I get what you say about the statistics and points per shot and it may very well tell you to let them shoot 3's. Let's just agree to disagree and move on. Anxious to see how the team gets put together next year and what players come back.

Maybe do defense like UH. Just a thought.

Stay on topic. Posts and performance are showing the defense needs changed.

Awww **** what happened in here now?

We're doing math. With varying degrees of success.

The "foul on the one and one" question seems relatively simple, mathematically.

You know the percentage of the foul shooter you're fouling, so its a simple points per possession calculation. It worth it to foul if you can get a shooter to the line who has an expected points lower than your normal defensive efficiency (probably with some sort of a buffer that accounts for the negative value of the foul itself).

Like no way should you foul a 70% free throw shooter because thats 1.19 expected points (or 119 points per 100 possessions.) 119 is a terrible defensive efficiency. However, as the free throw percentage of the shooter you're fouling goes down, its more worth it. A 60% shooter on the line for a one and one is 0.96 points or 96 points per 100 possessions. That's the equivalent of good defense, but you still shouldn't do it if you can already just play 96 level defensive efficiency already straight up.

bobinator said:

---

We're doing math. With varying degrees of success.

---

I bet someone didn't carry the 2. Hate when that happens.

I think it's more interesting as an end-of-game strategy if the game is tied and the game clock is under the shot clock.

You'd get absolutely roasted if it didn't work, but I bet the math works out.

JJxvi said:

---

The "foul on the one and one" question seems relatively simple, mathematically.

You know the percentage of the foul shooter you're fouling, so its a simple points per possession calculation. It worth it to foul if you can get a shooter to the line who has an expected points lower than your normal defensive efficiency (probably with some sort of a buffer that accounts for the negative value of the foul itself).

Like no way should you foul a 70% free throw shooter because thats 1.19 expected points (or 119 points per 100 possessions.) 119 is a terrible defensive efficiency. However, as the free throw percentage of the shooter you're fouling goes down, its more worth it. A 60% shooter on the line for a one and one is 0.96 points or 96 points per 100 possessions. That's the equivalent of good defense, but you still shouldn't do it if you can already just play 96 level defensive efficiency already straight up.

---

the old NBA "Hack-a-Shaq" strategy from back n the day

You're wrong and such a d***head Hop. I'm glad you're the all knowing and nobody else can have an opinion without being wrong. I guess there's a reason your a reporter and not in the real world.

Math is kind of like the rest of life - it's hard. It's even harder when you're... well, you know.

The opinion is how you look at the math.

No. The opinion is whether to use the math or not, which would seem like a dumb thing to not do

True when your opinion isn't based on facts.

That's not correct. Both opinions were based on math and support different points of view. Neither may be right and neither may be wrong. We lost the game because UH scored more points. The debate was where the point differential was. 3 pt shooting, 2 pt shooting or free throws. Pay attention.

Well you could take a little of your own advice. I was simply pointing out that even though they shot their avg 3 pt % for the season, they made 3 more than average which is 9 points more than they average scoring in a game. Based on my evaluations of games, we give up a lot of wide open 3 pointers trying to double team and guard down low. Whether by design or not, bobinators stats may mean that it is by design, giving up wide open 3's have been a trend all year. Not to mention we did not make FT's like we should have. Had we made a reasonable amount of FT's, nothing else would've mattered. And I don't believe I said anyone was wrong before you did to me. If you or I, or anyone debating here, knew precisely what we were talking about then maybe we would be coaching rather than debating on here.

At the end of the day, it's about offensive efficiency, and points per possession is the best measure I know of. For the season, Houston averaged 1.114 point per possession, in the last game they scored 1.215. I don't think that is a big enough gap to draw any meaningful conclusions, and still begs the question as to why they scored at the rate they did.

I mean it was their two point rate. 72% is other worldly. It was 5% better than any other game of theirs this season and the second place game was Longwood and that one is 8% higher than the third place game. And it was also easily the highest we've given up this season. Combine that with a much higher than normal free throw rate and a low turnover rate and you have your answer.

But unlike other games where we've fouled a lot or the opponent had been good from two, I think you just have to give most of the credit to Houston. It's not like we were giving up free runs at the basket defensively, they hit tough shot after tough shot.

The Clemson coach has been there, what, 16 years? On the other hand, the chodey Bama coach has been there only a short time. Every program has their journey is my point.

