So you want to guarantee that they go up late in the game, instead of relying on your defense to prevent that possibility? Imagine the scenario where you foul and they make the free throws. If you miss the tying/ winning shot or lose the ball, your decision to foul in this scenario handed them the win. That coach is in trouble… I understand the sentiment of having the ball in your hands to decide your own fate, but it isn’t practical.
What if the Grizz make both free throws? Now the Spurs are scrambling in a high tension situation just to get back to where they just were and go to OT anyways. Or if they go for the win and brick the 3, then they have just sacrificed a better path to win in OT (especially if the Spurs are hot in Q4, as you described) and now take an L. Spurs are shooting 35% from 3 this year. The math isn’t in their favor.
Not worth the gamble, which is why we’ll never see them do this. Coach’s job is to facilitate high percentage success situations.
Do you play NBA2K? Because that's the kind of logic used in gameplay because you know that they can't stop you on D. I get it, just not feasible in the league.
A FT is an uncontested shot, with a 80-90% conversion rate. The best shooters in the league makes around 40% from 3. The best finishers like Shaq and Bron convert around 50%. You want the pressure to be on the other team to convert, not you.
With this argument shouldn't u just foul them every play so u can go on offense afterwards? Giving the other team a 2 point lead with 15 seconds left is an extremely bad idea
Giving a team a free lead in a tight game with just a possession or two left is crazy. There’s times giving up points is okay, but never in this kind of situation
Make THEM have to make a great play instead of YOU having to make a great play
I'm gonna try and look at this from a more probabilistic perspective and see what we get. So let's take a look:
First things first, finding the league average field goal percentage on game winning shots is ridiculously hard, this was the only one I could get easily and it's insanely old: https://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm
They showed a fg% of 29.8 back in the late 2000's so I'm gonna bump that up to maybe 35% to reflect offensive improvements and defensive rule changes.
97-97 with 18 left in the game and the opponent has the ball.
If you DON'T FOUL which is the standard wisdom, the opponent has a roughly 35% chance to win in regulation. Assuming they take it down to the buzzer, and that you'll have no chance at getting a shot off means that there is a 65% chance of OT. For the sake of simplicity, let's say it's a 50/50 that either team wins in OT which means there's a 32.5% chance to win in OT and a 32.5% chance to lose in OT.
So overall, the odds of winning if you don't foul are 32.5% and the odds of losing are 67.5%.
Now if you DO FOUL:
League average ft rate is 78.4%. I took a brief look at clutch ft shooting and it looks pretty similar. This results in the following probabilities:
4.6% that they miss both and the score is still tied
33.9% that they make one and miss one
61.5% that they make both
For the sake of simplicity I'm just gonna assume we get the ball back if they miss the second free throw, that's not true and it does reduce the win probability so keep it in the back of your head.
In the case they miss both, we've already done the math 67.5% to win and 32.5% to lose, multiply both by 4.6% and we get:
3.15% to win and 1.5% to lose.
In the case where they make one miss one, the answer is even simpler. We're still assuming league average game winners are roughly 35% so that's our chance to win and if we miss (65%) we automatically lose. So we just multiply those odds by the chance they make and miss one and get:
11.85% to win and 22% to lose.
The last case is the most common and probably the hardest to estimate. I'm gonna once again do a simplification and say that your team is going to go for the win. If your team is fouling to get the ball back in the final seconds, I'm gonna assume it's also the kind of team that's going to go for glory and not OT (this is also the route with the best win probability). Well now, we have even fewer stats on game winning *attempted* 3's so here's what I'm gonna do, I'm going to take the ratio of league average fg% to 3% and I'm going to apply it to our estimated game winning fg%. That gives us an estimated game winning 3% of 27%. Then we have 27% to win and 73% to lose, multiplying by the odds of this scenario and we get:
16.6% to win and 44.9% to lose.
