Stall Ball ...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

We saw the proverbial “this isn’t getting the kids ready for college basketball” quote.

Tell me again the percentage of NFHS basketball players that go on to play college basketball?

You want 100% of schools to pay for a shot clock system and operator that will probably only play a factor in 1% of games? Ok, be my guest. But that should be a state-to-state decision, not a national mandate.

These stories make the news because they are the exception, not the rule. Stall games are not the national crisis that some claim they are.

I totally agree. This style was a choice. The defensive team could have pressured the ball and made the team play some offense.

The funny part is that people think that with a shot clock automatically a team cannot stall to some extent. They can stall in a similar way and take time off the clock. Teams in college do it all the time when they have a certain lead. Obviously, they have to shoot the ball, but just like that is a risk, holding the ball expecting a team to never play defense is also a risk.

I think the shot clock is coming. But it is not going to make the game better. It is just going to make the game rushed in many respects for many teams. So the bad shots we see now, we will see horrible shots with a shot clock.

Peace

[ilyazhito]

I disagree. I work high school games with a shot clock in DC, and I see a better product than in the non-shot clock high school games I work in VA. The shot clock allows me to more easily break the game down into smaller pieces and concentrate more on calling each piece correctly, it helps me to be more time aware in case a correction needs to be made, and there are fewer deliberate end-of-game fouls in the shot clock contests that I have worked. The shot clock is also a balancer, because the advantage is currently skewed to the offense in terms of dictating the pace of the game in games without a shot clock. With the shot clock, a neutral object dictates the pace of the game, not either team, so you won't have 40+ second possessions that are, in my experience, not usually productive. As an official, shot clocks also simplify other rules (I have a visual reference for 10-second counts, even if I might be required to make a visible count (no requirement in DC), 5-second counts on the dribble mare often eliminated in shot clock games, such as in DC), so I would be on board with it. Yes, there are incompetent tables, both with shot clocks and without shot clocks, but the shot clock will not by itself make or break the quality of the table personnel. Therefore, I believe that the shot clock would be a net positive.

[BillyMac]

While I wouldn't want to work a stall game, I do enjoy observing them.

I've worked with teenagers my entire adult life, as a teacher, a coach, a parent, and an official. It takes a very patient coach, who is good at teaching, and a special group of highly disciplined, intelligent, talented kids to run this stall offense. The coach doesn't just decide a few minutes before the game to use this strategy. He probably prepared for this game for a few practices, if not more. He gave his kids a chance to win within the rules of the game. That's his job. A job well done.

[CJP]

I witnessed a game like this once. It was very hard to watch. Because there are so little possessions, a mistake by an official is actually game changing. I think there were a few big calls that benefited the stalling team in the game I watched.

The state actually adopted the shot clock the next year and many think it was a result of this game.

As a fan, I paid to watch a basketball game. I don't care who wins most of the time, I just want to watch some ball.

As an official, I hope I never have to be a part of one. I am grateful for the shot clock.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by CJP

As a fan, I paid to watch a basketball game. I don't care who wins most of the time, I just want to watch some ball.

In most games, about half the fans want the stall ball team to win.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

In most games, about half the fans want the stall ball team to win.

Actually thinking back on it, it was the opposite in this case. The stalling team was an underdog for once. They were a private school power house. The other team was a rural school (a co-op of schools because the communities are very small). The private schools in North Dakota are not liked much by the rural schools. They have a lot of success and rural folks see the private schools location as a huge advantage because of their location and not belonging to a school district.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I disagree. I work high school games with a shot clock in DC, and I see a better product than in the non-shot clock high school games I work in VA. The shot clock allows me to more easily break the game down into smaller pieces and concentrate more on calling each piece correctly, it helps me to be more time aware in case a correction needs to be made, and there are fewer deliberate end-of-game fouls in the shot clock contests that I have worked. The shot clock is also a balancer, because the advantage is currently skewed to the offense in terms of dictating the pace of the game in games without a shot clock. With the shot clock, a neutral object dictates the pace of the game, not either team, so you won't have 40+ second possessions that are, in my experience, not usually productive. As an official, shot clocks also simplify other rules (I have a visual reference for 10-second counts, even if I might be required to make a visible count (no requirement in DC), 5-second counts on the dribble mare often eliminated in shot clock games, such as in DC), so I would be on board with it. Yes, there are incompetent tables, both with shot clocks and without shot clocks, but the shot clock will not by itself make or break the quality of the table personnel. Therefore, I believe that the shot clock would be a net positive.

