 left.. not enough time to get the ball down the court for a good shot.

I know that's not the normal play, but it seems like a reasonable alternative.
SIU ended up with 2 wide open 3 point shots from 2 of their best 3 point shooters. Had one of them hit I shudder to think what the reaction would have been on this website.

By the way.. The SIU coaches said both plays they had called at the end of the game were to inbound to Booker down low. BU took that shot away and SIU went to the 2nd option which was the 3 point shot.

[it's boogie time]

Tough call. Most of the guys handling the ball out front, Dillard, Freeman and Fay are 78%, 81% & 82% on the year. Booker is the guy to foul at 54%, but he isn't going to be shooting a three to potentially win the game.

If BU was down 2 at the end, I'd want a team to foul SM or AW.

With BU's 347th ranked free throw defense, it wouldn't be a real good idea.

[SaintLouBrave22]

I was really happy with most of the coaching decisions last night...


The only couple I really questioned were playing Singh in favor of Thompson, and the decision to not call a timeout before we lost the ball on a turnover with about a minute left and multiple timeouts remaining...


Otherwise, Les outcoached Lowery and the Braves outplayed the Salukis much more than the final score indicated...

[Da Coach]

I don't know any coaches who would intentionally foul and give 2 free throws to tie a game, especially a road game, and especially when our better offensive players were having such a bad scoring night (SIU was in the double-bonus, not 1 and 1). Coaches wouldn't intentionally give up a lead in the last few seconds.

[real fan]

I am not questioning the coaching last night. I just wanted to throw out a thought and see how others felt about it.

BU up 2 with 0:13 left and SIU is inbounding the ball.. Why not foul right away (not of course during a 3 point shot) forcing SIU to shoot 2 for a tie and then regardless we get the last shot? At worst we are tied shooting for the win. Best case senario we have the lead and the ball. I would not suggest this strategy with 0:03 left.. not enough time to get the ball down the court for a good shot.

I know that's not the normal play, but it seems like a reasonable alternative.
SIU ended up with 2 wide open 3 point shots from 2 of their best 3 point shooters. Had one of them hit I shudder to think what the reaction would have been on this website.

By the way.. The SIU coaches said both plays they had called at the end of the game were to inbound to Booker down low. BU took that shot away and SIU went to the 2nd option which was the 3 point shot.

No way do you foul with a 2 point lead, the only thing that I would have done different is put Brown guarding the in bounds pass so they would have to throw the ball further out , Egolf would be under the basket, DSE on Freeman, Maniscalco on Dillard and Roberts on whoever is left . I just don"t like it when we let the opposing team get a free pass under their basket , guard the guy throwing it in and with a tall athletic player.

[bigdaddystuck]

I might think about this up 3, because then they only get the 2 fts and we would get the ball back. (saw this in a NBA game last week) But I have no problem letting the D handle it and shut them down.

IMO, AT didn't play because Booker is a very physical player...SS and WE match up better with this. There is no way I would have put AT on Fay....he would have been driving all night on AT or banging him down low. Only way I can see AT getting in is when we go zone.

[tornado]

No way - can you imagine the press pressing Coach Les for an explanation if the FT's lead to 2 pts - or God forbid they make the first one then get the rebound and score again..and win the game as the result of the intention foul??

Nope-- if BU has the lead you put the outcome in the hands of YOUR defense, not in the hands of their shooters...
This is a question I think JL would have no question defending on his show, so e mail him that question...

[peoriakid]

What Coach said. You always always always are better off to have the lead. To foul them would have been their dream scenario. They get to score points with out the clock moving. You never ever ever give up a lead for a tie and the ball. No way.

Now...had we been up by 3, with say, 4 or 5 seconds left. Yes, I would foul say foul immediately and dont give them a look at a 3.

Just my $.02

Ryan

[Out of Balance]

What Coach said. You always always always are better off to have the lead. To foul them would have been their dream scenario. They get to score points with out the clock moving. You never ever ever give up a lead for a tie and the ball. No way.