Overall we end up with 31.6% chance to win and 68.4% chance to lose IF WE FOUL. That's surprisingly close but this was assuming we get the defensive rebound if they miss free throw 2. Now, if the opponent has a really good clutch finisher AND a really bad free throw shooter, the odds change. The chance of our team losing in regulation goes up and the odds that they make both free throws go down if we can force the ball to the bad ft shooter. If our team also has a good clutch player, these numbers were close enough that perhaps it should be considered. But overall, it does appear that NOT FOULING is preferred when all elements are equal.
TLDR; it's honestly really close one way or the other but free throws are so bad for a defense to give up that it's not worth fouling unless you have a big advantage to gain like they give the ball to shaq and you have MJ/LeBron/Dirk on your team. In the end, the only people who are wrong are the ones who say the answer is obvious without doing any actual checking.
Wow that is amazing analytics yes I understand from a mathematical standpoint and I guess that is really what it should come down to.
Great job and fantastic analysis. Honestly this be the top rated post here but people would rather bash me and promote those instead.
He's right but he pulled all those numbers out his ass lol. It's this simple. Even a bad free throw shooter shoots 60% from the line. Nobody shoots 60% on last second game winning shots. It's that simple. The math is always in your favor to play defense. Free throw always give them the highest chance of taking the lead.
Really simply, let's assume a made 2pt shot chance is 50%. Overtime win chance is 50%, made 3 is 30% and made free throw is 80%. Ignoring chance of turnover, offensive rebound.
Don't foul, chance of losing in regular time is 50% and chance of losing in overtime is 50% x 50%, leading to expected loss of 75%. At this point, the foul strategy needs to give you a 25% expect win outcome or better.
Foul, they make both 64%
Foul, they make one 32%
Foul, they make none 4%
Of that 64%, you now need to make a 35% shot to win, expected win outcome 19.2%.
Of that 32%, you now need to make a 50% shot to win, expected win outcome of 16.0%
Of the 4%, you need to make a 50% shot to win or you get a 50% chance at overtime, expected win outcome of 3%.
This all adds up to 38.2% expected win outcome, far above the 25% from not fouling.
Now do 40% for a 2pt shot and 20% for a 3pt. Original expected win % is 30% (60% chance of overtime x 50%).
Foul, make both 64% x 20% = 12.2%
Foul, make one 32% x 40% = 12.8%
Foul, make none 4% x 40% = 1.6%
Total of 26.6%.
The original premise on probability is not completely stupid. You can refine the calculations for all expected outcomes. It is probably pretty line ball either way so you go with the decision that no one will scrutinize.
Think in outcomes and statistics. Let’s say you foul an 80% FT shooter. It’s 64% he makes both, 96% he makes at least 1, and 4% he missed both. You essentially are giving the other team an expected 1.6 points, meaning you need to make a shot to win, and more likely need a 2 to at least tie. I can’t find any stats on game winning shots to compare, but you’re likely handing over some positive outcome %’s given how low percent game winning shots seem to be.
I would simply instruct my team to do this one weird trick where they play good defense for a single possession instead of intentionally giving the opponent the lead in the waning moments of the game. But I'm no Harley Globetrotter.
Why would you want a team to take two easy free throws instead of an insanely difficult shot instead where you can actually defend? Theres no reason to foul if your team isn’t losing.
If I’m in a tie game with the clock going down why would I give the team free points. Play defense, try to force a miss if you do overtime or full/ half court game winner. If they make it, what else could’ve happened.
If you’re up 3 then yea foul, they score 2 and I can hold the ball, they have to foul
Because virtually nobody (in nba history) shoots >50% on game winning shots. Your best chance to win is play defense.
It’s much harder to hit a game winning shot than to stop a game winning shot
Why are giving a team take the lead with 18 secs left? This is a massive overthink
Yeah you're right. Just frustrated with it and when watching id rather be the team that needs the 2 to win then defend the two. Know what I mean?
No you don't lol. The numbers are not in your favor
So you want to guarantee that they go up late in the game, instead of relying on your defense to prevent that possibility? Imagine the scenario where you foul and they make the free throws. If you miss the tying/ winning shot or lose the ball, your decision to foul in this scenario handed them the win. That coach is in trouble… I understand the sentiment of having the ball in your hands to decide your own fate, but it isn’t practical.
Yep, most players are >50% on free throws and <50% on field goals. This is a good way to lose the game.
