end of game shot clock situation

[podsox]

why do coaches have their teams run the shot clock down when they are tied or up by 3 or less with 40-50 seconds left in the game. unless they get an offense rebound the other team is getting the ball back. id prefer my team to get the best look possible instead of having to fight the shot clock

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

why do coaches have their teams run the shot clock down when they are tied or up by 3 or less with 40-50 seconds left in the game. unless they get an offense rebound the other team is getting the ball back. id prefer my team to get the best look possible instead of having to fight the shot clock

Agreed. The upside is so much better and there isn't much downside. If you get a shot off really early, you've pretty much guaranteed that you'll get at least one more possession. If you burn just enough to where the shot clock is off, then I don't think it makes that much of a difference if the opposing team gets the ball back with 30 or 20 seconds. They're probably going to end up doing the same stall tactic and burn through the rest of the clock anyway.

At least if you get a high percentage shot off, you have a better chance of:
1) Making the shot and gaining/increasing your lead
2) Setting up your defense, and possibly pressing, if you're good at that.

I also don't understand coaches that build a 10-15 point lead, while playing a fast-paced game, then when there us 10 minutes left, they go into clock grinding mode, and almost always let the other team back in the game. I know you don't want to run up the score, but, killing your momentum isn't a very good alternative.

That being said, most coaches are better coaches than I am (hence the reason I'm not a D1 coach) so you should probably take my coaching advice with a grain of salt. Second guessing hall of fame coaches is usually something I make fun of, not encourage.

 

[gpm1976]

I hate running the clock out in nearly any situation when you need to put points on the board. It almost always results in a missed shot and gets the offense off balance. Just ask Illinois... their coach tried to run out the clock when he got the lead and it killed their offense. Ended up costing them the game.

 

[gordontrue]

You see the 2-for-1 strategy a lot less in college compared to the NBA.

The reason is in college you always have to bring the ball the length of the court.

In the NBA, if you leave 5 seconds on the clock, your opponent has an eternity of time to execute a play and get a quality look.

In college, 5 seconds is not a lot of time at all. Plenty of time to attempt a shot, sure, but generally speaking not a very high percentage one.

All that said, I generally agree with what others have said. Running the clock tends to be a "playing not to lose" strategy. I personally prefer the "playing to win" strategy.

 

[gpm1976]

The NBA in general is a much different animal. You're talking about the best of the best who do this now for a living. Everything there happens so fast.

When OSU tried to come down the court the other day and stall for the last shot we ended up w/our freshman, Loving, making a there poor, off balance shot that had zero chance of going in. I see this way too often in college when teams try to eat the entire clock and take one shot.

 

[Smart]

I'm with you. I think when you have 50 seconds left, the best strategy is to shoot with about 40 seconds left, so you will likely get the last shot. Even if your odds are much lower for scoring than if you wait 20 seconds, you get an extra possession so it will always make sense strategically if the other team doesn't get an offensive rebound.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

I'm with you. I think when you have 50 seconds left, the best strategy is to shoot with about 40 seconds left, so you will likely get the last shot. Even if your odds are much lower for scoring than if you wait 20 seconds, you get an extra possession so it will always make sense strategically if the other team doesn't get an offensive rebound.

Well, I think trying to score immediately is better than waiting for the shotclock to run down to 7 or so seconds as teams tend to do. But I'd still prefer, just running your offense like it's a regular possession, and if you use all of the shotclock trying to get a good shot, so be it, but I'd rather try to get a good shot over what boils down to a pair of 10 second possessions.

The other thing that irks me about the "stand at half court and dribble for 28 seconds" strategy is that it almost always ends in "flailing into the lane, hoping the refs bail you out." At least try and get an open jumper instead of doing something that would almost certainly be called an offensive foul for the first 39:00 minutes of the game but mysteriously turns into a block/reach in when you get under a minute.

 

[gpm1976]

Well, I think trying to score immediately is better than waiting for the shotclock to run down to 7 or so seconds as teams tend to do. But I'd still prefer, just running your offense like it's a regular possession, and if you use all of the shotclock trying to get a good shot, so be it, but I'd rather try to get a good shot over what boils down to a pair of 10 second possessions.

The other thing that irks me about the "stand at half court and dribble for 28 seconds" strategy is that it almost always ends in "flailing into the lane, hoping the refs bail you out." At least try and get an open jumper instead of doing something that would almost certainly be called an offensive foul for the first 39:00 minutes of the game but mysteriously turns into a block/reach in when you get under a minute.

yeah, they are almost always poorly done. Usually ends up being your best ball handler/scorer plowing into the lane and taking a bad shot or passing the ball off to someone who is not in position to make the shot anyways. Also, the rest of the team tends to just stand and do nothing... no movement is always a bad thing.