A modest proposal



  • Heard this on a podcast today called Only a Game. If you’d rather listen to it, it’s on WBUR’s Only a Game, an excellent podcast.

    Otherwise, read about it here: http://fansided.com/2017/04/05/basketball-tournament-experiments-new-crunch-time-rules/

    If you don’t want to read about it nor listen to the podcast, in sum, it’s a proposal to stop the endless final minutes of pro and college games by stopping the clock at a set time. The officials will set a target score to win the game based on this writers formula. In other words, Kansas is winning against Michigan St. 68-63. The officials determine 7 points for KU or 12 for MSU necessary to win, in other words, first to 75 wins.

    It’s just a silly proposal, but the guy who studied 1000’s of games to come up with his formula is running a tournament this summer with these rules in place.

    Imagine, no more whining at the TV when the Big East game runs over every Monday night!



  • Give us an update this summer after the formula has been shown to be either right or wrong.



  • I don’t think this will work.

    The analysis was done based on how teams currently strategize. Changing the rules changes the strategy.

    For instance, right now, the strategy is to use clock if you are ahead by X number of points with X amount of time left. Under that line of thinking, maybe you only score 7 more points in the last two minutes because you eat clock, then shoot FTs in the last minute. However, if the thinking is that you need to score just 7 more points to win, your approach changes. Maybe you take that quick corner three that you would otherwise pass up to eat more clock. For the team that’s behind, maybe you try to attack the rim rather than hoisting threes because you need points, not just trying to catch up.

    The change in strategy would alter the scoring. I’d be curious to see how this tournament plays out. It could make for interesting games, but with nothing at stake, teams may take risks that college and pro teams wouldn’t otherwise take.



  • @justanotherfan I’m confused as to what you are saying won’t work. The situation you described is exactly what we want to happen.

    Instead of holding the ball in the corner and getting fouled, you’re more likely to take the open 3. Much more exciting.

    And teams won’t foul to put you at the line because all you need is 7 more points, so every point counts.



  • @wissox

    wonder if we would have won the 2008 championship with this rule

    or the final Mizzou game

    Maybe we would have won a few others, but it seems like a really terrible idea to me. Coaches are already throwing in the towel earlier than in the past unless it’s a do or die game or any game leading into KU’s game on Big Monday.



  • @Kcmatt7

    I should have been more clear. I think it will speed the game up. But I also think the analysis was flawed and officials may struggle to name the proper final score based on the formula because the strategy will have changed.

    The game slows down in the final few minutes because teams slow down their pace if they are ahead. But if the final few minutes is about reaching a certain score, that changes the strategy.

    It also changes the strategy of blowouts. When do you put in your scrubs?

    Imagine KU is up 92-68 when the under 4 comes. Do you just put your scrubs in and have them try to score the last 7 points, or do you leave one solid offensive threat in just in case? No, you shouldn’t blow a 24 point lead, but the clock isn’t running out here. How many times have we seen situations where that last unit can’t really score - not that they are really trying.

    I guess my point is, if the pace of the game doesn’t slow down, 7 points really isn’t a good target because chances are the pace of the game would dictate that more than 7 points would be scored. And who’s to say the pace would increase. If you’re behind, you go all out to get stops because you can’t give up any points really. Maybe you don’t play a stronger offensive player because you have to get stops first and foremost. That could turn the final few minutes into a slog anyway, just because it would emphasize defense first from the team that’s behind.



  • justanotherfan said:

    That could turn the final few minutes into a slog anyway, just because it would emphasize defense first from the team that’s behind.

    And yet, no matter how great the defense effort from the team trying to come from behind, the game could never end on a defensive play (block, steal etc.) it would have to end on a made basket.



  • @justanotherfan

    Also, what happens if you get to the 4 minute mark and still have a decent lead but your starters have fouled out and the other team does not have a clock to worry and can catch up playing against the bench, basically voiding the first 36 minutes of the game.

    The entire game strategy now changes and I really do not see it being implemented. Changes are introduced to the game periodically but this is a huge change that would make the game that we know quite different.



  • @JayHawkFanToo Unless you make it so once you reach minute 36, you can’t foul out anymore. Teams aren’t just going to hack either, because you don’t want to put a team on the line for a free bucket when they only need 7 points.



  • @justanotherfan I guess, but pace would be kept with a shot-clock still.

    I’m not saying this will ever get instituted. But, there needs to be something done about end of game fouls. It is not something the inventor of basketball saw coming, I’m sure.



  • @DanR I had the same thought! To be honest, the end of game length only bothers me when I’m waiting for our game to start on TV and the previous game is dragging on causing us to miss the beginning.

    I just thought it was an interesting story to hear and I probably won’t follow up on it to be honest. I seriously doubt anything remotely close to it occurs anytime soon!



  • @Kcmatt7

    My point was that a team can no longer just use up time and hold on to the lead to win, it has to actually score points.



  • @JayHawkFanToo Oh gotcha gotcha.

    Don’t you think that would be more fun to watch though? Essentially you have 36 minutes to build as big of a lead as possible. Then you finish the game by actually having to score points.

    Sounds more entertaining to me than hack-a-shaq or a team running 4 corners. Gets boring watching guys standing around before they hoist up a terrible shot right before the shot clock goes off and then they don’t score an actual basket the last 5 minutes of the game just hoping that time runs out.



  • @Kcmatt7

    but, but, but…if neither team scores the predetermined points it could take forever to finish the game, since the clock is off, right?



  • @JayHawkFanToo I mean maybe if it is Virginia vs. Wisconsin :joy:



  • @Kcmatt7 I don’t get notifications for comments on posts I started so I missed your snide Wisconsin comment!! Badgers have sped it up in recent years if only a little. Virginny hasn’t however, so maybe the refs in my modest proposal might say next hoop wins!



  • @wissox On your first post (or anyones) click the gray box that says “not watching” it will give you the option to receive notifications. It’s nice to not receive every notification on some of the hopping threads like a game thread.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to KU Buckets was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.