Latest news with #MarioElie
New York Times
2 days ago
- General
- New York Times
Why NBA fans shouldn't be mad about teams' strategy of fouling when leading by 3
I'm having some cognitive dissonance about the 'foul-up-three' ploy the Oklahoma City Thunder used Monday at the end of Game 4 of the Western Conference finals. All I'm reading on social media is that the NBA needs to do something to penalize this strategy because it's too much of an advantage. And all I'm thinking is that the league needs to stop coaches from using this strategy because they keep screwing it up and botching a hugely favorable win-probability scenario. I'm spending the last 20 seconds of every game screaming, 'What are you guys doing?!' at my TV. Advertisement Before we go forward, let's back up. I'm a bit surprised that now is the moment we've decided this is horrible, because the foul-up-three ploy has been around almost as long as the 3-pointer itself. Notably, the Houston Rockets used it at the end of their Game 7 'kiss of death' game against the Phoenix Suns in 1995 after Mario Elie's shot put them up three with 7.1 seconds left. (I'll go more retro: My opponents in a 1989 high school game were trying to foul up three — in only the second year my state had the 3-point line!) Generally speaking, a team with a three-point lead in the final seconds of a game is in an incredibly favorable position. Not only does the opponent have to make a 3 to extend the game, but the opponent knows it has to make a 3 to extend the game. Thus, the 3s you end up seeing in those situations often look like this one, from when the Indiana Pacers conspicuously did not foul up three at the end of Game 2 against New York when the Knicks gained possession with 14.1 seconds left: An opponent 3 doesn't result in a loss; it results in a worst-case scenario of the game being tied and continuing. And often, even in these situations, the opponent 3 comes before the buzzer, which means the team with the lead still has a possession to respond. In the NBA, where a team can advance the ball with a timeout, this can be particularly powerful if a team has a timeout left. As a result, the foul-up-three isn't quite the life hack some people seem to think. However, there is one particular situation where it is valuable: the old Stan Van Gundy rule of fouling up three when the clock is inside six seconds. Even then, it can be difficult to execute. If the opponent is inbounding from the frontcourt after a timeout and can go straight into a shot, it brings the risk of a three-shot foul. Teams are probably better off defending in that situation. Here's a scenario where the Pacers didn't foul because of the risk of the player shooting immediately and were less fortunate: Jaylen Brown's shot from Game 1 of the 2024 Eastern Conference finals. Watch Pascal Siakam conspicuously not fouling as Brown's heave finds the net: Indiana then couldn't score itself with 5.7 seconds left and lost in overtime, eventually being swept by the Boston Celtics. (Indiana, I will note, also did not foul up three in overtime of Game 1 against New York, with 15.1 seconds left. New York forced up a similarly wild miss from Jalen Brunson; an offensive rebound produced a better look for Karl-Anthony Towns, but he missed too. Even if he had made it, Indiana would have had roughly five seconds to respond and retake the lead.) Advertisement So, back to Game 4 of Thunder-Timberwolves. Minnesota's last possession slammed into the golden Van Gundy Rule scenario where fouling up three makes the most sense: having no timeouts and needing to advance the ball the length of the court, with only six seconds left. Oklahoma City's Alex Caruso could give the foul and be relatively certain that Anthony Edwards wouldn't pull up from 60 feet and make it a three-shot scenario. (While we're here: The other foul-up-three loophole nobody has tried exploiting, courtesy of Ken Pomeroy, is to foul up three in the waning seconds and then continuously commit lane violations on the second free throw until the other team makes it — thus eliminating the intentional miss and put-back scenario. A smart ref might eventually hit the team with a delay-of-game violation, two of which result in a technical foul.) However, Oklahoma City's earlier strategy — fouling Naz Reid when Lu Dort had him bottled up in the corner with 7.0 seconds left — was much more questionable. The reason why is contained in the two previous playoff games where this strategy overtly failed — the early foul-up-three introduces more possessions, and thus more variance, into a game where the team up three had an overwhelming advantage. The success of the Thunder's strategy depended on a clean inbound pass against a pressing opponent, and then matching the opponent's success at the free-throw line to maintain the three-point lead and foul once again. This is particularly true when teams foul with more than 10 seconds left on the clock, as the Thunder did in Game 1 against the Denver Nuggets and the Knicks did in Game 1 against Indiana. The Thunder's strategy worked out so well that they lost, in regulation and by two. Great work, everyone. The Knicks would have also lost in regulation had Tyrese Haliburton's foot been half a size smaller; they ended up losing in overtime instead. Advertisement The key problem was that Oklahoma City began fouling ridiculously