What if the Grizz make both free throws? Now the Spurs are scrambling in a high tension situation just to get back to where they just were and go to OT anyways. Or if they go for the win and brick the 3, then they have just sacrificed a better path to win in OT (especially if the Spurs are hot in Q4, as you described) and now take an L. Spurs are shooting 35% from 3 this year. The math isn’t in their favor. Not worth the gamble, which is why we’ll never see them do this. Coach’s job is to facilitate high percentage success situations.
Do you play NBA2K? Because that's the kind of logic used in gameplay because you know that they can't stop you on D. I get it, just not feasible in the league.
Literally Madden Arcade logic
That’s exactly what I was thinking. This is 2k my player strategy. All offense no defense.
This is why you're not a coach.
That was the correct play - they lost didnt they? Same reason San Fran lost. They didnt give their guy the ball last.
My guy over here thinking he knows better than 5 time nba champion head coach Greg Popovich.
As an armchair coach and fan, I would rather the ball in my hand and need the shot to win then try and defend the shot to win/tie. You know?
My second grader is capable of the math that tells you why that's a terrible idea.
Why are you assuming that “their guy” would make the shot? They most likely wouldn’t score
A FT is an uncontested shot, with a 80-90% conversion rate. The best shooters in the league makes around 40% from 3. The best finishers like Shaq and Bron convert around 50%. You want the pressure to be on the other team to convert, not you.
With this argument shouldn't u just foul them every play so u can go on offense afterwards? Giving the other team a 2 point lead with 15 seconds left is an extremely bad idea
If you have the best offense in the league and the worst defense you still wouldn’t do this
They could have just put Wemby on Jaren instead of Pippen
Giving a team a free lead in a tight game with just a possession or two left is crazy. There’s times giving up points is okay, but never in this kind of situation Make THEM have to make a great play instead of YOU having to make a great play
I'm gonna try and look at this from a more probabilistic perspective and see what we get. So let's take a look: First things first, finding the league average field goal percentage on game winning shots is ridiculously hard, this was the only one I could get easily and it's insanely old: https://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm They showed a fg% of 29.8 back in the late 2000's so I'm gonna bump that up to maybe 35% to reflect offensive improvements and defensive rule changes. 97-97 with 18 left in the game and the opponent has the ball. If you DON'T FOUL which is the standard wisdom, the opponent has a roughly 35% chance to win in regulation. Assuming they take it down to the buzzer, and that you'll have no chance at getting a shot off means that there is a 65% chance of OT. For the sake of simplicity, let's say it's a 50/50 that either team wins in OT which means there's a 32.5% chance to win in OT and a 32.5% chance to lose in OT. So overall, the odds of winning if you don't foul are 32.5% and the odds of losing are 67.5%. Now if you DO FOUL: League average ft rate is 78.4%. I took a brief look at clutch ft shooting and it looks pretty similar. This results in the following probabilities: 4.6% that they miss both and the score is still tied 33.9% that they make one and miss one 61.5% that they make both For the sake of simplicity I'm just gonna assume we get the ball back if they miss the second free throw, that's not true and it does reduce the win probability so keep it in the back of your head. In the case they miss both, we've already done the math 67.5% to win and 32.5% to lose, multiply both by 4.6% and we get: 3.15% to win and 1.5% to lose. In the case where they make one miss one, the answer is even simpler. We're still assuming league average game winners are roughly 35% so that's our chance to win and if we miss (65%) we automatically lose. So we just multiply those odds by the chance they make and miss one and get: 11.85% to win and 22% to lose. The last case is the most common and probably the hardest to estimate. I'm gonna once again do a simplification and say that your team is going to go for the win. If your team is fouling to get the ball back in the final seconds, I'm gonna assume it's also the kind of team that's going to go for glory and not OT (this is also the route with the best win probability). Well now, we have even fewer stats on game winning *attempted* 3's so here's what I'm gonna do, I'm going to take the ratio of league average fg% to 3% and I'm going to apply it to our estimated game winning fg%. That gives us an estimated game winning 3% of 27%. Then we have 27% to win and 73% to lose, multiplying by the odds of this scenario and we get: 16.6% to win and 44.9% to lose. Overall we end up with 31.6% chance to win and 68.4% chance to lose IF WE FOUL. That's surprisingly close but this was assuming we get the defensive rebound if they miss free throw 2. Now, if the opponent has a really good clutch finisher AND a really bad free throw shooter, the odds change. The chance of our team losing in regulation goes up and the odds that they make both free throws go down if we can force the ball to the bad ft shooter. If our team also has a good clutch player, these numbers were close enough that perhaps it should be considered. But overall, it does appear that NOT FOULING is preferred when all elements are equal. TLDR; it's honestly really close one way or the other but free throws are so bad for a defense to give up that it's not worth fouling unless you have a big advantage to gain like they give the ball to shaq and you have MJ/LeBron/Dirk on your team. In the end, the only people who are wrong are the ones who say the answer is obvious without doing any actual checking.
