Proposed rule changes

[flyerhawk]

Sources: Shot clock, other NBA changes likely

Kinda like changing the shot clock to 14 seconds after an offensive rebound. Make the game flow a bit more late in the game.

 

[MHSL82]

Thanks for posting. I support all these changes. I think the clear path as complicated change even though it is making it simpler. That is a "no duh" statement, but I'm saying that because I might be overlooking things in that change. In other words, maybe the change is bad and I just don't understand it (but I think it's good).

 

[trojanfan12]

Thanks for posting. I support all these changes. I think the clear path as complicated change even though it is making it simpler. That is a "no duh" statement, but I'm saying that because I might be overlooking things in that change. In other words, maybe the change is bad and I just don't understand it (but I think it's good).

So you like the change, but you don't really understand it. So because of that you might hate it, but you think it's good?

Now I'm confused. lol

 

[Lakers+USC=#1]

They should make a rule for players that take 3 or more steps without dribbling.

 

[trojanfan12]

They should make a rule for players that take 3 or more steps without dribbling.

Considering that we just got Lebron, that would be really unfortunate timing for the Lakers.

 

[MHSL82]

So you like the change, but you don't really understand it. So because of that you might hate it, but you think it's good?

Now I'm confused. lol

I like the rule change. But I always think I'm going to be called out on it by someone who actually analyzed the practical implications. I guess I'm used to the NFL rule change proposals that often sound ridiculous. I am "triggered" to think there's some obvious flaw.

Or when I make an obvious statement, something always tells me "no duh" in the back of my mind.

Can't help the crazies.

 

[MHSL82]

So you like the change, but you don't really understand it. So because of that you might hate it, but you think it's good?

Now I'm confused. lol

It would also help if I had proofread what I said. It was supposed to say the clear path rule change was the most complicated change, even though it made it simpler. Instead, I skipped some words. That was the "no duh" statement.

 

[trojanfan12]

Can't help the crazies.

The crazies can help one stay sane on this board. lol

 

[MHSL82]

The crazies can help one stay sane on this board. lol

It's all relative. I am a USC Trojan fan (alum) and a University of Utah fan. So if I see somebody with a BYU friend, they both look dumber for associating with someone who is a BYU fan and they also look smarter because they aren't themself a BYU fan.

 

[LogicMan]

that 14 second rule would really change game endings alot. love it

 

[Sparhawk]

Sources: Shot clock, other NBA changes likely

Kinda like changing the shot clock to 14 seconds after an offensive rebound. Make the game flow a bit more late in the game.

While I understand that this speeds up the games in theory, it can penalize a team.
If a team is down 4 with 24 seconds to go and moves in transition to get an open 3 with 20 seconds left on the shot clock, a miss and an offensive rebound would reset the shot clock to 14. But, in theory, the offensive team should have a few more seconds to play with.

Probably not going to happen that often because they want to get that shot up right away, but maybe if the lead is only 3 the situation changes. Then again, they would probably hold for the final shot anyway. I don't know. I guess it's a good rule change.

 

[shopson67]

Considering that we just got Lebron, that would be really unfortunate timing for the Lakers.

He would be grandfathered in, of course.

 

[gordontrue]

While I understand that this speeds up the games in theory, it can penalize a team.
If a team is down 4 with 24 seconds to go and moves in transition to get an open 3 with 20 seconds left on the shot clock, a miss and an offensive rebound would reset the shot clock to 14. But, in theory, the offensive team should have a few more seconds to play with.

Probably not going to happen that often because they want to get that shot up right away, but maybe if the lead is only 3 the situation changes. Then again, they would probably hold for the final shot anyway. I don't know. I guess it's a good rule change.

I'm not following. If you're down 4 with 20 seconds to go, the shot clock is pretty irrelevant. You are going to want to get a shot off as soon as possible, regardless of how much time is on the shot clock.

What I like about the rule is we'll have fewer games that end with a team in the lead securing an offensive rebound.:

Lets say there are 45 seconds left in the game and the team with the ball is up by 2. The defense knows if they can get a stop they'll have time left. Under today's rule if the offense holds the ball for 24 seconds, puts up a shot, and comes up with a rebound, there are 21 seconds left in the game and the game is essentially over, pending free throws. Under this proposed change though... The defense gets a chance to play 14 more seconds of defense and there's still 7 seconds left to try and send it to OT.

 

[Sparhawk]

I'm not following. If you're down 4 with 20 seconds to go, the shot clock is pretty irrelevant. You are going to want to get a shot off as soon as possible, regardless of how much time is on the shot clock.

What I like about the rule is we'll have fewer games that end with a team in the lead securing an offensive rebound.:

Lets say there are 45 seconds left in the game and the team with the ball is up by 2. The defense knows if they can get a stop they'll have time left. Under today's rule if the offense holds the ball for 24 seconds, puts up a shot, and comes up with a rebound, there are 21 seconds left in the game and the game is essentially over, pending free throws. Under this proposed change though... The defense gets a chance to play 14 more seconds of defense and there's still 7 seconds left to try and send it to OT.

Yeah, I mentioned they might want to put up a shot quicker rather than slower. However, 20 seconds can be a lot of time. Taking 10 seconds to get a quality look still gives you plenty of time to foul and get another chance. I suppose it wouldn't really matter if the clock reset to 14 or 20.

I'm pretty sure this rule will work as intended. But, it wouldn't surprise me if we see a close game where this somehow hurts a team. 'Hurts' being a rather subjective word depending on the game situation.

 

[tducey]

I do like that shot clock change the more I think about it. Let's see if any of these proposed changes come to be.

 

[The Q]

Pretty abysmal rule.

But a fan.

Punish all the good behavior and let stupidity like intentional fouls go by claiming you can’t figure it out...when high basketball has had it figured out for at least 20 years and probably more

 

[logic]

Pretty abysmal rule.

But a fan.

Punish all the good behavior and let stupidity like intentional fouls go by claiming you can’t figure it out...when high basketball has had it figured out for at least 20 years and probably more

high basketball is the best; always got it all figured out

 

[shopson67]

high basketball is the best; always got it all figured out

 

[trojanfan12]

Welp, they did sign Beasley. lol

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

They should make a rule for players that take 3 or more steps without dribbling.

lol