Mark Daigneault Discusses Fouling Up 3 And Probabilities Of Strategy

A lot has been made of the Oklahoma City Thunder's decision to foul up 3 against the Denver Nuggets in Game 1.

The issue most are finding with the strategy was the trigger point of the fouls. Oklahoma City did it early and often rather than waiting for more critical moments later in the game clock. The Thunder were burned by this decision in large part due to shooting 71% at the line this game –– no miss louder than Chet Holmgren's 0-for-2 pair at the stripe.

However, this was par for the course for Oklahoma City. The Thunder just ended up on the wrong end of the strategy this time –– mainly through its own wrongdoing vs. the idea itself to foul up three.

"That's usually our deal. To foul up three and to play that game. I thought we executed the fouls pretty well. Got the ball in-bounds pretty well. It didn't go our way tonight but it's worked out well for us in the past," Daigneault said postgame. "We'll continue to look at it, learn from it but I didn't think that's why we lost the game."

After the initial shock wore off, and the Oklahoma City Thunder bench boss had the time to break down the film and discuss it with his staff and team, he was peppered with questions about the foul up three decision again at Tuesday's practice.

When rehashing the choice, Daigneault mentioned the probabilities involved with fouling up three points vs. playing the game out straight up. After that answer wrapped up, I asked him his if those numbers change with the contest of matchup and defensive prowess.

"It changes, but it is also, you know, you don't have a calculator in your head. So you are working off instincts, you have some framework or rules that you have to have in place so that the team can execute and you are not just guessing in the moment. That is not just fouling up 3, that is on a lot of different situations that we try to cover and put ourselves in the best chance to execute well and win games. But again, there is going to be times where your philosophy or a decisions you make doesn't turn out well. As the coach, I have to be comfortable with taking responsibility for that, and I am," Daigneault detailed at practice Tuesday.

Hindsight is 20/20. It is easy to play the results and say the Thunder should've just let its historically great defense get one last stop to ice the game rather than spoil the game flow down the straight and place a second year big man at the free throw line to ice the game. But there is no changing that fact now.

As Daigneault discusses learning from this decision, all that is left to do now is what the rest of the series –– and future ones –– unfold and how the Thunder adjust to these situations down the line. Only time will tell. But the thought process behind the decision was clear and sound. The execution was not.