Way too many big words for me in your post....tell it to me like I’m a 6th grader..��. Shot clocks simply encourage more shots.. up and down play. That is/was exciting when it’s done well. Unfortunately, I see teams rush from end to end and it’s turnover to turnover. Bad shot to bad shot. . No real offense run. If my team is truly better than yours I will pressure you everywhere. If your good enough to hold the ball vs my pressure and win 10-4 then u deserve it.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Way too many big words for me in your post....tell it to me like I’m a 6th grader..��. Shot clocks simply encourage more shots.. up and down play. That is/was exciting when it’s done well. Unfortunately, I see teams rush from end to end and it’s turnover to turnover. Bad shot to bad shot. . No real offense run. If my team is truly better than yours I will pressure you everywhere. If your good enough to hold the ball vs my pressure and win 10-4 then u deserve it.

Shot clocks help officials focus more (fringe benefit), reduce deliberate fouls in the last 4 minutes of the game, and do not allow offenses to dictate the tempo of the game by holding the ball indefinitely. The long (40+ seconds) possessions often do NOT benefit the offensive teams. Shot clocks also make it easier to administer the closely guarded and 10-second rules.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Shot clocks help officials focus more (fringe benefit), reduce deliberate fouls in the last 4 minutes of the game, and do not allow offenses to dictate the tempo of the game by holding the ball indefinitely. The long (40+ seconds) possessions often do NOT benefit the offensive teams. Shot clocks also make it easier to administer the closely guarded and 10-second rules.

No they don’t...I don’t need an extra reason to concentrate in last 4 minutes..Offenses dictate tempo if they are allowed to. If I’m more talented teami will shove ball down your throat. Offensively..and then pressure you relentlessly. If you are on offense and can dictate tempo that means my defense isn’t good enough. I don’t see well but I can count to 5 (or 8) or 10 (or 12)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... but the shot clock will not by itself make or break the quality of the table personnel..

I don't think you have enough experience to make that assessment.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think the shot clock is coming.

Disagree...between the additional expense (it would have to be 100% adoption state wide. That’s a MASSIVE investment in my state) and the heightened need for qualified table personnel, I don’t think it will happen any time soon.

The truth is that “stall ball” is employed ina tiny percentage of games. It only gets discussed (the need for a shot clock) because of sensationalized headlines and social media hype.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

Disagree...between the additional expense (it would have to be 100% adoption state wide. That’s a MASSIVE investment in my state) and the heightened need for qualified table personnel, I don’t think it will happen any time soon.

The truth is that “stall ball” is employed ina tiny percentage of games. It only gets discussed (the need for a shot clock) because of sensationalized headlines and social media hype.

Massive investment? North and South Dakota are about as conservative as they come. If both of those states can make the change, any state can do it. Finding table personal has also been a challenge that is not really challenging. I have officiated in some very small, rural, communities and they get it done.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by CJP

Massive investment? North and South Dakota are about as conservative as they come. If both of those states can make the change, any state can do it. Finding table personal has also been a challenge that is not really challenging. I have officiated in some very small, rural, communities and they get it done.

North and South Dakota are also as sparsely populated as they come. I’m in Florida...there has to be THOUSANDS of high schools here so I think it would be a massive investment.

Maybe it’s our distracted student population or (lack of) basketball popularity, but table personnel are VERY challenging here. A shot clock will not help our cause in my opinion.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

North and South Dakota are also as sparsely populated as they come. I’m in Florida...there has to be THOUSANDS of high schools here so I think it would be a massive investment.

Maybe it’s our distracted student population or (lack of) basketball popularity, but table personnel are VERY challenging here. A shot clock will not help our cause in my opinion.

I know one school paid about $7500 (installed) for new shot clock equipment. It is not that expensive.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by CJP

I know one school paid about $7500 (installed) for new shot clock equipment. It is not that expensive.

That is more than I will make officiating for the entire season!
So it would more than double a school’s expense for basketball. In other words the school could pay for all of the officials for the entire season for less than that amount.

Not likely that shot clocks are coming.