Post game Michigan win: Pitino didn't foul, would rather take chances on NBA 3

[GopherLady]

Here are the notes, not verbatim, after the 5th game the Gophers won in a row!!!

John Beilein:

• Great basketball game, congratulation MN, they're a really good team, and we played a lot of good teams this year. Their bench is good, 24 came off the bench and played well, as did Dubrayer (McBrayer). I wish we could have gotten the win.
• On Gophers rebounding - at the beginning it was an advantage, we're going to get out rebounded a lot. They have a lot of strong guys, but that wasn't the difference in the game.
• Allowed 41 FT's? I don't know, some can look it up and find out.
• What explanation did you get on the Technical called? It wasn't on me.
• On the road, you can have a better command of it, but they were running this really well. They extended us a little bit. It didn't flow really well. We couldn't get enough stops, we couldn't stop their FTs, it's a physical, physical game. It's gotta be physical both ways.
• Was the officiating consistent for 40 minutes? I have to watch the video.
• Sorry to be brief, but it's Sunday night, gotta get back, classes in the morning.

Richard Pitino:
• 2nd chance points - we've been harping on it a lot, and we kind of set the tone early, Murph was having his way, Reggie was rebounding the ball. We're doing a pretty good job there. I thought that really got us going when our O wasn't playing well
• Curry was terrific, made winning plays, he made that tip at the end, he's a tough kid and performing in the clutch.
• On why they didn't foul, video below - I'll take my chance on an NBA 3….
• They need to stop, because it's driving me crazy. Fans are getting their money's worth…maybe playing in those early has taught these guys. We've just found a way to tighen up a little bit and make big FT's.
• It's cliché, but they don't seem to get too high or too low, I think that has a lot to do with Nate Mason. To lose 5 in a row, and then win 5 in a row, that says a lot about them. They only care about winning, they don't care about PT or shots.
• On Curry - challenge isn't' the right word, he's got a nice mid range shot, for a freshman, he's way ahead of where we thought he'd be
• To go with Curry over Lynch - Eric was playing well, Reggie came in and would foul, so I avoided the inevitable. I wanted to role with that group, they were good.
• McBrayer was huge, he has not been playing well, I kept on him about staying confident. He's a good player, he had a little funk. To snap out of it is really important.
• On Murph - he had that play where Dupree missed that, and he came and dunked it, it's a mentality switch, I explained what his role needed to be and he embraced it.
• It was an important game, that's an NCAA tournament team, terrific offensive weapons, tremendously coached. You've got to win at home, went on a little run here, we're becoming a tough bball team.
• On the technical - I didn't care - I was just happy it was a technical. I got a technical for yelling at my player last game.
• Amir - he got hit, a little Charley horse, I called that timeout. He's a tough kid, he's really really tough.
• We really put an emphasis on pounding the glass, getting to the foul line. That's a really good team.

Jordan Murphy:
• We knew we had to stay composed, stay confident.
• We're really resilient, really confident, we've been here before made mistakes and have had success.
• They're a terrific team, they run a lot of good sets
• Put back dunk - it was cool to see the place get up like that, I just wanted to make a play - Dupree - he got that off my miss

Dupree McBrayer:
• Knowing that in OT we had to make winning plays, that was it.
• On hitting that early 3 - definitely got me going, then I was more aggressive trying to get to the basket and FT line.
• On FT's - I think we were a little bit nervous to start out.
• On Murph's rebounding - I expect him to get every one of them.

We get a lot of love from fans, we didn’t' really get that last year, this year they're really into it.

 

[GopherLady]

Forgot the videos:

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Bad Gopher]

Watched the highlights when I got home, and that tying 3 was longer than I even remembered. It was almost as far out as those 35-footers my roommate used to take in transition on our intermural team. Practically a turnaround, fadeaway, 28-footer. Fairly low percentage shot.

 

[GopherLady]

Watched the highlights when I got home, and that tying 3 was longer than I even remembered. It was almost as far out as those 35-footers my roommate used to take in transition on our intermural team. Practically a turnaround, fadeaway, 28-footer. Fairly low percentage shot.

It is, and I completely see his point - but I would just think when up by 3, fouling, and giving them a chance at 2...or a long shot at 3 if they miss the 2nd and get the rebound and score, seemed to be a safer choice.

 

[Bad Gopher]

It is, and I completely see his point - but I would just think when up by 3, fouling, and giving them a chance at 2...or a long shot at 3 if they miss the 2nd and get the rebound and score, seemed to be a safer choice.

For the most part, I'm with you. As a defense, I want to do what the offense doesn't want me to. If I'm a good 3-point shooting team, I want a chance to shoot a 3.

 

[oak_street1981]

This is debate that has gone on for a long time, and part of the issue as that a coach you need to trust your players on the court to make the right call. I have always been a fan of fouling and fouling quick, but players have started anticipating the foul and creating a shot and getting three free throws.

I still think fouling is the right call. When the Michigan player started dribbling around the free throw line (not facing the basket) that would have been a good time to foul, before he kicked it to #5 that hit the shot.

I would guess the ratio of teams losing after giving up a late 3 vs. losing after trying to send player for 2 (on the line, down by 3) is about 90 percent vs. 10 percent or less.

Someone should have put the hammer on a Michigan player before a shot could be attempted.

 

[Holy Man]

This is debate that has gone on for a long time, and part of the issue as that a coach you need to trust your players on the court to make the right call. I have always been a fan of fouling and fouling quick, but players have started anticipating the foul and creating a shot and getting three free throws.

