- This topic has 221 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
V would foul
Just told the kid that
I would have called for the foul with 25 seconds left. Why let the clock run down? They make, you don’t have much time left. You foul, you have more control.
It would have been 1-and-1 if not a shooting foul. Grab a non-Harrison.
Give the KY defenders credit, they knew Grant would take a three AND that he wouldn’t pass it away. Smart defending.
Yea,UK was a tad smarter there at the end. Wiscy will certainly be no easy out as Kaminsky can more than hold his own in the post. But this UK team seems to get all the breaks when push comes to shove.
push comes to shove.
Pun intended? 🙂
Yeah, kaminsky will pull them out. Wisconsin will score. But ky will attack kaminsky on defense. I think blue rolls in that one by double digits
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/03/27/watch-the-assist-of-the-night/
Martin dunk is in there.
Intentionally fouling there is pretty balsy, I only have seen one coach do that.
Agreed, but even though it’s both rare and ballsy, it doesn’t make it any less right, especially when it’s a 1-and-1. In that particular set of circumstances (Auguste with 4, Grant dead on his feet), ND can’t play for OT. Even if KY pinky swears they will dribble out the clock…you have to foul and get the ball back.
Maybe I will win back the favour of Jigsy and Va by saying its all about the maths, yo.
Even assuming the Cats make 1 or 2 FTs, you figure you get a look with a 30-40%* chance to win. There’s NO WAY you have that good a chance to win in OT (with the factors I outlined), and that’s not factoring in the odds of stopping KY on defense, which are nowhere near 100%, even playing it straight-up.
I don’t see where you lose that much by fouling on purpose (they ended up fouling anyway, due to KY’s huge speed/quickness advantage), whereas you gain BOTH time on the clock* and the 1-and-1 factor.
* Those odds go WAY DOWN when you don’t have time to run a real play. Kudos to Calipari for drilling his kids to know that Grant would keep the ball AND go for a three at that point, knowing they couldn’t play for OT. Say what you will about the man, he coached his ass off those last two minutes of the game. And if you ever wanted proof of how much defense matters…
Another aspect where V was ahead of his time – mathematical intuition. Before advanced metrics, that’s essentially what V was calculating in his head, as a “hunch” of sorts. Poker players have been doing this for ages, whether they have worked out the exact calculations or not.
There’s nothing I hate more than doing things by “the book” when logic and math don’t support it, because coaches know they won’t get criticized for playing it safe. Drives me f-ing nuts.
/end rant
Maybe all this last play stuff, foul no foul, stuff …comes down to this…
How well the Coach trusts his players natural offensive or defensive instincts…
versus…
How well the Coach trusts his players to do exactly whatever impromptu craziness he comes up with during the timeout under the same amount of pressure as kids are feeling times ten.And then the Coach has to get this call right first…
Coaches choke too… just ask Mike Brey…
#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
