Luka Doncic part II

[MemphisX]

When I was a kid I spent a lot of time thinking about these end of game situations, and actually, NOT fouling is actually mostly the correct play. When it comes to these end of game situations, it seems like the whole Europe sucks at basic logic, statistics and probabilities.

Sure, there are exceptions where it would be better to foul, but they're rare.

Two main things everyone in Europe seems to miss:
1. The possibility of opposing team either grabbing an offensive rebound after 2nd FT, or STEALING the ball if the 2nd FT is hit. This dramatically changes the probabilities.
2. If you do let your opponent shoot a 3, they are not going to hit that often, almost surely under 30% of the time (since its usually impossible to execute a real play; players often shoot some crazy shot over defenders). But even if they hit it, quite often there's still going to be time left on the clock. But the latter is much more important in the NBA, where a team often has a timeout left and are going to be able to advance the ball.

Not even mentioning that there's still going to be an OT if they hit! But if you foul intentionally, there's actually a decent chance of you losing:
A) By losing the FT battle/lottery.
B) 1 hit FT, miss, rebound & 3.
C) The most likely and often completely disregarded: 2 hit FTs, STEAL after inbound (smarter teams are really good at trapping), then only a 2 is needed to win and you to lose.

If I was a general manager of a pro basketball team...the first time my head coach didn't foul a guy taking a 3 pointer at the end of the game, and the team lost because of it....I would tell the coach to never do that again, and to foul every time. If he failed to have the team foul a second time in that same situation (regardless if the team won or lost)...I would immediately fire him.

It is absolutely ridiculous to me that NBA teams do not automatically foul in that situation. There is no argument anyone could possibly make that justifies not fouling. Point blank, it's actually purposely trying to sabotage your own team from winning, to not foul in those instances.

It's a totally bizarre aspect of American basketball, and there is a reason why most leagues all around the world always foul in that situation. It's honestly really weird that American coaching tolerates such outdated thinking and strategy.

You think they do these things arbitrarily? Most NBA teams/coaches are using stat models to make these decisions. One thing to note is there are very few game winners actually made in this situation.

[burek3]

Miami fouled Simmons(whopping 57% FT this season) in the last possession for a win over Philadelphia couple of days ago.

[narcolepsy]

When I was a kid I spent a lot of time thinking about these end of game situations, and actually, NOT fouling is actually mostly the correct play. When it comes to these end of game situations, it seems like the whole Europe sucks at basic logic, statistics and probabilities.

Sure, there are exceptions where it would be better to foul, but they're rare.

Two main things everyone in Europe seems to miss:
1. The possibility of opposing team either grabbing an offensive rebound after 2nd FT, or STEALING the ball if the 2nd FT is hit. This dramatically changes the probabilities.
2. If you do let your opponent shoot a 3, they are not going to hit that often, almost surely under 30% of the time (since its usually impossible to execute a real play; players often shoot some crazy shot over defenders). But even if they hit it, quite often there's still going to be time left on the clock. But the latter is much more important in the NBA, where a team often has a timeout left and are going to be able to advance the ball.

Not even mentioning that there's still going to be an OT if they hit! But if you foul intentionally, there's actually a decent chance of you losing:
A) By losing the FT battle/lottery.
B) 1 hit FT, miss, rebound & 3.
C) The most likely and often completely disregarded: 2 hit FTs, STEAL after inbound (smarter teams are really good at trapping), then only a 2 is needed to win and you to lose.

I disagree, I think every scenario you mentioned is statistically less likely than hitting a three pointer.

Let's say you dont foul and opposing team has 25% chance to tie:

• 25% to hit three pointer
• 50% to win OT (let's disregard the mental aspect)
• 0.25 * 0.5 = 12.5% to lose the game

Scenario A completely depends on FT shooting ability of players. I'd actually love to see math for this one if we assume both sides are equally likely to hit free throws, but having 3 point headstart is a huge factor.

Scenario B.1:

• 90% to hit FT (assume elite FT shooter)
• 100% to miss (although i've seen people make FTs they tried to miss)
• 20% to grab offensive rebound (no way real chance is this high, but for sake of argument)
• 40% to hit the 3 (assume elite 3pt shooter)
• 0.9 * 1 * 0.2 * 0.4 = 7.2% to lose the game

So even in perfect situation with ridiculously optimistic numbers we still have lower chance to lose.

