Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAnnis, David H.
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-09T17:00:57Z
dc.date.available2014-04-09T17:00:57Z
dc.date.issued2006
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10945/40337
dc.descriptionAn Article Submitted to Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, Manuscript 1030en_US
dc.description.abstractWhen faced with protecting a three-point lead in the waning seconds of a basketball game, which is a preferable strategy: playing defense or fouling the offense before they can attempt a game-tying shot? Gonzaga University head coach, Mark Few, was faced with such a decision against Michigan State in the semi-finals of the Maui Invitational (November 22, 2005) and elected to play defense. The strategy backfired, as Michigan State’s Maurice Ager made a three-point basket at the buzzer to force overtime. (Gonzaga eventually won in triple overtime.) Was this failure to hold the lead at the end of regulation bad luck or bad strategy? Put another way, which strategy (conventional defense or intentionally fouling) maximizes the defensive team’s chances of winning the game? Drawing on the Gonzaga/Michigan State game for inspiration, this paper addresses this question and concludes that, contrary to popular belief, intentionally fouling is preferable to playing tight defense.en_US
dc.rightsThis publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.en_US
dc.titleOptimal End-Game Strategy in Basketballen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.authorstrategyen_US
dc.subject.authorbasketballen_US
dc.subject.authoroptimalen_US
dc.subject.authorintentional foulen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record