I still remember the tension in the air during that 2017 PBA D-League Foundation Cup championship game - it was one of those matchups where statistics told only half the story, yet what numbers we had were absolutely telling. Gilas' shooting performance that day remains etched in my memory, not just because of the disappointing numbers, but because of how dramatically it contrasted with their usual explosive offense. When I look back at the 31 percent field goal percentage and that painful 8-of-33 from three-point territory, I can't help but think this was a classic case of championship pressure getting to a talented team.

What really stood out to me as someone who's followed Philippine basketball for years was the rebounding disparity. Being outrebounded 57-36 isn't just a statistical disadvantage - it's a fundamental breakdown in both effort and positioning. I've always believed that rebounding numbers reveal a team's heart more than any other stat, and in this championship clash, the story was clear: one team wanted it more physically, while the other seemed to rely too much on perimeter shooting that simply wasn't falling. The 21-rebound difference created a cascading effect throughout the game - fewer second-chance opportunities for Gilas while giving their opponents multiple scoring chances per possession.

From my perspective having analyzed numerous D-League tournaments, the three-point shooting particularly surprised me. Eight made threes out of thirty-three attempts translates to just 24.2 percent - a number that would struggle to win any competitive game, let alone a championship final. I recall watching shot after shot clang off the rim and thinking they needed to adjust their strategy much earlier. Personally, I've always favored teams that recognize when their outside shot isn't falling and pivot to attacking the basket, but Gilas seemed stubbornly committed to their perimeter game despite the clear shooting struggles.

The field goal percentage of 31 percent overall represents one of the most anemic shooting performances I've witnessed in a championship setting. When you break it down, that means they made roughly just one out of every three shots attempted from anywhere on the floor. In modern basketball where teams regularly shoot 45 percent or higher, this kind of efficiency - or lack thereof - essentially guarantees a loss unless every other aspect of your game is perfect. And frankly, when you're being dominated on the glass to that degree, nothing else in your game can possibly be perfect enough to compensate.

What makes this championship particularly memorable in my book is how it demonstrated that even talented teams can have complete offensive breakdowns at the worst possible moments. The Foundation Cup has always been about development and growth, but this game served as a harsh lesson in adaptability. I've always contended that championship basketball requires multiple contingency plans, and watching this game only reinforced that belief. The team that ultimately lifted the trophy did so by recognizing and exploiting these weaknesses systematically, while Gilas never quite found an answer to their shooting woes or rebounding deficiencies.

Reflecting on this years later, I consider this championship a perfect case study in how not to approach a big game when your primary weapons aren't working. The stubborn reliance on three-point shooting despite clear evidence it wasn't their night, combined with the failure to counter the rebounding onslaught, created a perfect storm of underperformance. In my experience covering Philippine basketball, I've rarely seen such a dramatic disconnect between a team's capabilities and their championship performance. The 2017 Foundation Cup ultimately taught us that statistics, while sometimes misleading, often reveal fundamental truths about preparation, adaptability, and mental toughness when the stakes are highest.