early, with 12.2 seconds left on the clock. Denver ended up with three possessions in 10 seconds, where it normally would have had one, making four free throws and then an Aaron Gordon 3-pointer with 2.8 seconds left. Ditto for the Knicks, who fouled Aaron Nesmith with 12.2 seconds left in regulation in Game 1 and defensive ace OG Anunoby draped all over him. When Anunoby missed a free throw at the other end, the Pacers were only down two and still had 7.1 seconds left, taking away the foul-up-three on the last trip and leaving just enough time for Haliburton's shot to touch the sky and fall through the net at the buzzer. It's a point I've made over and over, but I will make again: The foul-up-three, especially with more than six seconds on the clock, is the only realistic way the leading team can lose in regulation. With all that said, let's circle back to the main point. There's an idea out there that something needs to be 'done' about the foul-up-three because it ruins the end of games. Right now I'd argue more the opposite: That it's making the end of games more exciting, because coaches keep screwing it up and giving away games they shouldn't lose. Also, the instances where it is truly advantageous are so specific — defending team up three, less than six seconds left, opponent not in a position to get into a shooting motion — that I wonder what a rule to address this would even look like and how often it would come into play. That said … I wanted to see Edwards make a bull rush up the court and fling up a desperation 3 for the tie Monday just like everyone else. Also, casual fans can probably appreciate that type of play more than his near-perfect free-throw miss that yielded a mayhem rebounding situation (10 guys went all out for the board, and it hit the ground before anyone got it) and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander eventually flinging the ball from his back to an eager fan sitting courtside. The foul-up-three also drags out the end of games, which might be good in some ways (sponsor dollars!) but is probably more of a negative in the big picture, especially since the league seems pretty concerned about fitting games into a two-and-a-half-hour window. Advertisement So, if we really wanted the league's competition committee to legislate this, one possibility is to say that, if the offense is in the bonus, a take foul by the winning team up by three points in the last six seconds (or eight or 10, whatever the committee thinks is appropriate) is one shot and the ball out of bounds. But the league needs to be very careful about the wording of any rule, given the huge potential for unintended consequences. Either way, the thing I can't emphasize enough is that A) we're legislating an extremely specific situation, and B) thus far this postseason, coaches inadvertently have done more to create excitement by fouling up three than they have to remove it. We only got Haliburton's and Gordon's shots because coaches screwed up the scenario. That's why, for me, the story isn't that the foul-up-three needs to be addressed by the rules committee; it's that it needs to be addressed in coaches' meetings. Indiana is doing it right; Oklahoma City and New York, not so much, even if the Thunder ultimately hung on in Game 4.
USA Today
21-05-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
Rockets, Mario Elie celebrate 30-year anniverary of iconic ‘Kiss of Death' in NBA playoffs
Rockets, Mario Elie celebrate 30-year anniverary of iconic 'Kiss of Death' in NBA playoffs It was exactly 30 years ago when Mario Elie sparked Houston to its most recent NBA championship. With his iconic 'Kiss of Death' at Phoenix, it was the last elimination game those Rockets would face. Known best as the 'Kiss of Death,' this Tuesday marks the 30th anniversary of the most famous shot in Houston Rockets franchise history, courtesy of three-time NBA champion Mario Elie. Via his X account, Elie shared highlights and interviews to celebrate the occasion. It was May 20, 1995, when Elie hit a corner 3-pointer with under 10 seconds left in Game 7 at Phoenix. The legendary shot broke a tie and lifted the Rockets to victory in the game (box score) and the Western Conference semifinal series, which they had previously trailed by a 3-1 margin. Led by Charles Barkley and Kevin Johnson, the Suns (59-23) were much better than Houston (47-35) in the 1994-95 regular season. But true to their nickname, 'Clutch City' was a different beast in the playoffs. And just a few weeks later, those Rockets secured their second straight NBA championship. (Elie captured his third title in 1999 with San Antonio.) On Tuesday's anniversary, via their social media outlets, the Rockets posted video of Elie's heroic shot — which proved to be the final elimination game that Houston would face on its 1995 championship run. The Phoenix shot is perhaps best remembered for what occurred right after it, with Elie blowing a kiss in the direction of the home bench. The Suns never had a realistic shot to tie the game after Elie's make, with head coach Rudy Tomjanovich opting to foul the Suns with a 3-point lead. In a story on the shot's 20th anniversary, Elie told the Houston Chronicle that the kiss was gestured at backup Suns center Joe Kleine. Elie said: He started that in Game 5. It started as fun, but I got the last kiss. It was just emotion, friendly competition, and us going at each other for the second year in a row. It was a somewhat risky play by Elie on multiple levels. With the shot clock off, Tomjanovich ideally wanted the Rockets to take the game's last shot, so that the worst-case scenario was overtime. Because Elie shot early, a miss would likely have allowed the Suns a shot to win in regulation. Those Rockets also had two future Hall of Famers on the court in Hakeem Olajuwon and Clyde Drexler. On paper, one of those two would seem be the preferred option in a late-game scenario. But Elie was open after a cross-court pass by Robert Horry, and he fired without hesitation. 