Clock Management Was Poor At KSU

Might be a generation thing as well, from my limited experience I have seen more "old school" coaches refuse to foul when up 3 at the very end while younger guys appear more open to putting a guy on the line.

More than one way to skin a cat and often you're playing the percentage game. That's why you have assistants who have subscriptions to kenpom, synergy sports, etc detailing the propensity of certain outcomes. If you're a staff and you don't have those particular algorithms on a tablet at the bench, you're doing yourself a disservice.
 
WTSooner said:
Yet it happens ALL the time in college ball. It's about playing the percentages. And putting a 50% FT shooter at the line, in some cases, is a more efficient option then letting a team run their offense, when they've scored it pretty efficiently on you all night.

If OU was a good defensive team, that would change things. But we are not.
Click to expand...

It does not happen all of the time. I would guess it is rare that you have a team down a basket foul with 50 seconds left
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
It does not happen all of the time. I would guess it is rare that you have a team down a basket foul with 50 seconds left
Click to expand...

I see it happen often enough. Next time I do, I'll post it here if I can remember.
 
garyeb2 said:
The TV announcers explained it pretty well. The play happened right in front of Kruger. When the refs went to the replay to see who last touched the ball, (Cousins or the K St. player) Kruger was sure that the call was going to be reversed and go our way. They said he spent the time he had drawing up an offensive play.

When the call didn't go our way, we went out to defend the inbounds play without current instructions from Kruger. Hornbeak probably made a mistake by fouling. He wasn't told to foul.
Click to expand...

disagree .. i think kruger wanted him to foul
 
You can disagree if you want to. I'm just telling you what the TV announcers said.
 
If Kruger was so pissed that Hornbeak fouled, why did we then foul again 2 seconds later, in basically the same situation?
 
Last edited:
I checked with one of the assistant coaches today. Hornbeak was not told to foul. Jelon just made a mistake.
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
I just feel it is really not smart to allow the other team a chance to make it a two possession game.
Click to expand...
Isn't playing defense taking the same chance? Here's my line of thinking.

Worst case scenario when you foul the bad shooter on a one and one: He makes two free throws, you're down two possessions, but you have 50 seconds to work with.

Best case: He misses the front end, you get the dang rebound, and you have 45 seconds left with the ball down 2.


However in your scenario,

Best case: You get a stop and you are down 2 with 20-30 seconds left.

Worst case scenario: About the same as fouling and he makes his free throws except now you're down two possessions with 20 seconds left on the clock instead of 50.



I think the fact that it was a 1 and 1 makes it a gamble worth taking. I do not believe Kruger wanted to take the gamble, but I disagree that it is a bad gamble to take. I personally would do everything to have the ball in my hands with as much time as possible if my team is behind.
 
Soonerborn03 said:
Isn't playing defense taking the same chance? Here's my line of thinking.

Worst case scenario when you foul the bad shooter on a one and one: He makes two free throws, you're down two possessions, but you have 50 seconds to work with.

Best case: He misses the front end, you get the dang rebound, and you have 45 seconds left with the ball down 2.


However in your scenario,

Best case: You get a stop and you are down 2 with 20-30 seconds left.

Worst case scenario: About the same as fouling and he makes his free throws except now you're down two possessions with 20 seconds left on the clock instead of 50.



I think the fact that it was a 1 and 1 makes it a gamble worth taking. I do not believe Kruger wanted to take the gamble, but I disagree that it is a bad gamble to take. I personally would do everything to have the ball in my hands with as much time as possible if my team is behind.
Click to expand...


That is a pretty good summation of how I feel about it, also.
 
Soonerborn03 said:
Isn't playing defense taking the same chance? Here's my line of thinking.

Worst case scenario when you foul the bad shooter on a one and one: He makes two free throws, you're down two possessions, but you have 50 seconds to work with.

Best case: He misses the front end, you get the dang rebound, and you have 45 seconds left with the ball down 2.


However in your scenario,

Best case: You get a stop and you are down 2 with 20-30 seconds left.

Worst case scenario: About the same as fouling and he makes his free throws except now you're down two possessions with 20 seconds left on the clock instead of 50.



I think the fact that it was a 1 and 1 makes it a gamble worth taking. I do not believe Kruger wanted to take the gamble, but I disagree that it is a bad gamble to take. I personally would do everything to have the ball in my hands with as much time as possible if my team is behind.
Click to expand...