Now...had we been up by 3, with say, 4 or 5 seconds left. Yes, I would foul say foul immediately and dont give them a look at a 3.

Just my $.02

Ryan

I agree and think Jimmy coached it right Our D cut off their first option and Fay's shot was a high % one. Better it than sending any one of their good % FT guards to the line and have them make them and then we have to score for the win or go to OT on their court Play for the Win, as it turned out, good decision Jimmy

[DeltaBrave03]

Rarely do teams play for the tie on the road as well. I think JL wanted to decide that game right there. Not give SIU the tie game on an easy lay in, but instead take our chances with them hitting a three which would be what probably a 65%-70% chance we win depending on who shoots. I would believe our percentage of winning in OT on the road would be much much lower.

[SFP]

Silly question in my book. You always play for the win on the road. I thought frankly that Lowery did a poor job of having his guys execute the last few minutes. Dillard and that cheap elbow to SM was as bad if not worse, due to the situation, then AW's intentional. If I was Lowery I would have had the ball in Fay's hand going inside. At home you play for the tie and if not, why not make Freeman your 2nd option?

On another note, we were 14-22 for FTs! It was just good enough but we still can do better.

Great win no matter how you dice it on the ROAD! Just last year we complained that we could not win them on the road and we have already won two and played UNI pretty tough!

[real fan]

Silly question in my book. You always play for the win on the road. I thought frankly that Lowery did a poor job of having his guys execute the last few minutes. Dillard and that cheap elbow to SM was as bad if not worse, due to the situation, then AW's intentional. If I was Lowery I would have had the ball in Fay's hand going inside. At home you play for the tie and if not, why not make Freeman your 2nd option?

On another note, we were 14-22 for FTs! It was just good enough but we still can do better.

Great win no matter how you dice it on the ROAD! Just last year we complained that we could not win them on the road and we have already won two and played UNI pretty tough!

I thought Dillard elbowed Sam out of frustration because they could not stop Sam and Dillard was having a bad game, really was a cheap shot.

[Bravesfan]

I am not questioning the coaching last night. I just wanted to throw out a thought and see how others felt about it.

BU up 2 with 0:13 left and SIU is inbounding the ball.. Why not foul right away (not of course during a 3 point shot) forcing SIU to shoot 2 for a tie and then regardless we get the last shot? At worst we are tied shooting for the win. Best case senario we have the lead and the ball. I would not suggest this strategy with 0:03 left.. not enough time to get the ball down the court for a good shot.

I know that's not the normal play, but it seems like a reasonable alternative.
SIU ended up with 2 wide open 3 point shots from 2 of their best 3 point shooters. Had one of them hit I shudder to think what the reaction would have been on this website.

By the way.. The SIU coaches said both plays they had called at the end of the game were to inbound to Booker down low. BU took that shot away and SIU went to the 2nd option which was the 3 point shot.

No way. I absolutely would never foul someone with a 2 point lead and just beg the other team to tie the game, and then go on to possibly lose in overtime!

No, I'd take my chances to prevent a three point shot every time.

[Future Walk-On]

I'll take the scenario that happened everytime. %'s say you have a good chance they will miss a 3.

I can't believe that this potential scenario has ever happened.

[tornado]

well didn't we just see BU foul a kid intentionally when we HAD a 3 pt lead and 2:45 remaining?

By the way...here is the official box score and play-by-play for the game from the SIU website..
they have logged that Andrew Warren committed a technical and they assess him as technical BOTH in the play-by-play and the box score.

http://siusalukis.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2009-2010/siu17.html

Are these stat guys at SIU loony?? An intention foul is NOT the same as a technical foul....someone needs to tell them.

Here's a few more thoughts--

http://bubravesblogger.blogspot.com/2010/01/bradley-beats-siu-57-55.html