The end of this game proves how much FTs matter
- Thread starter UPitt '89
- Start date
Past Pitt teams lose this game at the end because of an inability to hit FTs. You know it.Yep. Half as much as twos and one third as much as threes.
I mean BEING GOOD AT them matters.
They've always mattered.
It is such a great feeling knowing the game is safe if we get to the final minutes with a lead, because we aren't going to give it away at the line.
I know no such thing. Past Pitt teams could generally defend a little bit (except for last year). This team can't defend their way out of a wet paper bag. Defense is way more important than foul shooting.
Yup. If we can get some stops we blow out this Notre Dame team instead of needing free throws in the last seconds.
Of course they matter. Just like shooting twos matters. And shooting threes. And rebounding. And not turning the ball over. And playing defense. It ALL matters.
And a lot of it matters a lot more than foul shooting.
Agreed. Once we have the lead late and the other team has to foul, the game is over.
Dude we just won at a tough venue and we have a great offense and great FT shooting. Sure our defense is below average but we can finally counter that this year with an explosive offense.
FTs matter more in the final 2 minutes of a game than the other factors. Because with a lead, you aren't going to get a chance to shoot 2s or 3s.
In the final two minutes of a game you lead, if you don't make FTs, you will lose. Because they are the only shots you're usually going to get to take.
You're being obtuse. And you're wrong.
For the first 38 minutes of the game, the other things matter more. But in the final two minutes, not turning the ball over and making FTs matters more than any other factor.
Joe the Panther Fan wrong?? Nah, according to him he is always right didn't you know?
ND did not foul until there were under 30 seconds left - Pitt had chances to make 2's and 3's in the last 2 minutes, but missed them. If they had made 1 or 2 shots, ND never gets as close.
You're right, those three points we would've gotten from Artis' three matter less than two points from a free throw. Also, those two points Notre Dame got from an easy drive to the basket with seven seconds left? Way less important than free throws.
If we are winning a game late and the defense doesn't allow the other team to score would we win the game or not, even if we missed all of our foul shots?
I know you hate it when I point out the stupidity of your "foul shots over everything" take on the game, but that doesn't mean it isn't dumb.
Pitt didn't get a clean look at a FG over the final 2+ minutes. The ONLY way they were going to score was at the line.
This year, if Pitt has a lead when the game gets to the final 2 minutes, they're going to win. That's something we've never had here.
I've never claimed to always be right. But on this topic I am, and it's obvious to anyone who understands basketball at even a junior high level.
No you actually do claim to be always right but Pitt won so I am not going to ruin my good mood by going back and forth with you right now.
Right. I mean most people would consider the James Robinson layup to be a clean FG attempt, but obviously not.
Mike Young also got two good looks, the second of which drew the foul on Colson that led to two super important foul shots. Which of course would have been unnecessary had he made the first shot.
That's too bad. Pointing out how often you are wrong is fun. Probably would have kept me entertained until the Stiller game starts.
I didn't say "foul shots over everything".... or even anything close to that.
As usual, you have a reading comprehension problem.
Pitt final four possessions were all quick fouls by Notre Dame. Literally no way for Pitt to score points any other way than at the FT line. Couldn't take a 3-pointer or a 2-pointer or burn clock. Pitt went 7 for 8. If they go 2 for 8, they lose.
For the final four possessions of the game, making FTs was literally the ONLY thing that mattered offensively.... because we had no option to score any other way.
To recap.... for the first 38-39 minutes of a game.... other factors are more important than FTs. but in the final 1-2 minutes of a game in which your team leads, FTs take on significantly more importance - because at that point it doesn't matter how good your team is at shooting FGs - they won't get a chance to take any.
That is simply factually incorrect, which is perhaps why you continue to draw incorrect conclusions. Pitt last two possessions were quick fouls by Notre Dame. On the third possession from the end we ran 24 seconds off the clock and then Artis missed a three. On the possession before that we ran 21 seconds off the clock and then Mike Young got a shot in the paint, missed it, got the rebound, shot again, and was fouled by Bonzie Colson. The possession before that was Robinson's layup on the pass from Young. That was Pitt's five possessions in the last two minutes, and Notre Dame did not foul quickly on three of them.
Stop trying to argue - you are the wrong one. UPitt89 knows his stuff and you just like to start pointless arguments.
So our last 5 points... not our last 7... .were at the line. Doesn't invalidate the point. One could argue that the reason ND didn't foul earlier is because Pitt is so good at FT shooting. If this was the 2002 Panthers (64%), ND starts fouling after we come out of the final TV timeout.
The only people in the world who belittle free throw makes are on this board. so every coach at every level is wrong and Joe and his friends know better. wow. Must be reading too much of always wrong......On this site we learn free throws don't matter, coaches don't matter, 18-22 year old kids get fatigued and can't play games to their fullest five days apart. It is all ,amazing stuff.
And only three of those seven were because Notre Dame fouled on purpose.
The reason that Notre Dame didn't start fouling sooner is that they were only behind by two points with two minutes left to go in the game. Why on earth would you start intentionally fouling when you are only behind by two points with two minutes left?
Notre Dame outscored Pitt 73-66 from the field.
Pitt outscored Notre Dame 20-9 at the line.
Pitt was 20-24 at the line. If Pitt is 63% at the line (like the 2002 team's average).... they are 15-24 and they lose.
Pitt won the game at the line.
Pitt outscored Notre Dame 20-9 at the line.
Pitt was 20-24 at the line. If Pitt is 63% at the line (like the 2002 team's average).... they are 15-24 and they lose.
Pitt won the game at the line.
I have never said that foul shots don't matter. Not once. When you have to pretend that someone said something they didn't to try to win an argument that's a pretty good sign of the quality of your argument.
Actually, a lot of people were quite dismissive of this anytime someone brought it up the past few years when we lose some close games.
Well,.....maybe. Scoring MORE points than the other team is more important than defense.
It's funny that you say that in response to a post where I listed the actual facts of Pitt's last five possessions. So if I was wrong, which one (or ones) of those possessions did I get wrong? Did Notre Dame really intentionally foul us on our last four possessions as he said, or did they only do it on our last two possessions like I said?
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Even people who are wrong as often as you. Everyone is not entitled to their own facts.
Is there only one way to do that, or are there more than one?
Do you seriously think that foul shooting is more important in the grand scheme of basketball than defense is?
If Pitt played defense like the 2002 team and went 15-24 from the line as well, we clown Notre Dame off the court.
OK.....I must be a masochist. Chugged thru this entire stupid thread. Why don't you guys just kick your dog or try pistols at 20 yards?
Yep. Half as much as twos and one third as much as threes.
Depends how many you shoot.
Similar threads