Scenario B.2:

• 90% to hit FT
• 100% to miss
• 20% to grab offensive rebound
• 60% to hit the 2
• 50% to win the OT
• 0.9 * 1 * 0.2 * 0.6 * 0.5 = 5.4% to lose the game

Scenario C:

• 90% to hit FT
• 90% to hit FT
• 20% to get the steal (again, this is extremely optimistic, I think real chance might actually be half of that)
• 60% to hit the 2
• 0.9 * 0.9 * 0.2 * 0.6 = 9.7% to lose the game

Feel free to correct me if my thought process is wrong, but even with these incredibly optimistic numbers, I just cant see how not fouling is the better option

[SportsGuy8]

While all these numbers seem reasonable to me, there's one flaw: you're assuming there's only going to be 1 instance of this. In reality, quite likely the opposing team is going to get another chance (they're obviously going to be fouling you as soon as you touch the ball), then the situation repeats itself, just with less time on the clock.

If the team inbounds the ball quickly (and pushes it across half-court), not that much time is wasted before you have to foul if you don't want to allow a 3pt shot. Even less so in the NBA, with lots of timeouts and time-keepers being very strict.

The key is in how much time is left on the clock, obviously. Some European coaches even do it with like 20 seconds on the clock, which is ridiculous. Even in Europe, but much more-so in the NBA, with all the timeouts and time-stoppages.

[Mirotic12]

There is zero argument or justification to not foul in those situations. Zero. As someone that has been watching NBA and international basketball for years, I know for a fact that how the NBA does it is unbelievably amateur.

Countless NBA games have been lost because a coach didn't have the sense to tell the players to foul...even numerous times I remember NBA championships being lost because of it.

You watch international basketball (all around the world), where teams just foul, and very, very, very rarely do they lose. While NBA teams choose almost always not to foul, and regularly lose those games. On the other hand, when NBA teams do foul...magically, they win the games.

I would not even be surprised if the idea not to foul came as part of tanking for lotto picks strategy. It's an easy way to lose an extra game here or there.

[KF10]

I still have Doncic as the #1 pick for this draft.

[burek3]

Fouling is also boring. And America hates boring. If you foul, you are a terrorist, because you hate America!

[burek3]

The Bill Simmons' Podcast ep. 332

Bill Simmons on this years' draft and on Luka Doncic: "He might become one of the 30 best players ever."

Starts at mark 1:00:00.

[peja_the_legend]

it's really cute how euro-fans think they know better than the likes of Greg Popovich on whether fouling up by 3 is a good strategy or not..What does the old man know?He'd better ask burek3 and Mirotic12.

Of course teams that foul up by 3 "very, very, very rarely do they lose.."..Except when they lose the freaking euroleague final because of this "genius strategy"
https://youtu.be/_4eO-WEQk8g?t=122

[burek3]

Why are you dragging me into this? Even you admit that it's am exception that rarely happens.

Of course it's a gambit. You fail at statistics and calculating probabilities.

To add to this point, you quote CSKA, the masters of losing final fours.

[No-Man]

The Bill Simmons' Podcast ep. 332

Bill Simmons on this years' draft and on Luka Doncic: "He might become one of the 30 best players ever."

Starts at mark 1:00:00.

Simmons has never ever watched Doncic, taking his opinion as if it matters it's lunacy

[burek3]

Same as how you never clicked on that link.
Anyways, he is playing like sht/has played like sht today vs. Burgos in ACB.

[Johnny Firpo]

He is a significantly better prospect than Dirk was, so yeah, he may have a chance, but he will need an impeccable work ethic, and some luck too. It's often nuances that decide whether a player pans out or not. I think his floor is extremely high, so there is very little chance he is a bust, but how good he can become, is an entirely different discussion. The current NBA makes me optimistic though, it's really tailor-made for his abilities.

[UcanUwill]

Personally, I can even justify fouling while up 2. That potential 3 is just that much more scary. In 2011 Eurobasket quarterfinals, my Lithuania was up 2 against Macedonia and they gave up a game ending 3. You never want that to happen. Better tie the game and retake final possession for yourself.

