My Take on Wake - Let’s Debate: Play Him or Play it Safe?

Let’s Debate: Play Him or Play it Safe?

The comments on this blog have been entertaining, at times enlightening and always greatly appreciated. I’ll put the Peanut Gallery of MTOW against that of any blog in the free world. As the ol’ country singer in me will always say (knowing it’s the one thing I could say that guarantees me applause), “Give yourselves a hand.’‘

DC has written to say he absolutely agrees with Al-Farouq Aminu being in against N.C. State in the first half with two fouls. He makes a strong point, that Farouq’s contributions are indispensable to any real success the Deacons are going to have this season and that he needs to learn how to play without fouling. While recognizing the risk, DC felt that a December game against N.C. State was as good a time to learn as most. If I’m misstating your position in any way, DC, please let me know.

I’ll begin my response with the obligatory and indisputable disclaimer that Coach Dino Gaudio, while as fallible as any human, knows his team far, far better than I do. I watch them practice,and I watch them play, but I don’t break down tape and I’m not involved in their instruction and development and I’m not in any position to be telling them what they should or shouldn’t be doing. But no coach has ever lived who is right 100 percent of the time, not even Peahead Walker or Jim Grobe. Well, maybe the late Bighouse Gaines, one of my great heroes..

Regardless, there are many decisions—whether to foul leading by three late, for instance—that coaches themselves debate. This is another, whether to risk, or maybe, when to risk, allowing a player to start the second half with three fouls. I’ve always held the opposing position to DC, that for the most part you do whatever you can to see your players don’t begin the second half encumbered by three fouls. Nobody should be intractable, and there can obviously be other considerations, such as additional foul trouble and/or the possibility your team is about to get run out of the gym. But on this one, I agree with Dean Smith, who said many times that you play the first half to get to the second.

(Again, nobody should be intractable, and I know Smith had plenty of reason to second-guess himself for leaving this guy named Jordan on bench in the first half against Dan Dakich and Indiana in the 1984 Sweet Sixteen).

DC may be right. Obviously Gaudio felt the risk was worth it, or he wouldn’t have re-inserted Farouq. Maybe it will help Farouq to learn how to better play with fouls. But to me there are so many variables out of a player’s control, somebody falling down and into him, or a blown call by an official, or maybe he just finds himself in the wrong place at the wrong time. It happens. And like many coaches have told me, it’s misleading to say a player gets five fouls. He actually gets only four, because, as Skip Prosser used to say, on the fifth he’s fired. Starting a second half with three more of a burden I want to put on a player unless I absolutely have to.

This is a good debate. While we’re all sitting around enjoying this down time, I’d love to hear from anybody who would like to chime in with their opinion on when a player should be in the game in the first half with two fouls. Give them up gang, and let’s keep it civil. Remember the holidays are a time for good cheer.

Back to the main page.

By Dan Collins on 12/23/2009 (5:44 pm)

Comments

Smith has 6 All Americans sitting on his bench, when one gets two fouls, he simply replaces him with another All American.

Everyone from 8th grade girls basketball to Duke, now uses the two foul rule.

Here’s one .. player picks up 2nd foul with 8 to go in first half ..it takes 15 mins to play the 8 mins, then go to the locker room for 1/2 another 20 mins…now the player starts the 2nd half, he hasn’t played in 35 mins, has lost their sweat and rhythm.

Also for the teams that only have a few good players, they have 10 point lead, keep the lead, go into the 2nd half, build the lead to 15….when the star fouls out in 4th, you have cushion and ride out the loss of the player.

WmjofVa on 01/25/2010 (5:09 pm)

To Chris with the most respect,

Every ACC game is like a game in March and every minute of every game is equally important. To think anything less is a fallacy.

“It’s ok you didn’t go after that loose ball Chas, it’s just the first half.”

Does that fly?

If you lose by one, that uncontested layup or missed foul shot takes on meaning it never had. Dean Smith’s philosophy of “Play the first half to get to the second half,” is misleading.
We all know Dean and a special player (King Rice, Derrick Phelps etc.) sacrificed a chicken to the Dark Lord at the half. I mean, what else could explain their second half heroics?

Merry Christmas

Thomas on 12/24/2009 (1:38 pm)

In Farouq’s case I think he had to come in. While I do believe you sit someone who has 2 fouls in the first half. It is REALLY hard to play the second half with really only one foul to give before you’re back on the pine.