'Robert threw a high pass, and I had to jump to get it,' Elie said. 'But I had time to gather myself and get a great look at the basket.' Olajuwon and Drexler each had 29 points in the victory, which was just the fifth time in NBA history that a road team had won a Game 7. But it was the final shot of an 8-point outing by a veteran role player — known best for his defense and toughness — that the game is best remembered for. 'My kids don't think the old man could play,' Elie told the Houston Chronicle in 2015. 'I can show them on video that I was pretty good.' Unfortunately, the 30-year anniversary of Elie's heroic shot also reflects the last season in which the Rockets won the NBA championship. But Houston (52-30) just finished up a 2024-25 season with the league's fourth-best record and a relatively young and improving roster, so there's hope that the drought could end in the not-too-distant future. More: As Rockets celebrate anniversary of 1990s titles, Ime Udoka shares his personal connection
New York Times
20-05-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
Do the Timberwolves fear the Thunder? 3 keys to winning West Finals matchup
The Bounce Newsletter | This is The Athletic's daily NBA newsletter. Sign up here to receive The Bounce directly in your inbox. On this date, 30 years ago, Mario Elie delivered the 'Kiss of Death' in Game 7 against the Suns. The Rockets broke a string of 20 straight home teams winning a Game 7. They also went on to win the NBA title as the lowest seed ever (No. 6) to win the title. Minnesota will now try to match that feat. The Timberwolves also have a foreign-born center. It's exactly the same thing. All season long, we've seen the Thunder overwhelm their opponents. While they answered questions about their clutch-time prowess against Denver, they also reminded everybody that things can get out of hand in the blink of an eye. Two of their wins over the Nuggets were by a combined 75 points (!!!). You kind of forget that level of dominance when you think about a seven-game series that felt like it was balanced the whole time. Advertisement Now, they face the Timberwolves, who were here a year ago. This time, it wasn't a struggle to get through to the conference finals. They smacked the Lakers around in five games. Then, they weren't really challenged by a Warriors squad missing Steph Curry for all but 13 minutes. Minnesota is fresh, ready and trying to prove it has learned from last year's Western Conference finals, when the Mavericks were simply too much. Have the Thunder learned enough from this experience to combine that with their regular-season dominance to move on to their first NBA Finals since 2012? Have the Wolves learned from last year's five-game loss to the Mavericks in order to leap into their first NBA Finals in franchise history? Let's preview the Western Conference finals! Shooting Stars The star power in this series resides in Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Anthony Edwards. We assume some time this week, the NBA might get around to announcing the MVP award. We double-assume that it will go to SGA. Edwards, while three years younger than his SGA, is trying to throw his name into the mix as a true contemporary. Over the last two seasons, SGA has put himself a cut above most of the league, but Edwards battling him toe-to-toe in this series – and even upsetting him by winning the series – would erase any doubt of them being on the same level. But it has to be proven. SGA has been nothing short of spectacular in this postseason run, thus far. The 3-point shot hasn't been there (29.3 percent), but everything else has been top notch: The flip side of that is Edwards' run through the playoffs. He injured his ankle when LeBron James rolled on it in the first round and tweaked it in the second round. But his postseason numbers have been close to brilliant, at 26.5 points, 8.0 rebounds and 5.9 assists with 44.5/38.5/73.7 splits. Against OKC this season, Edwards wasn't as efficient or productive, though. He averaged 22.3 points, 9.3 rebounds and 6.0 assists in four matchups, but his 36.4/31.6/82.9 splits weren't up to his usual production. With that being said, the Wolves and Thunder went 2-2 against each other, and both stars had big moments. Advertisement The beauty of this matchup is both star guards do it all. They'll both spend time defending each other. They'll both spend time dissecting defenders assigned to them. And they'll both be expected to deliver an NBA Finals berth. The turnover battle The Wolves are going to have to watch the turnovers in this series, more so than they did against Golden State last round. Minnesota was sloppy with the ball in the regular season, ranking 