Knicks · Up by 3, to foul or not to foul? (page 1)

Under 20, 10, 5 - seconds, do you foul or not? I know it is possibly more complicated of a question as to the other game variables but it is a philosophy that a coach chooses. Some coaches would and some like MDA don't. I feel like we have gotten killed in the past in this scenario and I would have loved to foul in that situation.

MDA says "we don't do that", that he would foul if < 3 seconds or if it was not beyond the arc (because we might end up fouling in the act of shooting a 3). Can't we end up fouling contesting the 3 unintentionally - which can be a 4 pt play? SMH

Below is MDA's explanation which I HATE!! Especially when at the end he says "That's what Paul Pierce does"

Than why not foul the Mother Effer???

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/...

Thoughts?

I understand that many coaches don't like the foul in that situation, but I actually think the knicks would've won if they did foul. Of course there's always the danger of a foul and a made 3 which is disastrous, but players should be able to commit the foul before the shot.

In any event it's not the end of the world, cuz really we should've beaten the C's with a bigger lead. That 3rd qtr made no sense and neither did the foul situation with Lin. There were so many things that went wrong. This Knicks team is still very dangerous. I think they just played a poor game and the experience and chemistry of the C's prevailed. The Knicks don't have any experience or chemistry. 9 new guys and an inexperienced kid at PG. This is a work in progress for the players and the coach.

12 straight losses, PP always kills us on a last second shot - the coach needs to not be stubborn and instead of a steadfast philosophy, know it's PPierce and that he owns us.

We seem to play scared in Boston. If this team is going to compete, they need to believe in themselves. There is too much media and fan pressure that makes everyone scared to do the wrong thing - including the coach.

WE NEED BALLS!!!!

The Knicks were up by 3 with less than 24 seconds left, how does that make them scared??? What the Knicks are is a work in progress. The C's are a finished product. They've been to the top of the mountain and the have WAY more team chemistry and experience together than these Knicks do.

Do you realize that Melo still hasn't played 82 games for this team yet??? Melo has played in exactly 53 games so far as a Knick and Lin has started 12 games!!! 12 GAMES!!! So that's the extent of our starting units experience together as a group. Add to that the other new guys and rookies and compare that to the extensive experience the C's have and that's part of the reason the Knicks have a tough time winning consistently right now.

Yes it's like a broken record how the C's keep beating us the same way, but really that wasn't this actual team. This group has only been together for a short time and they have a bright future. We need to allow them time to grow together.

We played scared by not fouling. Foul the bastard and have confidence in our free throw shooting.

The Celtics are not even that good this year and Allen was no Allen today. We should have gone in there and hurt them. We are the better and MUCH DEEPER team. We need to start games with the killer instinct that winners have. We need to know, think and act like we are better than them cause we ARE!! We need to know that if we have 5 seconds left, we can also hit the winning shot - often!!

THAT MELO PLAY CALL WAS HORRIBLE. That is on both MDA and MELO. I give the knicks credit for fighting back in this game but that is/was not enough.

NOT FOULING WAS THE VERY WRONG CALL IMHO.

What would I do? I don't foul, you make them beat you with a shot. If you foul, they sink both at the stripes, you inbound, miss one, now you're in a situation where you're losing the game!

Always foul. You NEED to stop the other team to get into rhythm at ALL cost. Reggie Miller taught the Knicks that costly lession. Mike D'Antoni doesn't foul? Has he ever gone to the championship game in his miserable 13 years? Good, that answers your question. You always foul, and you always try to foul the right target and put LOTS of pressure while they're inbounding. If you don't foul, you're letting the opponents breathe at the end of the game. HOWEVER, you DON'T foul if the person got the ball and about to make a 3 point jumper. That's the only time you don't foul, ever, even if there was 5 seconds left.

Foul when?

KG set an illegal but effective no call screen. Can foul him when he is beyond the arch.

Love the monday morning QB thing on the UK. With the benefit of hindsight we are all sooooo much smarter!

IM sure we all wanted a win but Boston is one tough team at home and they were up for a national game on their home floor.

Pierce is one of the best clutch shooters in the history of the game. Hate him but respect.

Always FOUL! That lost the game...

If you foul and the worst happens, they make the 3 and 1, then you still get the ball back. I know they did and missed...

