If you really feel like a huge number aren't obviously intentional,."swats" that are not in the same zip code as the ball, a player grabbing one by the hips as they pass, then we can agree to disagree. If I were a ref, I'd get fired because I would call obvious intentional fouls
Nitpicking
- Thread starter RhabdoWildcat
- Start date
Is it nitpicking to point out that Michigan stayed within single digits of Purdue today after losing to NU by 14 in their previous game?
Your comments always baffle me.
There is literally nothing I could write about Collins, short of "he's the greatest coach in the history of basketball" that you wouldn't object to vehemently.
To me, the way the NCAA has the refs calling the last minute of the game - the rules that are in place - really detract from the game.
Nobody - literally nobody - wants to see the last minute of clock time played in 15 minutes of timeouts and free throws.
Coaches are judged on getting into and doing well in the tournament of which seeding is a major component. As long as the NET is used for selection and seeding you are going to see more, not less of it. I am not saying I agree with it, but as long as margin of victory is critical... Want it changed then they have to change how teams are selected and seeded. They are basically forcing this.
A big casualty of this is the guys at the end of the bench never get to see the floor or if they do get in it is at a time where they are just basically holding the ball to run out the clock. They put in so much but now the reward is basically a slap in the face. It is wrong but it is what they created
NET no longer factors in raw scoring margin, but it does as we’ve discussed here include adjusted offensive and defensive efficiency, which is certainly tied to margin of victory. Some things I’ve read have suggested that it isn’t overly sensitive to margin of victory or defeat in games against better teams, it’s more sensitive to margins against bad teams. There’s not really much difference in beating Michigan by 14 or 20 because even they are a “good” team in the wider D1 universe. We are punished much more for beating Western Michigan by only 4.
For example, using Torvik’s game by game data we’ve only had a negative adjusted efficiency in one Big Ten game (Illinois on the road), and one of our best games of the year for positive efficiency margin was the game we lost to Purdue. So our NET isn’t suffering in conference play, we’re just still paying for not beating bad teams by enough in November and December (and of course losing to one of them).
I also really hate the foularama the last minute of 7 or 8 point games have become. The problem would be solved by giving the team that is fouled the option of taking the ball out of bounds instead of shooting with a five or ten second runoff.
Teams that hit their free throws will put those games away. This is certainly not a new thing.
Having been on the losing end of my team pissing away such a lead a few times, I'm of the opinion that hitting free throws is part of the game and teams that lose those games deserve to lose.
Yes they will. But one time in 10, someone like Buie will miss one, or the fouling team will throw in a string of desperation 3's in trade for one or two made free throws. The current rules give a team an incentive to foul, and once in a while reward the fouling with an improbable comeback win. Giving the team fouled the option of taking the ball out of bounds gives the team the option. By your logic a "good" team should always shoot the free throws. The fact they probably wouldn't kind of makes the point that the fouling team is benefitting from the foul, which seems backwards to me.
Automatically stopping the clock with less than a minute to go every time somebody scores (I think thats what they do) is pretty dumb, if you look at it objectively.
Why are we penalizing the team that is winning, again?
I think those games are fun, and I give credit to the team for making circus shots in exchange for the other team's missed free throws.
To prevent teams from stalling and running clock on the inbound? (How much time runs off just getting the ball to the ref?)
I think foul shots at the end (or "foulathons") are actually exciting ways to win or lose games. It's like kicking a field goal in football - it's one of the skills that your team needs to have. And even if you miss those free throws, the other team still has to score. Sure, it's frustrating when you're on the wrong side of it (I have no sympathy for Illinois, but damn, the way they lost to Penn State last week), but it's just part of the game.
If I recall, the 2008 Memphis team was an absolute juggernaut led by Derrick Rose. They had one Achilles heel - they shot free throws poorly. It usually didn't matter because they blew teams out, but in the final against Kansas, they blew their lead because they couldn't do it and KU made the key shots they needed to make to force overtime and win it. Them's the breaks.
If I recall, the 2008 Memphis team was an absolute juggernaut led by Derrick Rose. They had one Achilles heel - they shot free throws poorly. It usually didn't matter because they blew teams out, but in the final against Kansas, they blew their lead because they couldn't do it and KU made the key shots they needed to make to force overtime and win it. Them's the breaks.
Well sure, free throws out of context aren't particularly interesting, but free throws with a game - or season - hanging in the balance can be really exciting.
And free throws with CHICKEN hanging in the balance are also exciting.
You would take the time off the clock 100% of the time, even if you had Rick Barry shooting FT’s.
I can remember watching a UNLV team under Tarq that lost because they could not hit FTs. Gave up a big lead. Long as that is a possibility it will keep happening