BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > Question about fouls in game

Question about fouls in game

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
98874.14 in reply to 98874.13
Date: 6/28/2009 11:54:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
To nobody in particular, but more of an observation of what I've noticed about fouling:

Players that back off when a player is shooting tends to result in a foul

Players that are up in a guys face when he's shooting results in even less fouls

Case-in-Point:

Lorenzo Capps, my star SG that I've had on my Chicago Goats roster since I joined BB back in Season 4, tends to back off of a player that is doing a jump shot and usually that results in a trip to the charity stripe. However, I'd say about 80 to 85% of the time that he stays in the shooter's face, he is rarely called for a shooting foul.

I thought when a defender backs off, it's so that he doesn't foul the shooter and a lot of times that actually causes the shooter to miss ... which they usually do in the games I play. Some shooters are more accurate with someone in their face than they are wide open, and vice versa.

Anyways, it was just something that's been bugging me a little. Capps is usually foul-happy on defense but majority of the time when he fouls, it's because he backed off slightly when the shooter goes up for the shot.

This Post:
00
98874.15 in reply to 98874.13
Date: 6/29/2009 12:12:29 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
six point shot?

Chris good job catching my error.
The correct is six point play. A three point basket with a shooting foul gives a six point play. As I often saw during Lakers VS Pacers finals , a 2 pointer with a foul on the shot is a four point play. The Lakers are good at this strategy.

This Post:
00
98874.16 in reply to 98874.15
Date: 6/29/2009 12:43:04 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
six point shot?

Chris good job catching my error.
The correct is six point play. A three point basket with a shooting foul gives a six point play. As I often saw during Lakers VS Pacers finals , a 2 pointer with a foul on the shot is a four point play. The Lakers are good at this strategy.

Erm, no. A three-point shot with a shooting foul is a four-point play, and a normal shot with a shooting foul is a three-point play.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
98874.17 in reply to 98874.11
Date: 6/29/2009 1:50:32 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
7575
So, to sum up, my theory is that if you are making all your shots you are probably not drawing many fouls. Anyone care to dispute my assumption?

It´s not that easy to make the shot with someone hanging in your arms...


I'm pretty sure that in the NBA there are more instances where people make shots when fouled (at least 2-3 times per game). In BB you're lucky to see it once every 2-3 games.
I agree... The thing i meant was that it is the foul that make sure you miss the shot. In some other post it almost sounded like having good shooters making the shots would reduce fouls, when in fact it most likely would bbe the other way around...


Last edited by Mannen at 6/29/2009 1:51:10 AM

/Mannen
This Post:
00
98874.18 in reply to 98874.8
Date: 6/29/2009 7:57:34 AM
JMDCeltics
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
32603260
I don´t have hard evidence as you request, but i´ve readen it in some posts, i´ve just played with less attitude one match this year, and i made 21 fouls when i usually make 14. Could it be by playing without normal/high attitude? Perhaps.
But the number of fouls depends on tactics, players, etc. so everyone is able to talk about his own experience better than me.
Best regards.

This Post:
00
98874.19 in reply to 98874.18
Date: 6/29/2009 9:10:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
I don´t have hard evidence as you request


I just wanted to make sure since you sounded completely convinced in your last post. So, we have a hypothesis that lower attitude means more fouls. However, it is not proven yet.

Just curious - can you link to that match? I couldn't find the one you describe when I look at this season's games.

What about this match from this season - you tried harder and you were at home but the fouls are almost equal: (13706027). It seems to go against the theory...

So, like I said, nothing is proven yet.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
98874.20 in reply to 98874.17
Date: 6/29/2009 9:14:28 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
The thing i meant was that it is the foul that make sure you miss the shot.


I don't think the foul makes you miss the shot in BB - it is an interesting theory but... I was talking with Crazyeye in another thread and he was commenting on how teams that are strong defensively (as a team) will draw more fouls. That seems to imply that missing a shot makes fouling more common and not that high quality shooters draw more fouls.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
98874.21 in reply to 98874.20
Date: 6/29/2009 9:33:53 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
7575
The thing i meant was that it is the foul that make sure you miss the shot.


I don't think the foul makes you miss the shot in BB - it is an interesting theory but... I was talking with Crazyeye in another thread and he was commenting on how teams that are strong defensively (as a team) will draw more fouls. That seems to imply that missing a shot makes fouling more common and not that high quality shooters draw more fouls.

Interesting and if true i think its wrong and should be fixed...

I´m not so good with all the defensive teams in the BB world so i thought i take a look at swedens number one (he cant be the worst defender anyway...)
He is averageing 14- 15 fouls the last seasons, to me that doesnt sound high...

I can also link one of his games (13113412)
The oponent are missing 56 shots and HHH fouls 9 times
HHH missing 57 shots and oponent fouls 27 times

This could be the exception that proves the rule (?) but to me it seems like better defence means less fouls...

Edit: I also think that 9 (off) vs 4 (def) would give a higher shooting % than 45 without the fouls, but all of this is just how I see it...


Last edited by Mannen at 6/29/2009 9:39:59 AM

/Mannen
This Post:
00
98874.22 in reply to 98874.21
Date: 6/29/2009 9:39:45 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155


This could be the exception that proves the rule (?) but to me it seems like better defence means less fouls...


I have always been of the opinion that better defense means less fouls, until Crazyeye told me otherwise. And yes, your example seems to be good evidence of that.

However, Crazyeye had some good examples, too. Maybe he will stop in here to post them. ;-)

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
98874.23 in reply to 98874.19
Date: 6/29/2009 9:43:06 AM
JMDCeltics
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
32603260
I was convinced because it appears in some posts and BB unofficial spanish guides like:

(http://www.introbb.com/es/partidos/87-actitud-del-equipo....)

It says that doubtful occasions (shots, fouls, divided balls, etc.) will be favorable for your rival.

The match that i played with less attitude was(13102639)
I can´t say that something is white or black taking just one match, my opinion was that because i read it.

Right? Wrong? I´m not sure.

This Post:
00
98874.24 in reply to 98874.23
Date: 6/29/2009 9:57:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
It says that doubtful occasions (shots, fouls, divided balls, etc.) will be favorable for your rival.

There isn't anything to substantiate such a statement, not to mention that "doubtful occasions" is an unclear concept. Less effort will typically cause your team to perform worse in a game, but that's about all that's known for sure.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
Advertisement