I guess we just disagree. it's one of those things that if it works you look like a genius and nobody questions it. if it doesn't work it looks idiotic
 
Soonerborn03 said:
Isn't playing defense taking the same chance? Here's my line of thinking.

Worst case scenario when you foul the bad shooter on a one and one: He makes two free throws, you're down two possessions, but you have 50 seconds to work with.

Best case: He misses the front end, you get the dang rebound, and you have 45 seconds left with the ball down 2.


However in your scenario,

Best case: You get a stop and you are down 2 with 20-30 seconds left.

Worst case scenario: About the same as fouling and he makes his free throws except now you're down two possessions with 20 seconds left on the clock instead of 50.



I think the fact that it was a 1 and 1 makes it a gamble worth taking. I do not believe Kruger wanted to take the gamble, but I disagree that it is a bad gamble to take. I personally would do everything to have the ball in my hands with as much time as possible if my team is behind.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Especially with our defense.
If they wasted the whole shot clock and scored, we are down 4 with 15 seconds left and the game is over.
If they make both free throws, we are down 4 with 50 seconds left.

Which scenario would you rather have?
 
Soonerborn03 said:
Isn't playing defense taking the same chance? Here's my line of thinking.

Worst case scenario when you foul the bad shooter on a one and one: He makes two free throws, you're down two possessions, but you have 50 seconds to work with.

Best case: He misses the front end, you get the dang rebound, and you have 45 seconds left with the ball down 2.


However in your scenario,

Best case: You get a stop and you are down 2 with 20-30 seconds left.

Worst case scenario: About the same as fouling and he makes his free throws except now you're down two possessions with 20 seconds left on the clock instead of 50.



I think the fact that it was a 1 and 1 makes it a gamble worth taking. I do not believe Kruger wanted to take the gamble, but I disagree that it is a bad gamble to take. I personally would do everything to have the ball in my hands with as much time as possible if my team is behind.
Click to expand...
Good post. I want to add to this.

SoonerBounce13,

Your fear that fouling allows the opponent to turn it into a two-possession game is disproportionate to the likelihood of that outcome.

Take campbest's hypothetical 45% free throw shooter, and for the sake of discussion, assume a defensive rebounding percentage of 80% on free throws (just a rough estimate, but DREB% is certainly going to be higher on FTs than FGs, due to position).

Potential outcomes:
--44% that he misses the first and you get the def. reb., down 2 with :50, w/ball

--11% that he misses the first and opp. gets off. reb, down 2 with :50, w/o ball (in this case, you're back to where you started)

--19.8% that he makes first, misses second, and you get def. reb., down 3 with :50, w/ball

--4.95% that he makes first, misses second, and opp. gets off. reb., down 3 with :50, w/o ball

--20.25% he makes both, down 4 with :50, w/ball

There is only a 20.25% chance (45% x 45%) that your fear is realized: he makes both free throws, leaving you down 4 points with 50 seconds.

Conversely, if you just play defense without fouling, let's just assume that there are two possibilities: the opp. either makes a shot or misses a shot after draining the shot clock.

*Yes, there are number of other possibilities (both good and bad) if you play defense: you force a TO (highly unlikely early in the shot clock, as the opp. will sit on it and milk the clock; a realistic possibility once they run a play), opp. doesn't even get a shot off (also highly unlikely), you accidentally foul (a realistic possibility, and a bad one if it's a decent foul shooter, and/or after a lot of time has been milked). In other words, there are other little things that can happen, but they balance out enough that we can ignore them while getting a ballpark estimate of possible outcomes.

Let's also assume you play some impressive, smothering, non-fouling defense that only gives the opponent a 35% chance of converting a FG (playing "good defense" doesn't preclude the possibility of the opposing offense scoring), and you have a 70% chance of getting the defensive rebound (again, DREB% on FGs < DREB% of FTs, for obvious reasons).

Potential outcomes:
--35% opp. makes FG, down 4-5 points with :15-:20, w/ball. Also, if this happens, the game is essentially over.

--19.5% opp. misses FG, opp. gets off. reb., down 2 with :15-:20, w/o ball

--45.5% opp. misses FG, you get def. reb., down 2 with :15-:20, w/ball

The best-case scenario from playing defense (getting the ball back down 2 with :15-:20) is about as likely as the best-case scenario of fouling the bad FT shooter (getting the ball back down 2 with :50), and the latter is clearly a more desirable outcome due to the time differential.

