Shot Clock

[nuhusker7]

If sadly we end up in the NIT they are doing an experimental shorter shot clock, do you guys think we would be better or worse off?

I personally believe we would be better with it. First off I think it would give our defense a bigger advantage, our defense excels because the opponents often can't get a good look in the 35 seconds as opposed to some defenses that are good because of high pressure and steals, so I think a shorter shot clock would benefit our defense.

I also don't think that our offense would struggle too much, we have a high amount of isolation points and even our shots at the end of the shot clock seem to come after "stalling" for lack of a better term, for a few seconds near the half court line.

Just a couple thoughts and wanted to know your guys opinions. Even though this is completely hypothetical because we will be playing in the NCAA tournament instead (okay maybe too much vodka in my red koolaid this morning)

[Norm Peterson]

Shooting percentages will probably go down as teams will be jacking up crap in the last 2 seconds of the clock more frequently.  That's because the last 2 seconds of the clock will arrive 5 seconds faster per possession.  It probably won't improve offenses terribly much.  Games won't necessarily be higher scoring affairs.  But you can bet shooting percentages will suffer as you factor in more bad shots at the end of the clock.

[colhusker]

Shooting percentages will probably go down as teams will be jacking up crap in the last 2 seconds of the clock more frequently.  That's because the last 2 seconds of the clock will arrive 5 seconds faster per possession.  It probably won't improve offenses terribly much.  Games won't necessarily be higher scoring affairs.  But you can bet shooting percentages will suffer as you factor in more bad shots at the end of the clock.

Good lord how could shooting percentages in college basketball go down further?  I understand what you're saying but if it goes down more, god help the game.

[cipsucks]

 (okay maybe too much vodka in my red koolaid this morning)

Not if you're still able to post at 1:42 PM.....

[HuskerActuary]

I guess there are two threads on this, so I'll post what I posted in the other thread with more of a Nebraska flavor.

 

One result of shortening the shot-clock to 30 seconds is going to be more fouls, and ultimately more foul-outs. Depth will become more important with a 30 second shot clock: because a) the foul-outs mentioned and more running up and down the floor. 

[jimmykc]

Mmmm-Nebraska, as Homer might say.

[AuroranHusker]

Teams will need to set up in their offense quicker. I doubt it's going to significantly change the game with a shot clock reduction of 5 seconds. Coaches and players would adjust. I think it's an idea that is long overdue. The trapezoidal lane would be an improvement in offensive basketball more than a 5-sec shot clock reduction.

[royalfan]

You want more scoring, defensive 3 seconds if not closely guarding someone is one thing that is needed.  Not saying, I personally want or need more scoring, but that is one of the best ways of doing it.   Combine this with a trapezoidal line and you will have more freedom in the paint.  Backing up the 3 point line a little would probably help open up space as well. 

[colhusker]

You want more scoring, defensive 3 seconds if not closely guarding someone is one thing that is needed.  Not saying, I personally want or need more scoring, but that is one of the best ways of doing it.   Combine this with a trapezoidal line and you will have more freedom in the paint.  Backing up the 3 point line a little would probably help open up space as well. 

I will say I want more scoring, not in terms of Loyola-Marymount scoring but 43 points by a Div 1 school is just painful to watch and god awful basketball.

[Dean Smith]

I guess there are two threads on this, so I'll post what I posted in the other thread with more of a Nebraska flavor.

 

One result of shortening the shot-clock to 30 seconds is going to be more fouls, and ultimately more foul-outs. Depth will become more important with a 30 second shot clock: because a) the foul-outs mentioned and more running up and down the floor. 

My question would be why do you think a shorter shot clock lead to more fouls? 

[Dean Smith]

Teams will need to set up in their offense quicker. I doubt it's going to significantly change the game with a shot clock reduction of 5 seconds. Coaches and players would adjust. I think it's an idea that is long overdue. The trapezoidal lane would be an improvement in offensive basketball more than a 5-sec shot clock reduction.

The trapezoid pushes offensive post players farther from the rim making it more difficult for them to score so that wouldn't affect Nebraska at all.

[HuskerActuary]

 

I guess there are two threads on this, so I'll post what I posted in the other thread with more of a Nebraska flavor.

 

One result of shortening the shot-clock to 30 seconds is going to be more fouls, and ultimately more foul-outs. Depth will become more important with a 30 second shot clock: because a) the foul-outs mentioned and more running up and down the floor. 

My question would be why do you think a shorter shot clock lead to more fouls? 

 

Just because the offense will be forced to make a move quicker instead of passing it around on the outside for an extra five seconds.

[royalfan]

 

I guess there are two threads on this, so I'll post what I posted in the other thread with more of a Nebraska flavor.

 

One result of shortening the shot-clock to 30 seconds is going to be more fouls, and ultimately more foul-outs. Depth will become more important with a 30 second shot clock: because a) the foul-outs mentioned and more running up and down the floor. 

My question would be why do you think a shorter shot clock lead to more fouls? 

 

There will be more possessions.  With more possesions comes more fouls as there will be more drives.