Fouling as a Strategy

[BillyC80]

It seems our offense gets stymied when we get fouled a lot. I think this is often the case in any college game, where a team’s offensive flow is constantly interrupted.

Getting fouled 25 times also had this affect on us:

1. Despite a combined +6 in possessions (8 more offensive rebounds minus 2 more turnovers), we still took 3 fewer shots from the field than SB.
2. The reason for this is that we got fouled 9 more times than we fouled them. And to make matters worse, we missed too many foul shots, including two front ends of 1 and 1 trips to the line.

The same thing happened against Bryant. We had +14 possessions but only took 3 more shots than they did. They fouled us 12 more times than we fouled them. And we proceeded to miss a ton of FTs, which made the game much closer than it should have been.

My suggestion, especially when we play better teams, is to be aggressive going for steals once our opponent gets into their half court set, and if we foul them before the shot while going for a steal, then so be it. Let’s interrupt their flow, make them take it in from out of bounds and reset their offense, and when necessary put their worst foul shooters on the line. This is what’s been done to us, with great effect.

Now I expect the stat-heads to poke holes in my theory, which is totally cool. Have at it.

 

[HeavenUniv.]

In soccer, don’t they let the play move on if the team that has the ball gets fouled and it would be to their advantage not to stop play? Wonder what basketball would be like if they allowed that. lol Also, I have been saying for years, that the team that gets fouled should have the option of putting the ball back in play or shooting free throws. Nothing worse than seeing some team hack a 40 percent free throw shooter to death the last five minutes of a game. It gives the advantage to the team committing penalties. Just my two cents.

 

[BillyC80]

Heaven, interesting idea. Reminds that at one time goal-tending was allowed until they realized nobody wants to watch tall guys standing under the basket swatting away shots that are on their way into the hoop*.

* Goaltending was disallowed in basketball in 1944, due in large part to George Mikan swatting away so many shots.

 

[blockm2]

It seems our offense gets stymied when we get fouled a lot. I think this is often the case in any college game, where a team’s offensive flow is constantly interrupted.

Getting fouled 25 times also had this affect on us:

1. Despite a combined +6 in possessions (8 more offensive rebounds minus 2 more turnovers), we still took 3 fewer shots from the field than SB.
2. The reason for this is that we got fouled 9 more times than we fouled them. And to make matters worse, we missed too many foul shots, including two front ends of 1 and 1 trips to the line.

The same thing happened against Bryant. We had +14 possessions but only took 3 more shots than they did. They fouled us 12 more times than we fouled them. And we proceeded to miss a ton of FTs, which made the game much closer than it should have been.

My suggestion, especially when we play better teams, is to be aggressive going for steals once our opponent gets into their half court set, and if we foul them before the shot while going for a steal, then so be it. Let’s interrupt their flow, make them take it in from out of bounds and reset their offense, and when necessary put their worst foul shooters on the line. This is what’s been done to us, with great effect.

Now I expect the stat-heads to poke holes in my theory, which is totally cool. Have at it.

Teams have essentially equal possessions in each game under the usual way of counting them. Offensive rebounds aren't extra possessions, they are just extending the current possession.

You kinda imply that Rutgers offense would perform better if they had more FG attempts instead of FT attempts, the simple fix for that is shooting FTs better.

 

[Seton75]

You were made to waste valuable seconds because your defense played by the rules. My rule change is if one team is under the limit, they decide whether you shoot or inbound. This rewards cleaner defense and would clean up the game. Foul shaq and I am under the limit, I'll inbound, foul steph, I'll shoot. Last night, you foul and you decide. Old rules apply if both are over the limit. No one I mentioned this too likes it btw.

 

[BillyC80]

Teams have essentially equal possessions in each game under the usual way of counting them. Offensive rebounds aren't extra possessions, they are just extending the current possession.

You kinda imply that Rutgers offense would perform better if they had more FG attempts instead of FT attempts, the simple fix for that is shooting FTs better.

You’re right I was referring to the number of shots so I should not have said possessions.

What I should have implied more strongly is that the other team is getting more shots from the field (and making a higher percentage of threes) than us because we don’t foul them enough.

Fouling them more would also disrupt their offensive flow, take the ball out of their best shooters hands (at least temporarily) more often and give us the opportunity to put their worst foul shooters at the line.

That’s what’s been done to us. As a strategy I’m suggesting it as one tool in the toolbox to slow a team down and not let their shooters find a rhythm or let their offense get into a flow.

 

[blockm2]

You’re right I was referring to the number of shots so I should not have said possessions.

What I should have implied more strongly is that the other team is getting more shots from the field (and making a higher percentage of threes) than us because we don’t foul them enough.

Fouling them more would also disrupt their offensive flow, take the ball out of their best shooters hands (at least temporarily) more often and give us the opportunity to put their worst foul shooters at the line.

That’s what’s been done to us. As a strategy I’m suggesting it as one tool in the toolbox to slow a team down and not let their shooters find a rhythm or let their offense get into a flow.

Fouling more is usually not a good defensive strategy. Assume your opponent shoots FTs at about a 70% clip and they will average around 1.4 points per possession at the FT line (ignores the few potential 1 and 1s when they miss the front end) which is likely way, way more than they would score on regular FG attempts. Even 60% FT shooters score 1.2 points per trip to the line when given 2 FT attempts.

 

[BillyC80]

Fouling more is usually not a good defensive strategy. Assume your opponent shoots FTs at about a 70% clip and they will average around 1.4 points per possession at the FT line (ignores the few potential 1 and 1s when they miss the front end) which is likely way, way more than they would score on regular FG attempts. Even 60% FT shooters score 1.2 points per trip to the line when given 2 FT attempts.

