Terrific game and NU won, so all's well that ends well, but here's the thing: 67-66 NU. Vandy is out of time outs. 1.7 or so seconds left. NU has 2 foul shots, misses the first and makes the second. If the shooter misses the first shot, shouldn't he deliberately miss the second so that the rebound rattles around and time runs out, instead of risking a Taphorn-like disaster with Vandy's throw in pass? Not to second guess Collins, merely my $ .02.
End-of-Vandy-Game strategy
- Thread starter Frabjous
- Start date
I thought about that, but remember it was Sanjay at the line. As much as i love him and all he's done for our program, he is not the most consistent shooter. If he is instructed to miss the shot, there is no guarantee that he hits the rim. Vandy might get a chance at a Taphorn-ish miracle anyway. Better that miracle tie the game than win it.
I agree. Wasn't he trying to miss it? I thought I read somewhere that was his intent.
It seems simple enough: just change your shot. Move 6 inches to the left or right, or shoot from the chest or whatever.
It seems simple enough: just change your shot. Move 6 inches to the left or right, or shoot from the chest or whatever.
Well if he makes the first, I would think you try to make the 2nd as well, then the worst case scenario is a tie. Now because he missed the first, and only then, would I also miss the 2nd, since no difference between and 1 and 2 pt game on a missed free throw with under 2 seconds left.
Well, the worst case scenario if he makes the 2d foul shot is a Vandy throw in and a 3 point winner at the buzzer.
Wrong. You always miss the second because the clock starts on the rebound. A guy has to make an 90 foot shot to beat you. If you make it, the ball is allowed to be thrown 70 feet with no time running off the clock.
I think the other interesting debater's point of the last 16 seconds of that game could be that the Fisher-Davis foul was actually a good strategy for Vanderbilt. With a 1 point deficit and the ball, assume the Cats run clock to get a final shot. In the last five minutes of the game, they had scored 2 or more points on more than half their possessions, and hence had a better than 50% chance to score and go ahead with almost no time for Vandy to run play and tie, and without a timeout, they could not set a play anyway.
On the other hand if you foul immediately (even Mac) here are the scenarios:
Mac misses both free throws and you rebound and win the game (a little less than 2%)
Mac misses one free throw and you either rebound (second shot miss) or get possession (1st shot miss), about a 20% chance. In this case, you do no worse than go to overtime, and based on a 50% efficiency in the last five minutes you have a 10% chance to win and a 10% chance of overtime.
Mac makes both free throws and you have 15 seconds to set and score, essentially winning the game (about a 50% chance based on last 5 minute efficiency). So this is 50% of a 78% chance, or 39%.
Add them up, and based on the fouling scenario, Vandy had about a 51% chance to win, a 10% chance at overtime, and a 39% chance to lose.
Let NU run its offense, and Vandy has a less than 50% chance to win.
The logic is similar to the "always go for 2" in football.
On the other hand if you foul immediately (even Mac) here are the scenarios:
Mac misses both free throws and you rebound and win the game (a little less than 2%)
Mac misses one free throw and you either rebound (second shot miss) or get possession (1st shot miss), about a 20% chance. In this case, you do no worse than go to overtime, and based on a 50% efficiency in the last five minutes you have a 10% chance to win and a 10% chance of overtime.
Mac makes both free throws and you have 15 seconds to set and score, essentially winning the game (about a 50% chance based on last 5 minute efficiency). So this is 50% of a 78% chance, or 39%.
Add them up, and based on the fouling scenario, Vandy had about a 51% chance to win, a 10% chance at overtime, and a 39% chance to lose.
Let NU run its offense, and Vandy has a less than 50% chance to win.
The logic is similar to the "always go for 2" in football.
Or get fouled in the scrum of the rebound. You want to trust the refs not to make that call?
I probably agree with you to be honest. But over many years of watching, most coaches seem to want to make the FT to put them up 3. It also really depends on the time left on the clock as well. If its more than 2-3 seconds, you really got to make the FT. It was 1.7 seconds for us? I'm OK with missing it as you describe.
At the risk of stating the obvious, the main reason for the intentional miss was Vandy's lack of TO's. Had they had the possibility of calling a TO then little would have been gained by intentionally missing the last FT, since Vandy would have stopped the clock anyway by calling a TO as soon as allowed by the rule (which I think would be as soon as the clock would start running, so the clock would not run at all before the TO took effect). In that case, attempting to make both FT's would be the best strategy.
With Vandy unable to stop the clock, missing the second FT was very attractive, because by the time a Vandy player got the rebound very little of the 1.7 secs would be left for him to attempt the extra-long distance desperation shot.
If you watch the tape on the second, Sanjay clapped his hands with frustration after making the second. He was definitely trying to miss if.
