Harvard Study: No Discernible Advantage to Fouling While Up Three

[LutherRackleyRulez]

Per Rush The Court.....


Harvard Study:
No Discernible Advantage to Fouling While Up Three


One of the coolest sporting trends of the last decade in sports has been the increasing usage of statistical analysis to make determinations about the games that we love and follow. While Bill James, Nate Silver and others have done yeoman’s work in popularizing the use of these metrics, they’ve mostly focused on the professional side of sports (and political polling, in Silver’s case). One notable exception, Ken Pomeroy’s site of college basketball tempo-free statistics, has been invaluable in how we all understand and evaluate the game, helping to debunk common myths while also alerting us to teams and players under the radar of the national consciousness. Another up-and-coming group that is showing it wants to enter the fray by analyzing some of the big questions in the game is the Harvard Sports Analysis Collective, who just two weeks ago presented us with the most unlikely finish of the 2009-10 season, a random game between Cal State Fullerton and Cal State Northridge.




http://rushthecourt.net/2010/08/25/harvard-study-no-discernible-advantage-to-fouling-down-three/

[XU 87]

Interesting article.

We saw in the Kansas State game how fouling may be a bad idea when Holloway got fouled at half court. We then saw how not fouling may be a bad idea when Crawford hit the three to go into another OT.

[BiggieXU]

I wish they would put how often the team losing by 3 tied or won the game in the half or OT that they were down 3 in. Obviously winning vs losing is the most important statistic but I think the true point of that strategy is to avoid letting the other team tie the game. The stat may be skewed some by teams that don't foul, allow a tying 3-pointer, but then win in OT.

[X-band '01]

Interesting article.

We saw in the Kansas State game how fouling may be a bad idea when Holloway got fouled at half court. We then saw how not fouling may be a bad idea when Crawford hit the three to go into another OT.

On that sequence in regulation, K-State did actually try to foul Holloway prior to his 3 attempt, but it wasn't called. The 2nd foul was called in the act of shooting. I don't know if Frank Martin did this or not, but it may have been prudent to alert the official along the sideline that he was going to try to have his team foul prior to the shot.

At the end of the day, it will vary between coaching staffs as to whether you foul or not in the endgame.

[XU 87]

On that sequence in regulation, K-State did actually try to foul Holloway prior to his 3 attempt, but it wasn't called. The 2nd foul was called in the act of shooting. I don't know if Frank Martin did this or not, but it may have been prudent to alert the official along the sideline that he was going to try to have his team foul prior to the shot.



You're correct but the bottom line is that fouling backfired on KSU. But I'm sure Holloway was told to shoot the ball when someone looked like he was going to foul (which is what he did).

I saw a similar play the year before watching some game on ESPN. I also remember watching an NCAA tourney game (Virginia?) around '07 where the winning team was up by three and fouled with about 7 or 8 seconds to go. The other team made two and fouled on the inbounds. The winning team missed both free throws and the other team had the ball down by 1 with about 6 seconds to go. (They missed the shot, which I think was a good look).

So many people thought Sean Miller was an idiot for not fouling in the OSU game. But personal experience and the Harvard article show that there reallly is no "correct" way to defend a three point lead at the end of the game.

[Porkopolis]

One of these days a player will hit the three while being fouled, then cooly sink the FT for the win. Then the strategy will go by the wayside even more than it already has.

[drudy23]

Flawed article and analysis. Ask any coach...what's the main factor in fouling when you're up 3....the answer..."How much time is left"?

If there is no variable in this study for analyzing WHEN the fouling occured...it should have never been written.

Without a doubt, fouling is the best option when it is likely that the other team will not get the ball back in enough time to produce a legitimate shot that has a decent chance of going in.

Add to that...I would bet that your chances of winning the game are very, very good with a three point lead and in the last possession. So, even if you don't use the fouling strategy, you're defininitely at a huge advantage to win anyway.

Fouling increases that already big advantage in the right situation.