Buzz has the program on the right track. I hope he stays around for a while longer to see how far he can go with this. Could we do better? Not sure - it's a crapshoot. Could we do worse? Absolutely.

A new arena isn't going to magically improve the basketball program; that's old thinking. Spend money on players if you want to make deeper runs into the NCAA Tournament.

Maybe you should check your reading comprehension and possibly look at changing your user name. I can give you a few suggestions if you'd like. Could even think of some creative ones keeping the Jack!

John Wayne quote inserted here.

aggiez03 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Here is Buzz not confronting an official.

Buzz Williams had to be restrained by a few players before confronting the official on that last call.

Wanted a travel on UH, not a jump ball. pic.twitter.com/72eoa7Cv2R

— Ben Peck - KCEN/KAGS 🦚🐻👍 (@TheBenPeck) March 25, 2024

---

It was a definite travel. One of many non-calls by the officials in the 2nd half.

I realize we received more foul calls than they did, but all that means is that they fouled more.

Billy touched on this in his segment today. They swallowed their whistle for the 1st part of the 2nd half trying to even it out, even though that is not their job.

It felt like the holding calls against Myles Garrett back when he was here, eventually they just stopped calling it cause it would be on 30-50% of plays and they weren't going to interrupt the game that much. Still pisses me off. Rules are rules for a reason. If they hold 10 plays in a row, they should call it every time.

---

So when they call more fouls on the other team, it is because they foul more, but when they don't call more fouls on the other team, it is because they don't want to call them and they're screwing us?

Hypocrisy much?

91AggieLawyer said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Here is Buzz not confronting an official.

Buzz Williams had to be restrained by a few players before confronting the official on that last call.

Wanted a travel on UH, not a jump ball. pic.twitter.com/72eoa7Cv2R

— Ben Peck - KCEN/KAGS 🦚🐻👍 (@TheBenPeck) March 25, 2024

---

It was a definite travel. One of many non-calls by the officials in the 2nd half.

I realize we received more foul calls than they did, but all that means is that they fouled more.

Billy touched on this in his segment today. They swallowed their whistle for the 1st part of the 2nd half trying to even it out, even though that is not their job.

It felt like the holding calls against Myles Garrett back when he was here, eventually they just stopped calling it cause it would be on 30-50% of plays and they weren't going to interrupt the game that much. Still pisses me off. Rules are rules for a reason. If they hold 10 plays in a row, they should call it every time.

---

So when they call more fouls on the other team, it is because they foul more, but when they don't call more fouls on the other team, it is because they don't want to call them and they're screwing us?

Hypocrisy much?

---

I guess Jay Wright is a hypocrite on A&M's behalf. He said even with the high number of fouls called the refs only called about half of those that could have been called. You expect a certain amount of this in the tournament but this game was beyond that.

91AggieLawyer said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Here is Buzz not confronting an official.

Buzz Williams had to be restrained by a few players before confronting the official on that last call.

Wanted a travel on UH, not a jump ball. pic.twitter.com/72eoa7Cv2R

— Ben Peck - KCEN/KAGS 🦚🐻👍 (@TheBenPeck) March 25, 2024

---

It was a definite travel. One of many non-calls by the officials in the 2nd half.

I realize we received more foul calls than they did, but all that means is that they fouled more.

Billy touched on this in his segment today. They swallowed their whistle for the 1st part of the 2nd half trying to even it out, even though that is not their job.

It felt like the holding calls against Myles Garrett back when he was here, eventually they just stopped calling it cause it would be on 30-50% of plays and they weren't going to interrupt the game that much. Still pisses me off. Rules are rules for a reason. If they hold 10 plays in a row, they should call it every time.

---

So when they call more fouls on the other team, it is because they foul more, but when they don't call more fouls on the other team, it is because they don't want to call them and they're screwing us?

Hypocrisy much?

---

Fouls should be called if they are fouls, no matter how many times they were previously called.

Holds should be called if they are holds, no matter how many times they were previously called.

Hope that helps...

F. Forced to agree with Hop and Bob. They're right and I quit for the day

This brings up a ? though.

Do any teams have a guy in the booth running an intra-game model and relaying info to the bench? Running various parameters, at a min the foul/no foul could be reliably solved.