However, if I remember correctly, Farouq picked up his second foul with at least 10 minutes still to go in the first half. You sit him for the rest of the half and then half time that’s a long time to sit before playing again. In this case, I think you play him, but this was one of the few circumstances you break the golden rule with 2 fouls.

I do wonder where Ish’s jumping ability and defensive playmaking came from. First time I have seen him throw down the dunks like he has and block bigs’ shots

berlaj7 on 12/24/2009 (2:58 am)

I don’t believe every minute of the game is equally important. Strategy changes throughout and every good team makes a run when pushed, etc. The second half is always more important. I would err on the side of sitting someone with two fouls, but it is situational with me. If its a post player, he sits—period—unless he happens to be the only true offensive weapon on the team in a must-win game (like March). I would generally play a guard with two fouls if he’s vitally important. Forwards are a tough call. I don’t mind playing Aminu because most of his fouls (I believe) don’t tend to be banging down on the blocks, so I tend to think he’s capable of playing with some fouls. I think you also must consider the opposition—State is not what I would call an aggressive, take-the-ball-to-the-hole type of an offense that will draw a lot of fouls.

Chris on 12/23/2009 (11:51 pm)

I’ve always believed in sitting a player with 2 fouls in the first half…unless you have the ball with 15 seconds left in the half and that player is a scorer. Especially in a close game. AFA got a silly 3rd foul Sunday night. Dino looked good in his decision because AFA played the 2nd half without a foul but, to me, it’s a really risky thing to do, especially with your team’s star player.

But, just so we win, I don’t really care.

Ken Green on 12/23/2009 (10:42 pm)

Dan,

You summarized my argument perfectly. Thank you. I think that the key to your post is that you noted that there are numerous variables at play with every decision that a coach makes.

As a general matter, I agree with the principle that a player should be taken out of the game if he commits two fouls in the first half. But from that general principle, exceptions can be made when those variables line up a certain way. And for the reasons already mentioned, Aminu should have stayed in the game in the first half against NC State.

And I think that speaks to the unique player that Aminu is. I find it strange that a player can be so widely accepted to be the best on his team while at the same time possessing so much untapped potential. He doesn’t need to control the team like Chris Paul (perhaps Josh Howard would be a better example?), but the team needs him to take a few steps in his development if it is going to succeed. And that plays a huge role in the decision to keep in the game at risk of getting into deeper foul trouble.

Also, the way NC State was playing, if we couldn’t beat them in spite of Aminu’s foul trouble, then we have bigger problems to worry about.

DC on 12/23/2009 (10:32 pm)

Just looking at this for this situation alone I think Dino did the right thing. Aminu needs to learn not to make stupid fouls? A given. But the bottom line is that Wake needs him in the game, particularly against the Pack because NOBODY else is, to this point, an offensive post option. From Dino’s point of view I think you’ve got to play him and just cross your fingers he doesn’t make a stupid foul. If Aminu goes out and Wake’s lead is lost or lessens then everybody says, “Why didn’t you keep him in? Gotta have Aminu in the game.”
Coaches must make decisions in the flow of a game, not in a vacuum. If it works it works and you’re a genius, if it fails it fails and you’re a putz. Now that doesn’t mean going for it on 4th and 20 from your own five is a good choice, but if you make it it’s a gutsy call.

Thomas on 12/23/2009 (9:46 pm)

I agree with Rick, but would add that AFA is a unique case, because although he is our best player (or at least has the most potential for greatness), we don’t rely on him like other teams rely on their star. He’s a really good player, but I don’t think you could say that he consistently carries our team. It seems that just about every game, someone new steps up (Ish, CJ, LD, the list could go on). I think Gaudio knew that we could beat NC State without Aminu, so he put him back in to give him more time to regain his confidence on the court. We are winning games because our team is deep, not just because we have AFA. He hasn’t reached CP3 status just yet.

Lucas on 12/23/2009 (7:35 pm)

In my opinion, every minute of the game is equally important. Therefore when a player like AFA (who is easily Wake’s best player) has 2 1st half fouls, then you don’t automatically rule him out for the half. If you have a nice lead, then maybe you save him; but I think it is foolish to automatically (or even frequently) sit a guy with 2 fouls until the second half. Another way to look at it is, “You can’t win a game in the first-half, but you can lose it.”

Rick on 12/23/2009 (6:57 pm)