I need someone to anticipate the two changes coming in this year and how Pitt must adapt

[daytonpanther]

We know the 30 second is in and the extended arc (4 feet?). I expect this will make it a more open game which allows higher guard advantages. 30 second allows for teams to work more quickly and likely score more points or possessions per game. Am I thinking about this right? What other things will result from the changes.

Better question is how will it impact our game. Robinson is a slower guard and we typically are running pick plays which may take some time to develop. IMHO a slasher is a needed constant if nothing else but to create shots as the shot clock is running down.\

Appreciate other thoughts. Can't wait till Gannon in a week.

 

[daytonpanther]

Just read PPG online and saw the article but still appreciate thoughts.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The 30 second shot clock isn't going to have much impact at all. The women have played with the 30 second clock for years, and when you watch one of their games it's barely noticeable. In fact on more than one occasion over the years I have heard people sitting around me wondering why the shot clock was only resetting back to 30 instead of 35. What makes that funny is that every time it's happened it was in the second half when the question got asked, which means that the people watching the game didn't even know there was a 30 second shot clock until after watching live (as opposed to on television) more than one half of the game.

The notion that has been express on numerous occasions that teams are going to have trouble getting into and running their offenses because the shot clock has five less seconds on it will prove to be incorrect.

The change that will impact the game is if they call fouls on physical play like they claim they are going to. Or at least it will impact the game if they follow through on it, unlike a couple years ago when they said they were going to do it and then stopped after about six weeks into the season.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

The 30 second shot clock isn't going to have much impact at all. The women have played with the 30 second clock for years, and when you watch one of their games it's barely noticeable. In fact on more than one occasion over the years I have heard people sitting around me wondering why the shot clock was only resetting back to 30 instead of 35. What makes that funny is that every time it's happened it was in the second half when the question got asked, which means that the people watching the game didn't even know there was a 30 second shot clock until after watching live (as opposed to on television) more than one half of the game.

The notion that has been express on numerous occasions that teams are going to have trouble getting into and running their offenses because the shot clock has five less seconds on it will prove to be incorrect.

The change that will impact the game is if they call fouls on physical play like they claim they are going to. Or at least it will impact the game if they follow through on it, unlike a couple years ago when they said they were going to do it and then stopped after about six weeks into the season.

Agree with all of this. The whole "team X just passes the ball around and chucks up a shot with 5 seconds left on the clock" is a cognitive bias. It annoys people or confirms their beliefs, so the rare times it happen tend to stick out more clearly and become more easily recalled.

From media members who have gone to practices, more teams are applying token pressure and then dropping into zones to deal with the new rules. I wouldn't expect much to change beyond that.

 

[DC_Area_Panther]

The 30 second shot clock isn't going to have much impact at all. The women have played with the 30 second clock for years, and when you watch one of their games it's barely noticeable. In fact on more than one occasion over the years I have heard people sitting around me wondering why the shot clock was only resetting back to 30 instead of 35. What makes that funny is that every time it's happened it was in the second half when the question got asked, which means that the people watching the game didn't even know there was a 30 second shot clock until after watching live (as opposed to on television) more than one half of the game.

The notion that has been express on numerous occasions that teams are going to have trouble getting into and running their offenses because the shot clock has five less seconds on it will prove to be incorrect.

The change that will impact the game is if they call fouls on physical play like they claim they are going to. Or at least it will impact the game if they follow through on it, unlike a couple years ago when they said they were going to do it and then stopped after about six weeks into the season.

I absolutely agree. IMO, it really won't increase possessions appreciably and it certainly won't increase scoring as the rules committee dunderheads imagine it should or will. Most teams were already shooting almost every possession in less than 30 seconds (even Pitt!). It may also help the defense a little on a few possessions that run longish since it is easier to guard for 30 vs 35 secs. The only way to really increase scoring is to shoot FT's on every foul including the current non-shooting variety (like what was done up through at least the mid-1960s). Having additional 1-shot fouls per game/per team (max of 6 per half) would increase scoring about 5-12 points per game/per team. A shorter shot clock does nothing. Reality is counter-intuitive to what s hoped/intended, IMHO.

 

[Harve74]

Agree with all of this. The whole "team X just passes the ball around and chucks up a shot with 5 seconds left on the clock" is a cognitive bias. It annoys people or confirms their beliefs, so the rare times it happen tend to stick out more clearly and become more easily recalled.

From media members who have gone to practices, more teams are applying token pressure and then dropping into zones to deal with the new rules. I wouldn't expect much to change beyond that.

Well, Pitt played more zone in the Blue-Gold scrimmage than usual, but that's probably to be expected with an influx of new guys in the rotation.

 

[IamHeisenberg]

We know the 30 second is in and the extended arc (4 feet?). I expect this will make it a more open game which allows higher guard advantages. 30 second allows for teams to work more quickly and likely score more points or possessions per game. Am I thinking about this right? What other things will result from the changes.

Better question is how will it impact our game. Robinson is a slower guard and we typically are running pick plays which may take some time to develop. IMHO a slasher is a needed constant if nothing else but to create shots as the shot clock is running down.\

Appreciate other thoughts. Can't wait till Gannon in a week.

I agree with Coach Boeheim. The shot clock won't mean much since most teams do chuck it up early anyway. For us, it will probably mean a little more speed in getting it across the line but I don't see us giving up our deliberate offense.

As the articles have said its the enforcement of the hand checking by the refs that would make a difference. A little concerned with DIxon supposedly saying we will be getting back to Pitt basketball that this could mean a lot of fouls called on us.

 

[DC_Area_Panther]

I agree with Coach Boeheim. The shot clock won't mean much since most teams do chuck it up early anyway. For us, it will probably mean a little more speed in getting it across the line but I don't see us giving up our deliberate offense.

As the articles have said its the enforcement of the hand checking by the refs that would make a difference. A little concerned with DIxon supposedly saying we will be getting back to Pitt basketball that this could mean a lot of fouls called on us.

"A little concerned with DIxon supposedly saying we will be getting back to Pitt basketball that this could mean a lot of fouls called on us."

I think that it will cut both ways. I don't think we will foul a whole lot more than anyone else. If the rule is enforced everyone will be fouling more. No one is going to simply play "matador defense" IMO. In any event, we now have enough roster depth that getting in foul trouble is much less of a concern than it would have been last season.

In any event, IMHO, the rule (If strictly enforced) has great potential for a negative effect on competitiveness in college basketball. It could give more of an advantage to the most talented teams (Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, etc (who don't have to cheat to recruit the best talent) and to those shadier programs that make crooked deals with AAU "handlers" to get talent. The result would be many fewer "Cinderella" teams as the more talented teams are given an unneeded greater advantage than they already enjoy. I hope that doesn't happen.