What is the point of this strategy? In the OP, A is down by 1, B gets 2 free throws and makes the first, tying the game. They then employ thier strategy, guaranteeing that B makes the second free throw, putting B up by 1. All this so that they get a throw-in with the clock stopped, which they then have to take the length of the floor and make a basket to come from behind in only 1 or 2 seconds.
That makes zero sense to me.
Looking at the possibilities:
- B makes the second free throw, which puts A right where they apparently want to be -- behind with 2 seconds to make a desperation shot
- B misses the free throw and A secures the rebound. They have a small chance of getting off a buzzer beater, but likely will go to overtime
- B misses the free throw and B secures the rebound. They try a put-back and miss. We go into overtime.
- B misses the free throw and B secures the rebound. They try a put-back and make it. B wins.
I'll take my chances on getting the rebound. Statistically speaking A is more likely to get the rebound than B. Even if B gets it, what are the odds the kid will make the put-back? 50%? 60%? Maybe even 70%? Assuming B has even as much as a 40% probability of gettting the rebound and as high as a 70% chance of making the put-back, that still leaves A with around a 70 - 75% chance of the game going to overtime.
On the other hand, what are the odds of A going the length of the floor in 1 to 2 seconds and making the now-required desperation shot? A
LOT lower than 70%!