20th in turnover rate. There was a slight uptick in turnovers in the postseason, but that must subside against the Thunder. The latter are the best in the league at forcing turnovers and taking care of the ball. Minnesota will lose the turnover battle, but it can't get dominated in that category. In the Thunder's four-game sweep of the Grizzlies, they won the turnover battle. They won it by 46 in seven games against Denver. The Wolves turned the ball over 92 times in five games against the Warriors, after doing so 56 times against the Lakers in the same number of games. They have to eliminate the dumb mistakes. Keeping up on the perimeter The 3-point shot has completely left the Thunder during the playoff run so far. They're shooting 31.9 percent from deep in 11 games. SGA, Lu Dort and Jalen Williams are all under 30 percent in the postseason. That won't fly against Minnesota's defense. Minnesota gave up the sixth-lowest 3-point percentage (35.3) this season. That went to 35.1 percent against the Lakers and then 34.4 percent against the Warriors (remember, there was pretty much no Curry). The Wolves are great at defending the perimeter, so the Thunder have to regain their outside shooting touch to put pressure on a really good defense. Game 1 is tonight in OKC at 8:30 p.m. ET on ESPN (You can also watch on Fubo for free!). We want to hear from you again! We have another poll for you, The Bouncers, to vote in to make your predictions for the Western Conference finals! We'll share your results for the Eastern Conference finals predictions below. Did WWE script Knicks-Pacers East finals? 💪 Royal Rumble. Wrestling paved the way for this year's East finals matchup. Grab a chair and brass knuckles! 🔮 Who wins? We've got writers here at The Athletic predicting the conference finals. Who's picking Minnesota? 🏀 The bigger picture. Chris Finch knew the plan would work if they stuck to it. The Wolves made it back. 🏀 Time for change? Is Brad Stevens ready to talk about big changes to the Celtics? Not yet. Advertisement 🧍 Standing tall. Under coach Tom Thibodeau, the Knicks are enjoying their deepest playoff run in a quarter century. 🎧 Tuning in. Today's 'NBA Daily' previews the keys to each conference finals series. Likewise for the 'No Dunks' crew! The story of the greatest players in NBA history. In 100 riveting profiles, top basketball writers justify their selections and uncover the history of the NBA in the process. The story of the greatest players in NBA history. East finals predictions are now in! Yesterday, we asked you (yes, specifically you 🫵) to vote for and predict the outcome of the Eastern Conference finals and beyond. You did, so it's time to go over the results! Who will win the East finals? In how many games? Who will be the East finals MVP? Then, we had other options to receive smaller portions of the vote. We also allowed write-in votes. Mitchell Robinson got one. Frank Ntilikina, a.k.a. Frankie Smokes, who plays in the Serbian League, received a vote. And, of course, one person wrote in Thanasis Antetokounmpo, as always. I will find you someday, whoever you are. Will the winner of the East finals win the NBA Finals? Who do I have advancing, you ask? I guess if I'm asking everybody else to make predictions and we have a link to our writers making predictions, then I should put my own predictions on the line. I've thought a lot about where I think these two series will go, and what potential storylines might happen. Also, check out the latest episode of The Bounce by clicking on my moving face! Did you know this league has trade demands? During the first couple of years of the Big 3, I was casually into it. You got a little bit of nostalgia with players out of the league still giving it a go. It was my only chance to still watch Ricky Davis – one of my all-time favorites – hoop. And I was in the building when Charles Oakley 'accidentally' hit Al Harrington in the teeth with the backfist. Since then, the only time I really think about it is when Jeff Teague is discussing his experience on his podcast. I'm not trying to be dismissive about it. It still seems like a good, fun product, and people are enjoying it. It's successful. I just kind of check out of hoops during the summer to recharge my battery. Well, I saw a social media post today that definitely got me interested in it. This was from Chris Haynes, reporting that Michael Beasley (yes, that Michael Beasley) is upset that the expansion Miami Big 3 team drafted Lance Stephenson (yes, that Lance Stephenson), and is contemplating requesting a trade. This reads like 2012 basketball MadLibs. This led to one of my group chats having a lot of questions: I'm curious if Beasley will try to get traded to the Houston Rig Hands or Boston Ball Hogs or LA Riot. Yes, those are all real team names. I know it seems like I'm making fun of the Big 3, and I promise that's not the intention. I do actually want to get back into it this season. Teague's podcast has been a big part of that, and I love watching Beasley cook. That's especially so if we're about to get a big-time Beasley-Stephenson rivalry and drama either with them on the same or opposite team. Or is it just forced promotion for some one-on-one battle they're doing on the internet? (I'm not linking to it). I just need to know when Ricky Davis is getting elected into the Big 3 Hall of Fame.