I still think fouling is the right call. When the Michigan player started dribbling around the free throw line (not facing the basket) that would have been a good time to foul, before he kicked it to #5 that hit the shot.

I would guess the ratio of teams losing after giving up a late 3 vs. losing after trying to send player for 2 (on the line, down by 3) is about 90 percent vs. 10 percent or less.

Someone should have put the hammer on a Michigan player before a shot could be attempted.

I know the math is another thread, but I can go both ways on this. The foul can be a major risk if it is messed up and the guy gets three shots and with the way officiating is going this year having one of the zebras call an intentional or flagrant is not out of the question. In this case, I am pretty sure Mr. Wilson had not even attempted a three the whole game, much less made one. The gut has to be on our side in that scenario. The guy made a big shot and deserves a hat tip (since we won) but I do think the situation favored us. Agree with Oak that IF you foul, you foul in a low risk spot like a guy at the free throw line with his back to the basket.

On another topic, I'm surprised Beilein thinks the rebounds didn't make the difference. We had a lot of second chance points especially late and in overtime that I think really did make the difference. Also obvious he didn't know who Curry was. He must have gotten a bad scouting report.

 

[Stan]

Love his comment about getting a technical last game for yelling at his own player.

 

[MennoSota]

It is, and I completely see his point - but I would just think when up by 3, fouling, and giving them a chance at 2...or a long shot at 3 if they miss the 2nd and get the rebound and score, seemed to be a safer choice.

I thought the same, but the time on the clock, had we fouled, would have led to us being fouled immediately. If Michigan made the throws, down 1, and we come back and miss the throws. There would be about 5 seconds for MI to score.
I know, that's a lot of "what if," but that was the discussion I had with a friend at the game. I argued for fouling. He laid out the scenario where fouling backfires.
Give props to Wilson for having ice in his veins and hitting that shot. What a great game.

 

[tikited]

This is debate that has gone on for a long time, and part of the issue as that a coach you need to trust your players on the court to make the right call. I have always been a fan of fouling and fouling quick, but players have started anticipating the foul and creating a shot and getting three free throws.

I still think fouling is the right call. When the Michigan player started dribbling around the free throw line (not facing the basket) that would have been a good time to foul, before he kicked it to #5 that hit the shot.

I would guess the ratio of teams losing after giving up a late 3 vs. losing after trying to send player for 2 (on the line, down by 3) is about 90 percent vs. 10 percent or less.

Someone should have put the hammer on a Michigan player before a shot could be attempted.

Agree on the bold. Not sure how much (if at all) they practice that sort of situation? It would be interesting to know.
I don't think college players are as good at anticipating the foul as Pro players are, but it is still a risk.

 

[salzie]

I think you just tip your cap when they make that shot, crazy tough shot.

Didnt like our defender biting on the drive, let him go to the hoop in that situation, but otherwise it was good defense and we forced a long contested shot...

 

[MaroonGold1]

I thought the same, but the time on the clock, had we fouled, would have led to us being fouled immediately. If Michigan made the throws, down 1, and we come back and miss the throws. There would be about 5 seconds for MI to score.
I know, that's a lot of "what if," but that was the discussion I had with a friend at the game. I argued for fouling. He laid out the scenario where fouling backfires.
Give props to Wilson for having ice in his veins and hitting that shot. What a great game.

At the end of regulation, Coffey was guarding Robinson(?) inside the 3 point line, with Robinson's back to the basket with 3-4 seconds on the clock, definitely less than 5. There was a pretty clear opportunity to foul, without any sort of risk of the player getting a shot up as you foul.

In overtime, I think it was more defensible. I believe it was Mason guarding the ball, and I'm not sure he ever had much of an opportunity to wrap Walton up with a certainty that he wouldn't get a shot off.

 

[tizzom2020]

I didn't care one way or the other on the fouling. My frustration was that Murphy ,who was guarding Wilson, was below the three point line with less than 3 seconds left. I felt he should have been in his face, because the worst thing he could do was take an open 3. If he drives past for a layup, the game is over if we inbound the ball. Glad that we held on in OT and made big plays, but was mad with the mental lapse.

 

[tikited]

I didn't care one way or the other on the fouling. My frustration was that Murphy ,who was guarding Wilson, was below the three point line with less than 3 seconds left. I felt he should have been in his face, because the worst thing he could do was take an open 3. If he drives past for a layup, the game is over if we inbound the ball. Glad that we held on in OT and made big plays, but was mad with the mental lapse.

It certainly wasn't textbook defense on both last second shots. Kind of like Indiana not paying enough attention to blocking out and rebounding on the Springs shot. We have karma, or something, going our way lately.

 

[Otis]

I would always go with fouling, but coaches are thinking about other things because they get paid to win. Several things can go wrong fouling.

1. Foul outside the 3pt line and give up 3 free throws or a 4pt play
2. Make foul too obvious and get an intentional foul call
3. Leave too much time on the clock and lose the FT% battle.

 

[watertown 1987 guy n]

Forgot #4. Player makes the front end of a 2 shot foul and then intentionally misses the second with a hard back board shot. At that point the rebound is up for grabs since it isn't like a normal free throw rebound. MI has a 50/50 shot of getting the rebound. If they don't get the rebound they foul again.

I side with the coach on this one. You make them make a tough 3-pt shot with defenders in their face. They made a tough shot, good for them, but we still got the win.