[916fan]

Personally, I can even justify fouling while up 2. That potential 3 is just that much more scary. In 2011 Eurobasket quarterfinals, my Lithuania was up 2 against Macedonia and they gave up a game ending 3. You never want that to happen. Better tie the game and retake final possession for yourself.

That logic makes no sense to me as a NBA fan. Why would you give the opposing team free points? Especially down 2. I'd rather force the opposing team to take a contested game tying or winning shot over gifting them 2 FTs for a tie.

How often do teams make game winning shots? Not that often.. how much would you trust your team to get a game winning bucket? Not very much unless you had Curry, Harden, Lillard, or a few others. In the NBA, if there is more than 7s left, then the last play is usually an isolation play for the star.

[Juree93]

Personally, I can even justify fouling while up 2. That potential 3 is just that much more scary. In 2011 Eurobasket quarterfinals, my Lithuania was up 2 against Macedonia and they gave up a game ending 3. You never want that to happen. Better tie the game and retake final possession for yourself.

That logic makes no sense to me as a NBA fan. Why would you give the opposing team free points? Especially down 2. I'd rather force the opposing team to take a contested game tying or winning shot over gifting them 2 FTs for a tie.

How often do teams make game winning shots? Not that often.. how much would you trust your team to get a game winning bucket? Not very much unless you had Curry, Harden, Lillard, or a few others. In the NBA, if there is more than 7s left, then the last play is usually an isolation play for the star.

for me its simple. they hit 3 its over. they hit 2 at worst is overtime.

[UcanUwill]

Personally, I can even justify fouling while up 2. That potential 3 is just that much more scary. In 2011 Eurobasket quarterfinals, my Lithuania was up 2 against Macedonia and they gave up a game ending 3. You never want that to happen. Better tie the game and retake final possession for yourself.

That logic makes no sense to me as a NBA fan. Why would you give the opposing team free points? Especially down 2. I'd rather force the opposing team to take a contested game tying or winning shot over gifting them 2 FTs for a tie.

How often do teams make game winning shots? Not that often.. how much would you trust your team to get a game winning bucket? Not very much unless you had Curry, Harden, Lillard, or a few others. In the NBA, if there is more than 7s left, then the last play is usually an isolation play for the star.

It depends on the situation, but I know I am pushing it. Its just me, but I probably rather foul up 2 in a lot of situations (probably even more so than up 3). I just do not want to give opponent opportunity at the final shot.

[BlueSan]

He played poorly again in the Spanish league:

3 points total
1-6 from play , 0-3 three pointers, 4 personals , index 3

I am a Slovenian and I am therefore biased, but trying to think objectively as possible, I wouldnt take the kid not as a first pick, not as a second or third, considering what he has shown me lately and if he continues like that, he would in my book, go further down the pecking order for me.

Idk... seriously dont know...

[burek3]

He played poorly again in the Spanish league:

3 points total
1-6 from play , 0-3 three pointers, 4 personals , index 3

I am a Slovenian and I am therefore biased, but trying to think objectively as possible, I wouldnt take the kid not as first pick, not as second or third, considering what he has shown me lately and if he continues like that he would in my book go further down the pecking order for me.

Idk... seriously dont know...

Maybe you're right, but fans in any case do get angry when their guy doesn't play well...

The problem with that rationale is what he flashed before February 2018. It's like demo version of a player. Shown that he can ball and now someone has to pay for the full version , the potential. Nobody except the most inner circle can know what is happening to him at this point. It's either fatigue, injury, poor conditioning, club-player relationship, club-manager rel., coach-player rel. etc...

But he is capable of monstrously good things. That's what you draft.

I guess.

They played vs. Burgos. Not really an important game. Good that Randolph and Tavares got their feet wet, they underperformed in Euroleague lately. Ayon is coming back to strength too. Luka likes to pass first, not score, so there is that. Shame for his 3pt shooting though.

[Coxy]

Gfycat Video - Click to Play

That is a simple summary of how i see Doncic in the NBA.

Linking 3 opponents and assist for open three. Not bad.

Switching will kill his offense as he is not able to beat even taller players of the dribble and other defenders will stick to their guys looking for the pass. His shot is also not good enough as he doesnt transfer momentum smoothly and his shot is a bit flat. He will be a ok/good starter but i dont expect much more.

Agree 100%. Have no idea why this kid is being talked about as a number 1 pick. No clue.