|
Post by Gundo on Apr 28, 2015 13:33:02 GMT -8
Personally, I think changes like these are kinda ridiculous. We're seeing the whole "speed the game up" type of mentality in virtually every sport now. Why? If you're complaining that a game is too long or a style of play is "boring," then you simply don't enjoy the game, period. "Let the kids play?" What does speeding up the game do for them? Nothing. But, it makes it more entertaining for us, and that's what's most important, right? I get tired of people complaining that they spent 3 hours of their day watching a game. Guess what? No one forced you to go to or watch the game. No one made you make 50 different plans that same day. If your life is too busy and you have too much to do, then don't watch games, it's that simple. With society's millisecond attention span these days, we're bound to see more pointless changes like this, unfortunately. For everyone claiming (under the false pretense) that this will make teams like Wyoming or Air Force more enjoyable to watch, I say you simply don't get it. To me, it's like someone saying a 1-1 game going into the 9th is boring. It's plenty exciting if you know and appreciate the game and strategy of baseball (and baseball has done plenty to try to speed up the pace of games so our ADD-riddled pea brains can stomach them). OK Dean Smith, lets get a 6-2 lead and play four corners for 38 minutes. I am not saying we should play Paul Westhead BB and average 122 points a game either (And still remember that 181-150 win over USIU.) I am over 50 and still would like to see a little more tempo in the game. We have an athletic team, playing a few more possessions is a good thing. Aztec shooting and scoring is trending down for the last 6 years, FT shooting is the worse its been in that period. Our defense however, is keeping us in games and beating teams. I did the analysis both FG and FT shooting was at its lowest point last year.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 29, 2015 0:13:34 GMT -8
Shooting and scoring is down not because of the "long" shot clock; it's down because we don't have guys that can score, period. What does our FT shooting have to do with the shot clock? Again, if we don't have players that can score, it doesn't matter.
You just said "I am over 50 and still would like to see a little more tempo to the game." Why may I ask? Does the current pace bore you? Other teams don't seem to have a problem scoring more points than we do.
I agree that we have an athletic team and thus, we should play to that strength which may include a little run and gun and shooting with more time left on the clock. But that's only because we have the athletes to do it. either way, we're still looking for true scoring threats.
|
|
|
Post by North County Aztec on Apr 29, 2015 6:33:07 GMT -8
I can’t see how this change will hurt, we’ll have to see if it helps. Personally I’d like to see a little faster tempo a 30 second clock might be the answer.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Apr 29, 2015 9:58:50 GMT -8
Here's what I've noticed from Kenpom (looking at every other year):
Yr Avg Tempo Avg O Efficiency '15 64.8 1.02 (pts/poss) '13 66.1 1.00 '11 68.8 1.01 '09 65.2 1.02 '07 67.7 1.01
The pace of play in college ball has slowed overall compared to last few years, but is cyclical. '09 was basically the same as this past year.
However, when it's slow offensive efficiency has also gone up. So tends to balance out.
If we see 2-3 more possessions as a result of the 30-second clock we may see O-efficiency drop once again. Is a slightly faster game with the same amount of scoring an improvement?
I'm open to the 30, but not convinced it's going to help the college game. As Bill points out, it may just lead to more last 10 second iso's, which would actually hurt the game. Depends on how good the best player is for each team. With Pope & WS, maybe it helps us?
I do believe the one change we'll see is more teams will get into using 3/4 court defensive presses just to force time off the clock. Hopefully that leads to more teams passing over the zone & rather than setting up afterwards, trying to score of it. Only time will tell though.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 29, 2015 10:22:42 GMT -8
Very easy to make the change from a 35 to 30 second clock . Very easy to implement. Does not need to change lines on the court , no explanation to refs .coaches or fans , . Try it, to see results . if not then very easy to change back . Who does it hurt.
