Questions about the end of the first half

[HoustonREDHawk]

I know it didn't matter, but I wasn't sure about a couple of things at the end of the first half tonight. First, when Wisky got the ball with about 37-38 sec left, the game clock ran for maybe 6 or 7 sec, before they started the shot clock. Wisky didn't touch the ball, but should the game clock run if the shot clock isn't?

Second, when Iowa committed a foul, it took away the chance for the last possession. Still, they had several fouls to give with only maybe 12-13 sec left. Wisky went on to get a 3-pt play, but Iowa could have prevented anything except a desperation heave, if we used the fouls. This is not the first time Fran has failed to use available fouls. Can anyone explain why you would not use the fouls to keep an opponent from having a decent scoring opportunity, or is this just lousy coaching?

 

[iahawkeyes17]

In first half click keeps running even after a minute after a make. Connor actually was smart and did same thing couple of times. Slowly get the ball, toss to official or roll it. Heads up play by them.

As for the fouls unless you are having bench guys do it don’t want to pick up cheap ones. Look at freeman. 1 foul vs Utah and gets 3 quick ones in 2nd half.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

In first half click keeps running even after a minute after a make. Connor actually was smart and did same thing couple of times. Slowly get the ball, toss to official or roll it. Heads up play by them.

As for the fouls unless you are having bench guys do it don’t want to pick up cheap ones. Look at freeman. 1 foul vs Utah and gets 3 quick ones in 2nd half.

So the shot clock doesn't start until a player touches it inbounds, but the game clock can run. Strange that I never noticed that before. I thought both started at the same time. A smart coach wouldn't let the other team run off time when there are over 30 sec remaining.

We only had 3 team fouls, which is remarkable as an away team. Maybe a good indicator for how little defense was being played. After the first foul, which was stupid because it gave Wisky the final possession, Fran could put Brauns and other bench players in to foul, and leave in those who didn't have a foul. A good coach would have saved Iowa 3 pts, and it isn't the first time Fran didn't take advantage of having fouls to give. It is a big part of why you don't want to commit fouls throughout the game.

 

[DewHawk]

I know it didn't matter, but I wasn't sure about a couple of things at the end of the first half tonight. First, when Wisky got the ball with about 37-38 sec left, the game clock ran for maybe 6 or 7 sec, before they started the shot clock. Wisky didn't touch the ball, but should the game clock run if the shot clock isn't?

Second, when Iowa committed a foul, it took away the chance for the last possession. Still, they had several fouls to give with only maybe 12-13 sec left. Wisky went on to get a 3-pt play, but Iowa could have prevented anything except a desperation heave, if we used the fouls. This is not the first time Fran has failed to use available fouls. Can anyone explain why you would not use the fouls to keep an opponent from having a decent scoring opportunity, or is this just lousy coaching?

Fran was busy spacing out on your second point

 

[Hawkfan_08]

I know it didn't matter, but I wasn't sure about a couple of things at the end of the first half tonight. First, when Wisky got the ball with about 37-38 sec left, the game clock ran for maybe 6 or 7 sec, before they started the shot clock. Wisky didn't touch the ball, but should the game clock run if the shot clock isn't?

Second, when Iowa committed a foul, it took away the chance for the last possession. Still, they had several fouls to give with only maybe 12-13 sec left. Wisky went on to get a 3-pt play, but Iowa could have prevented anything except a desperation heave, if we used the fouls. This is not the first time Fran has failed to use available fouls. Can anyone explain why you would not use the fouls to keep an opponent from having a decent scoring opportunity, or is this just lousy coaching?

We NEVER utilize that second point. I don't know why. Put in Kingsbury, Cooper, Brauns, Traore (since he plays less than half of the game anyways) and hack the crap out of these guys to waste clock.

 

[the24fan]

LOL who cares? They were getting boat raced at that point anyway.
By all accounts the game was already over.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

We NEVER utilize that second point. I don't know why. Put in Kingsbury, Cooper, Brauns, Traore (since he plays less than half of the game anyways) and hack the crap out of these guys to waste clock.

Exactly what I am suggesting. One more thing Fran needs to reconsider.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

LOL who cares? They were getting boat raced at that point anyway.
By all accounts the game was already over.

The point is that Fran never takes advantage of having fouls to give. It could matter.

 

[Hawkfan_08]

Exactly what I am suggesting. One more thing Fran needs to reconsider.

It has to be a "his philosophy" thing. Which isn't working.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

It has to be a "his philosophy" thing. Which isn't working.

But there is no argument to not using fouls to give, if it can prevent a team from getting a decent shot at the end of the half or the game. In this case we had 3 team fouls with about 12-13 sec left in the half. The top players don't need to even be on the court to commit the fouls. At least there is an argument for sitting players with 2 fouls in the first half, even if I don't always agree that it is always a smart move.

 

[Hawkfan_08]

But there is no argument to not using fouls to give, if it can prevent a team from getting a decent shot at the end of the half or the game. In this case we had 3 team fouls with about 12-13 sec left in the half. The top players don't need to even be on the court to commit the fouls. At least there is an argument for sitting players with 2 fouls in the first half, even if I don't always agree that it is always a smart move.

I agree with you. I don't get it but it is what he does.