final possession strategy

[KFsdisciple]

Iowa allowed Indiana to dribble down the time and take the last shot for the win or go to OT. Being that Iowa is a better offensive team than defensive team, and being that Fran had time outs available, would it have been a terrible strategy to foul Indiana with 10-15 seconds, left, and give your offense a chance to tie or win the game depending on the result of the free throws?

I know the "normal" thinking is you don't give up points when the game is tied, but I'm curious if anyone thinks that its better for this team to rely on its offense to win rather than defense to make a stop?

 

[fivecardstud14]

I hate after basket timeouts because they shouldn't be allowed (they aren't in real basketball)...but after Bohannon made the three to tie it up was the time for an after basket timeout to get some subs on for D.

 

[JRingo]

I have been thinking about this a lot and agree completely. Conventional wisdom says to just play defense when tied or one up. No one ever tries it the other way (except Jim Valvano against Houston in 1983), but I really like the math on this one. It would have left Iowa with a much better chance to win. Plus... Playing for overtime on the road is not a high percentage deal.

 

[Pepperman]

I can see the logic here. I’m not 100% sure what the analytics say, but I guess you’ve got to make some mathematical assumptions and you’ll never know for sure.

with no shot clock, there’s a very good chance you’re losing or going to OT, and a minimal chance you might get the ball back with enough time to get a good look.

Now if you foul, the worst case REALISTIC scenario is you’re down 2 and have the ball. There’s other worse permutations like IU makes one and gets the rebound on the 2nd but let’s ignore that for now. Fouling is likely to put you behind by 1 or 2 with the ball and 10-15 seconds left. If you’re behind by 1 it’s a great chance to win the game by driving to the hoop hoping IU won’t foul you. If behind by 2 you can still do that to get a chance at OT. Of course there’s the third option which is you make a 3 pointer to win outright in regulation.

the above is a word salad that basically could be shortened to “that’s an interesting idea”!

 

[SotaHawk87]

I don’t know what analytics say but I 100% agree I’d rather be tied or down potentially 1-2 with the ball to end the game. A defensive stop there plus having to win it on the road in OT when they had all the momentum felt like a death trap.

 

[unoHawkeye]

I don’t hate the idea. Give the offense a chance to win it, rather than put the pressure on the defense (weakness) not to lose it. Was Indiana in the single or double bonus at that point?

Agree with fivecard that you gotta take a timeout there to get a better defensive lineup on the floor. Maybe we even force a TO and get a shot to win

 

[Hawkeye 1992]

Great point, this would involve understanding your team. We left bad defense on the floor, and allowed them to take a decent shot with no time left. Fran would have to think about what he has in his team, and also make a rational decision. Both he seems to have trouble with at the end of a game.
I have watched him for years and in late game situations he is clueless. The last play we ran was disgusting, with that much time and a timeout in hand, throw it half court and take the time out and set up a play.

 

[Pepperman]

I don’t hate the idea. Give the offense a chance to win it, rather than put the pressure on the defense (weakness) not to lose it. Was Indiana in the single or double bonus at that point?

I think still single bonus? Hawks had 8 team fouls IIRC

 

[HawkRugged17]

 

[unoHawkeye]

I think still single bonus? Hawks had 8 team fouls IIRC

Yeah I don’t hate the chances that a couple of Indiana’s players miss the front end of a 1-and-1 and we can draw up a last shot. That Armaan Franklin is only shooting 73% from the line this year and is a career 67% FT shooter

 

[Pepperman]

I stand corrected, IU was in double bonus. We had 10 fouls already in H2

 

[unoHawkeye]

I stand corrected, IU was in double bonus. We had 10 fouls already in H2

Either way I like putting the onus on the offense to either force overtime or get the win instead of the defense

 

[JRingo]

Indiana was 15 of 24 free throws. 62.5% in a tie game pressure situation. Could easily have missed at least 1.

 

[KFsdisciple]

I stand corrected, IU was in double bonus. We had 10 fouls already in H2

Is it hindsight to say I'd rather be down 2 with 12 seconds and the ball with a chance at the last shot than be tied and let them heave the buzzer beater to win?

 

[KFsdisciple]

Indiana was 15 of 24 free throws. 62.5% in a tie game pressure situation. Could easily have missed at least 1.

I think Fran had 2 time outs available too which you can't call if you don't have the ball.

 

[unoHawkeye]

Is it hindsight to say I'd rather be down 2 with 12 seconds and the ball with a chance at the last shot than be tied and let them heave the buzzer beater to win?