I’m with you regarding the stats, however I’m not advocating that we foul indiscriminately. For example, let’s say we foul exactly 9 times per half, always before the act of shooting, by being aggressive and going for steals after the opposition brings the ball up and is setting up their offense to get a good shot. We would have 18 fouls for the game, none of them in the act of shooting, with 6 one and ones.

If you could pull that off, or something close to that, I think you would have the advantage of a) getting some additional steals by being aggressive, b) keeping the opposition from getting into an offensive flow, and c) potentially putting their worst foul shooters at the line, as a strategy, to shoot those one and ones.

I guess the point I’m making is that fouling as a strategy, in the way I’ve described, should be considered as one way to gain an advantage.

 

[blockm2]

I’m with you regarding the stats, however I’m not advocating that we foul indiscriminately. For example, let’s say we foul exactly 9 times per half, always before the act of shooting, by being aggressive and going for steals after the opposition brings the ball up and is setting up their offense to get a good shot. We would have 18 fouls for the game, none of them in the act of shooting, with 6 one and ones.

If you could pull that off, or something close to that, I think you would have the advantage of a) getting some additional steals by being aggressive, b) keeping the opposition from getting into an offensive flow, and c) potentially putting their worst foul shooters at the line, as a strategy, to shoot those one and ones.

I guess the point I’m making is that fouling as a strategy, in the way I’ve described, should be considered as one way to gain an advantage.

college players mostly cannot even execute far simpler things than that. Trying to intentionally foul is great and then opponents just go up with a shot as contact is coming.

 

[BillyC80]

I find myself bumping this thread because once again a lesser opponent fouled us at a very high rate, 27 fouls last night, to keep the game closer than it should have been.

How many times did one of our guards get fouled after getting a step past their defender when they were about to make a strong move into the lane?

This has been done, by our opponents so far, for two reasons — to aggressively try for steals, which SFA did get many times, and barring a steal they force us to restart our offense by taking it in from out of bounds, thus giving them another chance to set up a trap while keeping us from getting into an offensive flow.

By fouling our driving guards before they penetrate the lane, it also protects their bigs from fouling out early because their bigs don’t have to step in to try and stop our guards from getting to the rim.

Lastly it gives our opponent the option, particularly once they have amassed 6 fouls in the half, to put our worse foul shooters on the line as needed — case in point Myles who went 1-5 from the line (second most foul shots taken by an RU player).

We overcame this aggressive defensive and fouling strategy last night by shooting a higher percentage from the field, especially from the arc. That was critical because all the aggressive steals and fouls left us with only 45 shots taken from the field (to their 51 shots) and we also shot poorly as a team from the FT line.

 

[blockm2]

fouling more is correlated with losing games. That's why FT rate (FT attempts/FG attempts) is one of the "four factors" that determine whether you win or lose a game (others are eFG%, OR%, and TO%)

 

[Scangg]

fouling more is correlated with losing games. That's why FT rate (FT attempts/FG attempts) is one of the "four factors" that determine whether you win or lose a game (others are eFG%, OR%, and TO%)

That stat is obviously greatly influenced by end of game fouling though

 

[BillyC80]

fouling more is correlated with losing games. That's why FT rate (FT attempts/FG attempts) is one of the "four factors" that determine whether you win or lose a game (others are eFG%, OR%, and TO%)

Statistically that may be the case most of the time (although against SB we won 3 of those 4 stats and still lost the game), but what I’m suggesting is that WHEN you foul and WHO you foul can give you an advantage if you do it strategically (play aggressive and go for steals, particularly against penetrating guards before they attempt to shoot, until you get 6 fouls, then put the worst opposing FT shooters at the line. Meanwhile you’re keeping your opponent from getting into an offensive flow while protecting your bigs from early foul trouble).

 

[RUich]

I assume Pike makes sure that our best FT guys are on the floor in the last minutes of any close game when the other team is going to foul.

 

[BillyC80]

I assume Pike makes sure that our best FT guys are on the floor in the last minutes of any close game when the other team is going to foul.

True, but what about in the first half? Or the first 10 minutes of the second half? If I were our opponents, once I got to 6 fouls by being aggressive and going for steals and disrupting the RU offensive flow, then I would foul Myles. I’d do this to try and build a lead or keep the game close, not just at the end of the game.

 

[blockm2]

Statistically that may be the case most of the time (although against SB we won 3 of those 4 stats and still lost the game)

that is not true. In the St Bon game, the Bonnies had a much better effective FG% (69 pts on 56 shots vs 55 pts on 56 shots for Rutgers) and a lower TO rate.

 

[BillyC80]

that is not true. In the St Bon game, the Bonnies had a much better effective FG% (69 pts on 56 shots vs 55 pts on 56 shots for Rutgers) and a lower TO rate.

You’re right. I thought eFG% was the only stat, of the four you cited, that SB won. I thought we won the TO rate. So it was 2 out of 4, and not 3 out of 4. But that was a side comment to my main point that WHEN you foul and WHO you foul can be an important determinant of the outcome of a game.

 

[blockm2]

You’re right. I thought eFG% was the only stat, of the four you cited, that SB won. I thought we won the TO rate. So it was 2 out of 4, and not 3 out of 4. But that was a side comment to my main point that WHEN you foul and WHO you foul can be an important determinant of the outcome of a game.

college players can barely keep track of all their assignments on a given play let alone try to remember the foul percentage of each opponent on the floor which is why no coach in the country tries to strategically foul for an entire game. Last couple minutes? Sure, foul the worst shooter on the court.