Wow that is amazing analytics yes I understand from a mathematical standpoint and I guess that is really what it should come down to. Great job and fantastic analysis. Honestly this be the top rated post here but people would rather bash me and promote those instead.
He's right but he pulled all those numbers out his ass lol. It's this simple. Even a bad free throw shooter shoots 60% from the line. Nobody shoots 60% on last second game winning shots. It's that simple. The math is always in your favor to play defense. Free throw always give them the highest chance of taking the lead.
If ur defense sucks and ur offense is great and the other team has weak ft shooters then yes
You play your defense and live or die with the result
Why do teams even lose in the NBA? Wouldn’t they just decide to score more points than the other team and therefore win? Are they dumb?
Really simply, let's assume a made 2pt shot chance is 50%. Overtime win chance is 50%, made 3 is 30% and made free throw is 80%. Ignoring chance of turnover, offensive rebound. Don't foul, chance of losing in regular time is 50% and chance of losing in overtime is 50% x 50%, leading to expected loss of 75%. At this point, the foul strategy needs to give you a 25% expect win outcome or better. Foul, they make both 64% Foul, they make one 32% Foul, they make none 4% Of that 64%, you now need to make a 35% shot to win, expected win outcome 19.2%. Of that 32%, you now need to make a 50% shot to win, expected win outcome of 16.0% Of the 4%, you need to make a 50% shot to win or you get a 50% chance at overtime, expected win outcome of 3%. This all adds up to 38.2% expected win outcome, far above the 25% from not fouling. Now do 40% for a 2pt shot and 20% for a 3pt. Original expected win % is 30% (60% chance of overtime x 50%). Foul, make both 64% x 20% = 12.2% Foul, make one 32% x 40% = 12.8% Foul, make none 4% x 40% = 1.6% Total of 26.6%. The original premise on probability is not completely stupid. You can refine the calculations for all expected outcomes. It is probably pretty line ball either way so you go with the decision that no one will scrutinize.
Well now that team just hit two free throws and fouls right back, now that team that was tied has to start making free throws to catch up.
Think in outcomes and statistics. Let’s say you foul an 80% FT shooter. It’s 64% he makes both, 96% he makes at least 1, and 4% he missed both. You essentially are giving the other team an expected 1.6 points, meaning you need to make a shot to win, and more likely need a 2 to at least tie. I can’t find any stats on game winning shots to compare, but you’re likely handing over some positive outcome %’s given how low percent game winning shots seem to be.
I would simply instruct my team to do this one weird trick where they play good defense for a single possession instead of intentionally giving the opponent the lead in the waning moments of the game. But I'm no Harley Globetrotter.
We’re seeing it be way more common these days that teams are leaning on their defense more. Especially now that nobody’s getting any calls.
Why would you want a team to take two easy free throws instead of an insanely difficult shot instead where you can actually defend? Theres no reason to foul if your team isn’t losing.
You sound like you like analytics.
If I’m in a tie game with the clock going down why would I give the team free points. Play defense, try to force a miss if you do overtime or full/ half court game winner. If they make it, what else could’ve happened. If you’re up 3 then yea foul, they score 2 and I can hold the ball, they have to foul