Meanwhile, the worst-case scenario from playing defense (down 4-5 points with :15-:20) is more likely than the bad FT shooter making it a two-possession game (down 4 points with :50), and the former is clearly a less desirable outcome due to the time differential.

I certainly don't think it's an automatic fouling situation, but it's also not the "never foul" situation you're making it out to be. It's dependent upon multiple factors, including the presence of a poor FT shooter and the quality of your defense relative to the opponent's offense. My estimates are quick and dirty, but at the very least, they should open your mind to the notion that there are circumstances under which fouling is the optimal strategy.
 
Last edited:
Smash Williams said:
Good post. I want to add to this.

SoonerBounce13,

Your fear that fouling allows the opponent to turn it into a two-possession game is disproportionate to the likelihood of that outcome.

Take campbest's hypothetical 45% free throw shooter, and for the sake of discussion, assume a defensive rebounding percentage of 80% on free throws (just a rough estimate, but DREB% is certainly going to be higher on FTs than FGs, due to position).

Potential outcomes:
--44% that he misses the first and you get the def. reb., down 2 with :50, w/ball

--11% that he misses the first and opp. gets off. reb, down 2 with :50, w/o ball (in this case, you're back to where you started)

--19.8% that he makes first, misses second, and you get def. reb., down 3 with :50, w/ball

--4.95% that he makes first, misses second, and opp. gets off. reb., down 3 with :50, w/o ball

--20.25% he makes both, down 4 with :50, w/ball

There is only a 20.25% chance (45% x 45%) that your fear is realized: he makes both free throws, leaving you down 4 points with 50 seconds.

Conversely, if you just play defense without fouling, let's just assume that there are two possibilities: the opp. either makes a shot or misses a shot after draining the shot clock.

*Yes, there are number of other possibilities (both good and bad) if you play defense: you force a TO (highly unlikely early in the shot clock, as the opp. will sit on it and milk the clock; a realistic possibility once they run a play), opp. doesn't even get a shot off (also highly unlikely), you accidentally foul (a realistic possibility, and a bad one if it's a decent foul shooter, and/or after a lot of time has been milked). In other words, there are other little things that can happen, but they balance out enough that we can ignore them while getting a ballpark estimate of possible outcomes.

Let's also assume you play some impressive, smothering, non-fouling defense that only gives the opponent a 35% chance of converting a FG (playing "good defense" doesn't preclude the possibility of the opposing offense scoring), and you have a 70% chance of getting the defensive rebound (again, DREB% on FGs < DREB% of FTs, for obvious reasons).

Potential outcomes:
--35% opp. makes FG, down 4-5 points with :15-:20, w/ball. Also, if this happens, the game is essentially over.

--10.5% opp. misses FG, opp. gets off. reb., down 2 with :15-:20, w/o ball

--45.5% opp. misses FG, you get def. reb., down 2 with :15-:20, w/ball

The best-case scenario from playing defense (getting the ball back down 2 with :15-:20) is about as likely as the best-case scenario of fouling the bad FT shooter (getting the ball back down 2 with :50), and the latter is clearly a more desirable outcome due to the time differential.

Meanwhile, the worst-case scenario from playing defense (down 4-5 points with :15-:20) is more likely than the bad FT shooter making it a two-possession game (down 4 points with :50), and the former is clearly a less desirable outcome due to the time differential.

I certainly don't think it's an automatic fouling situation, but it's also not the "never foul" situation you're making it out to be. It's dependent upon multiple factors, including the presence of a poor FT shooter and the quality of your defense relative to the opponent's offense. My estimates are quick and dirty, but at the very least, they should open your mind to the notion that there are circumstances under which fouling is the optimal strategy.
Click to expand...

It is refreshing that some poster's put serious thought into their conclusions. And I would agree that the best strategy is not always clear cut.

But, the unanswered question is, then what? Then what is the calculation for victory when we are down 2.3. or 4 with 15 seconds left? And then what is the calculation for victory after the 15 second outcome and so on and so on. It quickly gets to the point where the most obvious solution is the best solution.
 
JBaker said:
Agreed.

Especially with our defense.
If they wasted the whole shot clock and scored, we are down 4 with 15 seconds left and the game is over.
If they make both free throws, we are down 4 with 50 seconds left.

Which scenario would you rather have?
Click to expand...

The chance that two freethrows are made is great than the chance of them scoring.

So I would rather let the defense play it out as would the majority of coaches I would assume
 
Smash Williams said:
Good post. I want to add to this.