Of course it’s hindsight, but I would hope and expect that Fran and his staff have discussed strategy for scenarios such as yesterday’s at great length. It feels like one of those things where it’s just accepted practice to try to get a stop when the other team has a chance to get a shot at the buzzer, but isn’t necessarily the best solution in every instance

 

[Pepperman]

Is it hindsight to say I'd rather be down 2 with 12 seconds and the ball with a chance at the last shot than be tied and let them heave the buzzer beater to win?

i don’t think so. Of course, IU could have then fouled us with 11 seconds left thinking along similar lines that they’d rather be tied and trying to get a game winner at the buzzer, or go to OT at home.

 

[KFsdisciple]

Of course it’s hindsight, but I would hope and expect that Fran and his staff have discussed strategy for scenarios such as yesterday’s at great length. It feels like one of those things where it’s just accepted practice to try to get a stop when the other team has a chance to get a shot at the buzzer, but isn’t necessarily the best solution in every instance

That's what I was thinking too. And yeah if its not obvious at this point, I'd feel better with Luka getting up a shot 2 feet from the hoop triple teamed to tie or maybe win than relying on the defense to get the stop.

it just seemed like as I was watching the game we were content to say well if hit a game winner, we will just tip our cap.

 

[hawkifann]

It’s an interesting strategy idea. I wouldn’t have done it, but I get the play and it’s not unreasonable. I would have called TO to make some defensive subs. I wouldn’t have gone full line change because I would need to be able to score on the other end. I’d have probably gone with a lineup of Garza, Nunge, Weiskamp, Murray and Toussaint. Joe T or Weisy could push the ball back up the other way and you still have an outside threat and your all-American in the game.

 

[KFsdisciple]

I'm genuinely surprised that no one has said absolutely not. You NEVER give away free points in that situation, you make them hit a game winner and tip your cap when they do.

 

[83Hawk]

I'm genuinely surprised that no one has said absolutely not. You NEVER give away free points in that situation, you make them hit a game winner and tip your cap when you do.

Especially when you consider how poorly Iowa runs their last second offense. They normally do not get a good shot (unlike our opponents, who almost always do).

 

[HawkRose]

Can't believe so many people think fouling would be a good strategy???? Indiana shot 36% for the game and doesn't have great shooters. All analytics are going to say play defense. Plus as 83 just mentioned our last second offense is woeful.

The mistake was not subbing in defense, and lack of awareness on what to do when clock was under 5, we should have been charging 2 guys at him as soon as clock hit 5. Garza inexplicably backed off.

So Iowa has had a number of these situations at the end of the half and regulation the last 5 years, anyone remember Iowa getting this decent of look? That is what you should be questioning. Why we have a guy that can't create space with the bounce and why we don't have defenders that can close out.

Fouling is crazy talk!

 

[KFsdisciple]

Can't believe so many people think fouling would be a good strategy???? Indiana shot 36% for the game and doesn't have great shooters. All analytics are going to say play defense. Plus as 83 just mentioned our last second offense is woeful.

The mistake was not subbing in defense, and lack of awareness on what to do when clock was under 5, we should have been charging 2 guys at him as soon as clock hit 5. Garza inexplicably backed off.

So Iowa has had a number of these situations at the end of the half and regulation the last 5 years, anyone remember Iowa getting this decent of look? That is what you should be questioning. Why we have a guy that can't create space with the bounce and why we don't have defenders that can close out.

Fouling is crazy talk!

I'm not sure people are pro-foul in that situation as much as they are open to the idea, I could be wrong, but that's what I'm reading.

 

[KFsdisciple]

BTW, can you intentionally foul a player away from the ball? If Indiana had a free throw shooter on the court you wanted at the line, do you have to foul the guy with the ball for it to be called?

 

[Robster Raws]

With this team, I have no confidence that our last play we would draw up would be anything more than Jbo shooting a fade away 3 30’ away over two defenders.

 

[Ihawkhoops]

With this team, I have no confidence that our last play we would draw up would be anything more than Jbo shooting a fade away 3 30’ away over two defenders.

Good post. I was about to reply with the same but you beat me to it. You cannot use late game and strategy in the same sentence for Fran. If the best shot we can get is a deep 3 then take it early and send 4 guys to the glass. Late game scramble for a rebound with the potential for a put back or foul is better than a heave as the game clock expires.

 

[Whinny]

When it comes right down to it, we should have never been in the situation where the game was tied with under a minute to go.

 

[ajdl]

I think Fran had 2 time outs available too which you can't call if you don't have the ball.

Maybe that moron should’ve used then when we were giving up leads. He must get a bonus for not using timeouts before the last minute of the game. Of course if he did take a timeout he probably wouldn’t know what to do or say anyway so I guess it doesn’t matter.

 

[Pepperman]

Maybe that moron should’ve used then when we were giving up leads. He must get a bonus for not using timeouts before the last minute of the game. Of course if he did take a timeout he probably wouldn’t know what to do or say anyway so I guess it doesn’t matter.

he would have Connor tell the team what to do.

I remember at the time of that stunt we still thought a final four was gonna happen.