Aggressive D and Fouling: SFA beats Duke

[BillyC80]

Two things jumped out at me yesterday. In our game against NJIT we played aggressive D on Cooks and a couple times fouled him before the shot with fewer than 6 team fouls. That took the ball out of his hands, forced NJIT to inbound again and restart their offense on that possession, and in some cases a different player shot the ball (and missed).

In the SFA v Duke game, SFA played aggressive D, got 22 turnovers and fouled Duke 29 times. This limited Duke’s shots from the field to 54 (SFA took 74 shots) and forced Duke to try and win the game at the foul line, which they failed at, missing 16 free throws (24-40).

Duke shot a better percentage than SFA from the field and still lost at home, due in large part to SFA’s strategy of playing aggressive D, going for steals, and not worrying about fouling too much. Duke obliged by missing all those FTs.

 

[blockm2]

In the SFA v Duke game, SFA played aggressive D, got 22 turnovers and fouled Duke 29 times. This limited Duke’s shots from the field to 54 (SFA took 74 shots) and forced Duke to try and win the game at the foul line, which they failed at, missing 16 free throws (24-40).

Duke shot a better percentage than SFA from the field and still lost at home, due in large part to SFA’s strategy of playing aggressive D, going for steals, and not worrying about fouling too much. Duke obliged by missing all those FTs.

Duke shot 56% on 2 pt shots in the game and 60% on FTs. If instead of 40 FTs, they had 20 extra 2 pt shot attempts and hit them at the same 56% rate they would have lost by an even larger margin. Duke mostly lost because SFA got 7 "extra" possessions by being +8 in TO margin and only -1 in offensive rebounds.

 

[wngarbarini]

What did we beat SFA by?

 

[BillyC80]

Duke shot 56% on 2 pt shots in the game and 60% on FTs. If instead of 40 FTs, they had 20 extra 2 pt shot attempts and hit them at the same 56% rate they would have lost by an even larger margin. Duke mostly lost because SFA got 7 "extra" possessions by being +8 in TO margin and only -1 in offensive rebounds.

Thanks block. My point is that SFA went for steals and didn’t worry about fouling too much, and in the process got 22 turnovers against a superior team.

You also have to consider how aggressive D/fouling disrupts the offensive flow (which is why I included the NJIT/Cooks example in my OP), and the impact of that cannot be determined by stats alone.

 

[koko2315]

Coach K philosophy. Jump the passing lanes, foul foul foul. The refs can't possibly call them all.

 

[BillyC80]

Duke shot 56% on 2 pt shots in the game and 60% on FTs. If instead of 40 FTs, they had 20 extra 2 pt shot attempts and hit them at the same 56% rate they would have lost by an even larger margin. Duke mostly lost because SFA got 7 "extra" possessions by being +8 in TO margin and only -1 in offensive rebounds.

Btw block there’s a flaw in your math. You can’t just replace all 40 of Duke’s FTs with 20 FG attempts. Duke took 20 fewer FGs but 23 more FTs. So at 60% from the line those extra FTs only netted 14 points, but 20 fewer FGs at 56% cost them 22 points.

 

[blockm2]

Btw block there’s a flaw in your math. You can’t just replace all 40 of Duke’s FTs with 20 FG attempts. Duke took 20 fewer FGs but 23 more FTs. So at 60% from the line those extra FTs only netted 14 points, but 20 fewer FGs at 56% cost them 22 points.

The difference in FGA is from turnovers and offensive rebounds. By definition possessions that ended with free throws were not turnovers. So if the foul was not called a shot was going up.

your fascination with field goal attempts is bizarre to me since it has no correlation with wins or losses. I mean this is well proven stuff that isn’t debated by anybody. Shooting matters, rebounds matter, turnovers matter, and getting to the FT line matters. That is about it. That’s why they are called the four factors.

 

[BillyC80]

The difference in FGA is from turnovers and offensive rebounds. By definition possessions that ended with free throws were not turnovers. So if the foul was not called a shot was going up.

your fascination with field goal attempts is bizarre to me since it has no correlation with wins or losses. I mean this is well proven stuff that isn’t debated by anybody. Shooting matters, rebounds matter, turnovers matter, and getting to the FT line matters. That is about it. That’s why they are called the four factors.

Block, thanks for indulging my nonsense. Sometimes it does seem bizarre, even to me. My fascination is more with aggressively going for steals without concern for fouling too much.

So let me just leave it at this: in over 50 years of observing college basketball, I’ve noticed that lesser teams can keep a game closer by aggressively going for steals and fouling the better team, especially earlier in the game. It slows down their offensive rhythm and flow, which cannot be measured directly by statistics.

Try this. Next time we play a team we should beat handily, and we’re losing to them in the first 10 minutes of the game, check to see how many times they fouled us, up to that point in the game. It’s uncanny how fouling a lot, especially if it’s done by going for steals, and especially early, can keep a game closer than it should be. (You can also try this with any college game you see on tv where the lesser team is keeping it close or leading)

 

[blockm2]

Block, thanks for indulging my nonsense. Sometimes it does seem bizarre, even to me. My fascination is more with aggressively going for steals without concern for fouling too much.

So let me just leave it at this: in over 50 years of observing college basketball, I’ve noticed that lesser teams can keep a game closer by aggressively going for steals and fouling the better team, especially earlier in the game. It slows down their offensive rhythm and flow, which cannot be measured directly by statistics.

Try this. Next time we play a team we should beat handily, and we’re losing to them in the first 10 minutes of the game, check to see how many times they fouled us, up to that point in the game. It’s uncanny how fouling a lot, especially if it’s done by going for steals, and especially early, can keep a game closer than it should be. (You can also try this with any college game you see on tv where the lesser team is keeping it close or leading)

that only works in the first 10 minutes because all those fouls don't result in FTs. The problem is you get into the bonus and then it's a bunch of free throws on possessions that were nowhere close to the rim. And then it also gets your players in foul trouble.