Quote:
Originally Posted by wiper
always kinda wondered why they didn’t just say, “hey. don’t foul for a while”
I mean, I get it, people play badly when they're worried about fouls so you sit them for a while such that the fouls/time remaining equilibrates and they can play freely, sure.
I also get that if you commit your second foul with, you know, 12 mins left in the 1st half then you should rest for a bit bc fresh players tend to foul less.
But I've never understood why the appropriate allocation for minutes for a guy who picks up 2 fouls in the first minute is 19 minutes on the bench followed by 20 mins on the floor.
Like, if a guy ends the game with 2 fouls you realize you sat him for no reason, right?
The last minute of the game is higher leverage than other minutes sure, but not much more beyond that. And even that's not clear. Sure you wanna have your star player available when you're down 1 with 45 seconds left, but maybe if you played him instead of planting him on the bench he would've fouled out but you'd be up six with 45 seconds left instead.
It just makes no sense that with 21 mins left, there is close to a zero percent participation rate for star players with 2 fouls, but with 20 minutes left it's literally 100%.
The most hilarious is when coaches do the same thing for like the 5th best starter or the 6th man and go deeper into the depth chart instead of keeping the guy who only plays 25 mins a game anyway on the floor if that's what you otherwise would have wanted.