Aztecs play D , so if we can do it for 30 rather then 35 could be even better, , also does not take as much out of the guys on D , so maybe hopefully helps the offense . But bottom line that needs better shooting/scoring. But for the most part numerous teams waste 5 to 10 seconds per possession . Now you better be focused on your offensive scheme and execute it quicker. Including the Aztecs.
a major change for MBB ,has been the increase of guys leaving school early , as that goes up , you can expect the offense to dip .
|
|
|
Post by danloc09 on Apr 29, 2015 11:44:35 GMT -8
Here's what I've noticed from Kenpom (looking at every other year): Yr Avg Tempo Avg O Efficiency '15 64.8 1.02 (pts/poss) '13 66.1 1.00 '11 68.8 1.01 '09 65.2 1.02 '07 67.7 1.01 The pace of play in college ball has slowed overall compared to last few years, but is cyclical. '09 was basically the same as this past year. However, when it's slow offensive efficiency has also gone up. So tends to balance out. If we see 2-3 more possessions as a result of the 30-second clock we may see O-efficiency drop once again. Is a slightly faster game with the same amount of scoring an improvement? I'm open to the 30, but not convinced it's going to help the college game. As Bill points out, it may just lead to more last 10 second iso's, which would actually hurt the game. Depends on how good the best player is for each team. With Pope & WS, maybe it helps us? I do believe the one change we'll see is more teams will get into using 3/4 court defensive presses just to force time off the clock. Hopefully that leads to more teams passing over the zone & rather than setting up afterwards, trying to score of it. Only time will tell though. regressing.deadspin.com/how-has-the-ncaas-new-30-sec-shot-clock-worked-this-pos-1695275647
|
|
|
Post by mnico213 on Apr 29, 2015 14:00:17 GMT -8
I would doubt this would make much of an impact overall as other have said, but I am still for it. One thing I like about a shorter shot clock is that it speeds the end of the game up. Teams don't have to start fouling quite as early when they are down late. Again, 5 seconds won't make a huge difference, but you can definitely see the difference at the NBA level where they generally don't start the foul every possession strategy nearly as early (obviously, others things impact this as well like the score, but I'm talking on average).
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Apr 29, 2015 14:38:21 GMT -8
What do you guys think of going with what Bilas has suggested & using FIBA's rules (minus a couple we REALLY don't like; i.e. the goaltending rules)? In other words....
24 second clock wider lane 22 foot 3 point line
??
I think changing the 3 point line would have as much if not more of an impact on the game than shortening the clock by 5 seconds, and may force players to attack the rim more. Might bring the mid-range game back into play. Doubt you'd see many fast break 3 point attempts..
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 29, 2015 18:11:27 GMT -8
start with the 30 second clock . go to 6 fouls before you are eliminated rather then 5 . the refs make mistakes that can cause a team to lose a player for way too long . Both would be very easy to do , without confusion . Also to eliminate a lot of the fouls . Once your team makes 7 fouls,the other team, gets two shots , no one and one . or any foul less then two minutes you get two shots and the ball , . Foul some one on purpose when they do not have the ball , shots and the ball .
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on May 3, 2015 9:03:03 GMT -8
I would like the 30 second clock. Even better would be reseting the clock to 20 seconds on any non shooting defensive foul inside 20 seconds and on an offensive rebound.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on May 3, 2015 9:29:04 GMT -8
I would like the 30 second clock. Even better would be reseting the clock to 20 seconds on any non shooting defensive foul inside 20 seconds and on an offensive rebound. can we include a 20 second clock after a timeout is called in the back court by teams in danger of a 10 sec violation to your list?
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on May 3, 2015 9:44:51 GMT -8
I would like the 30 second clock. Even better would be reseting the clock to 20 seconds on any non shooting defensive foul inside 20 seconds and on an offensive rebound. can we include a 20 second clock after a timeout is called in the back court by teams in danger of a 10 sec violation to your list? Better yet, make the back court count like the shot clock. No reset because of a time out or being the ball being knocked out of bounds by the defense.
|
|