Yesterday, Boston had 0 Timeouts. A foul must be the kind that the shooter does not get the shot off. When Garnet or Rondo had it, I would have fouled.

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:What would I do? I don't foul, you make them beat you with a shot. If you foul, they sink both at the stripes, you inbound, miss one, now you're in a situation where you're losing the game!

Except what you are not factoring in is the Celtics had no time outs left - so you foul with about 10 seconds or so, with them clearly not in a shooting motion.

They hit both - we call a time out, in bound mid court, and throw it into the back court and take 4-5 seconds off.

Then, they have to court the length of the court with 5 seconds.

Pressure them the whole way, and if I've hit both my fts, I might foul them again to prevent any 3 pt shot.

Also - when they in bounded the ball, we didn't pressure, allowing them the full 18 seconds to run the play in the offensive zone.

How about pressuring Rondo the whole way up? The way our guys play defense, we might get a turnover.

Nalod wrote:Foul when?

KG set an illegal but effective no call screen. Can foul him when he is beyond the arch.

Love the monday morning QB thing on the UK. With the benefit of hindsight we are all sooooo much smarter!

IM sure we all wanted a win but Boston is one tough team at home and they were up for a national game on their home floor.

Pierce is one of the best clutch shooters in the history of the game. Hate him but respect.

This isn't Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

This loss is 100% on D'Antoni.

You foul the ball handler at 10 seconds when they are moving away from the basket.

Boston had 0 time outs.

We hit our FTs and they have to score from their end line in 5 seconds. They need luck, and I would live with that.

franco12 wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:What would I do? I don't foul, you make them beat you with a shot. If you foul, they sink both at the stripes, you inbound, miss one, now you're in a situation where you're losing the game!

Except what you are not factoring in is the Celtics had no time outs left - so you foul with about 10 seconds or so, with them clearly not in a shooting motion.

They hit both - we call a time out, in bound mid court, and throw it into the back court and take 4-5 seconds off.

Then, they have to court the length of the court with 5 seconds.

Pressure them the whole way, and if I've hit both my fts, I might foul them again to prevent any 3 pt shot.

Also - when they in bounded the ball, we didn't pressure, allowing them the full 18 seconds to run the play in the offensive zone.

How about pressuring Rondo the whole way up? The way our guys play defense, we might get a turnover.

Very strong points, very strong. I'm with you on this, man.

One thing: if a guy is rolling the ball up the court on you, you take him out, and I don't mean for a coffee, NEETHA'! What would I do? I run at the ball and kick it, and in the follow through I run through Rondo, putting him on the floor like a little punk!

MDA seems to eff this one up all the time

Odds are still less than 50% they tie it up.

Knicks win its a great "come back".

Lost we have to play the blame game.

Lots of blame to go around. Many plays not executed.

Im sure sitting on the couch we all could have done better.

Bottom line: Three HOF players and while surly, an All star Point guard playing an insane game..

Nalod wrote:Odds are still less than 50% they tie it up.

Knicks win its a great "come back".

Lost we have to play the blame game.

Lots of blame to go around. Many plays not executed.

Im sure sitting on the couch we all could have done better.

Bottom line: Three HOF players and while surly, an All star Point guard playing an insane game..

Why is it so hard for you to say once in a while that the coach screwed this one up? This is not blame game, its a question in philosophy that we as fans can and should discuss. Thats what fans do.

Even Nixluva had the balls to admit his ICON erred.

It's not Monday morning QA anyway - PP has kicked the sh1t out of us so many times with this sh1T!!!!!!!!!!!!

With our history against the Celtics(Pierce and Ray Allen 4th qtr or buzz beaters against us), you foul 11 times out of 10....dumbass D'Antoni!

Rondo is just dribbling around for 3-4 seconds. rondo was 4 for 7 from the line in that game, and is a 60% FT shooter on the year. i can think of no better guy to foul than him, as he dribbles and waits for them to run a freaking play.

i don't understand the strategy. you're up by 3 points. you didn't have a chance to sub in some defenders. the C's are out of timeouts while the knicks had TWO timeouts. given all of that, fouling is the play. even if they hit both, you can call a timeout and inbound at halfcourt. lets say they fouled at 15 seconds, the C's hit both, knicks are up 1, you call a time out. inbound takes 3 seconds off. you can also set up your defense for after.

why is rondo's name floated around in trade rumors? its not because he's on a team friendly deal and drops insane triple double lines. its because he can't shoot it and gets especially gun shy late in the game. pressure rondo and foul him again if need be. rondo had already killed us at that point; i'd much rather put him on the line and make him uncomfortable than let the C's run a freaking play for pierce who kills us time and again.