SoonerBounce13,

Your fear that fouling allows the opponent to turn it into a two-possession game is disproportionate to the likelihood of that outcome.

Take campbest's hypothetical 45% free throw shooter, and for the sake of discussion, assume a defensive rebounding percentage of 80% on free throws (just a rough estimate, but DREB% is certainly going to be higher on FTs than FGs, due to position).

Potential outcomes:
--44% that he misses the first and you get the def. reb., down 2 with :50, w/ball

--11% that he misses the first and opp. gets off. reb, down 2 with :50, w/o ball (in this case, you're back to where you started)

--19.8% that he makes first, misses second, and you get def. reb., down 3 with :50, w/ball

--4.95% that he makes first, misses second, and opp. gets off. reb., down 3 with :50, w/o ball

--20.25% he makes both, down 4 with :50, w/ball

There is only a 20.25% chance (45% x 45%) that your fear is realized: he makes both free throws, leaving you down 4 points with 50 seconds.

Conversely, if you just play defense without fouling, let's just assume that there are two possibilities: the opp. either makes a shot or misses a shot after draining the shot clock.

*Yes, there are number of other possibilities (both good and bad) if you play defense: you force a TO (highly unlikely early in the shot clock, as the opp. will sit on it and milk the clock; a realistic possibility once they run a play), opp. doesn't even get a shot off (also highly unlikely), you accidentally foul (a realistic possibility, and a bad one if it's a decent foul shooter, and/or after a lot of time has been milked). In other words, there are other little things that can happen, but they balance out enough that we can ignore them while getting a ballpark estimate of possible outcomes.

Let's also assume you play some impressive, smothering, non-fouling defense that only gives the opponent a 35% chance of converting a FG (playing "good defense" doesn't preclude the possibility of the opposing offense scoring), and you have a 70% chance of getting the defensive rebound (again, DREB% on FGs < DREB% of FTs, for obvious reasons).

Potential outcomes:
--35% opp. makes FG, down 4-5 points with :15-:20, w/ball. Also, if this happens, the game is essentially over.

--19.5% opp. misses FG, opp. gets off. reb., down 2 with :15-:20, w/o ball

--45.5% opp. misses FG, you get def. reb., down 2 with :15-:20, w/ball

The best-case scenario from playing defense (getting the ball back down 2 with :15-:20) is about as likely as the best-case scenario of fouling the bad FT shooter (getting the ball back down 2 with :50), and the latter is clearly a more desirable outcome due to the time differential.

Meanwhile, the worst-case scenario from playing defense (down 4-5 points with :15-:20) is more likely than the bad FT shooter making it a two-possession game (down 4 points with :50), and the former is clearly a less desirable outcome due to the time differential.

I certainly don't think it's an automatic fouling situation, but it's also not the "never foul" situation you're making it out to be. It's dependent upon multiple factors, including the presence of a poor FT shooter and the quality of your defense relative to the opponent's offense. My estimates are quick and dirty, but at the very least, they should open your mind to the notion that there are circumstances under which fouling is the optimal strategy.
Click to expand...

hold on man. You can't do percentages like that. Just b/c a guy is 45% FT shooter doesn't mean he has a 45% x 45% chance of making both free throws.

I watch a lot of NBA games and mostly just OU college games. It is very rare to see a coach decide to foul in a one possession game when there is 50+ seconds left.
 
Smash Williams said:
I certainly don't think it's an automatic fouling situation, but it's also not the "never foul" situation you're making it out to be. It's dependent upon multiple factors, including the presence of a poor FT shooter and the quality of your defense relative to the opponent's offense. My estimates are quick and dirty, but at the very least, they should open your mind to the notion that there are circumstances under which fouling is the optimal strategy.
Click to expand...

You won't convince me that it is the optimal strategy.

And good luck doing those numbers in the heat of the game
 
BTW he was 65%+ free throw shooter. The odds of having the chance to foul a 45% shooter is pretty low
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Thoughts on Bama
Replies
17
Views
447
WichitaSooner
W
Sooner04
A Rainy Night in Fort Worth
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
mict085
mict085
W
OU vs Michigan - Best Game I Ever Saw In Person!
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
MsProudSooner
M
O
Is This Rock Bottom For the Program?
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
4K
AnotherSoonerInTX
A
C
Demote moser immediately
Replies
1
Views
144
Soonerguy06
S
Back
Top