SupremeCommander wrote:MDA seems to eff this one up all the time

I'm ok with MDA having this as a rule - but, yesterday should have been an exception. Celts had no time outs! Its maybe a bit different if they had one. Maybe.

And second - its the celtics. If this had been the bob cats or someone else that doesn't have championship tested shooters, I say, playing it straight up isn't the worse thing.

BigSm00th wrote:

Rondo is just dribbling around for 3-4 seconds. rondo was 4 for 7 from the line in that game, and is a 60% FT shooter on the year. i can think of no better guy to foul than him, as he dribbles and waits for them to run a freaking play.

i don't understand the strategy. you're up by 3 points. you didn't have a chance to sub in some defenders. the C's are out of timeouts while the knicks had TWO timeouts. given all of that, fouling is the play. even if they hit both, you can call a timeout and inbound at halfcourt. lets say they fouled at 15 seconds, the C's hit both, knicks are up 1, you call a time out. inbound takes 3 seconds off. you can also set up your defense for after.

why is rondo's name floated around in trade rumors? its not because he's on a team friendly deal and drops insane triple double lines. its because he can't shoot it and gets especially gun shy late in the game. pressure rondo and foul him again if need be. rondo had already killed us at that point; i'd much rather put him on the line and make him uncomfortable than let the C's run a freaking play for pierce who kills us time and again.

By many accounts read over the years Rondo is a bit of a strange dude who clashes with his coach. Its the reason why his draft position was not higher. Its the reason many teams did no take him in the draft earlier.

They are not bashing him because they don't want to kill his value.

Celts look to be in a pre-rebuilding mode. They might prefer to draft a new point then have him lead with youth.

NObody disputes his talent, its his head.

Paul Pierce is always an exception you foul every time to keep him from beating us with another buzzer 3. You also don't let Rondo roll the ball the length of the court. Should've fouled Rondo

Nalod wrote:

BigSm00th wrote:

Rondo is just dribbling around for 3-4 seconds. rondo was 4 for 7 from the line in that game, and is a 60% FT shooter on the year. i can think of no better guy to foul than him, as he dribbles and waits for them to run a freaking play.

i don't understand the strategy. you're up by 3 points. you didn't have a chance to sub in some defenders. the C's are out of timeouts while the knicks had TWO timeouts. given all of that, fouling is the play. even if they hit both, you can call a timeout and inbound at halfcourt. lets say they fouled at 15 seconds, the C's hit both, knicks are up 1, you call a time out. inbound takes 3 seconds off. you can also set up your defense for after.

why is rondo's name floated around in trade rumors? its not because he's on a team friendly deal and drops insane triple double lines. its because he can't shoot it and gets especially gun shy late in the game. pressure rondo and foul him again if need be. rondo had already killed us at that point; i'd much rather put him on the line and make him uncomfortable than let the C's run a freaking play for pierce who kills us time and again.

By many accounts read over the years Rondo is a bit of a strange dude who clashes with his coach. Its the reason why his draft position was not higher. Its the reason many teams did no take him in the draft earlier.

They are not bashing him because they don't want to kill his value.

Celts look to be in a pre-rebuilding mode. They might prefer to draft a new point then have him lead with youth.

NObody disputes his talent, its his head.

if you read any bill simmons, arguably the biggest celtics homer in the world, he complains like once a week about how defenses sag off rondo and how you can easily defend against him because of his shooting issues. look how far novak is playing off of him in the clip! the guy clams up when D's force him to shoot; fouling him is definitely the right play.

i agree with you that he has mental issues too and is a strange guy, but the ONLY real complaint of his actual game is his shooting and the reprecussions it has for the rest of the offense (defenders sag off 4 feet, easier to double down in the post, harder to slash/cut through, etc).

he was 4 of 7 yesterday and thats about par for the course for rondo from the line. he's like a point guard version of tim duncan. he should've been fouled.