Bo Hamburger
Years ago

Zach Lowe on crunchtime, aka first to a target score

Zach Lowe is always worth reading and his piece this week, on an idea about how to better end games gaining momentum, is no exception:

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23825970/zach-lowe-basketball-tournament-nba-crunch

The main premise: at a certain point in the game, shutting off the game clock and playing until one team reaches a target score.

eg: "At the first dead ball under the 4:00 mark, the clock will go dark as officials add seven points to the score of the leading team. The first team to reach that score wins. If Team A leads Team B, 78-70, when the clock stops with 3:58 left, they play until one reaches 85."

Why, that sounds very similar to an idea proposed by some learned soul right here in this forum:

https://www.hoops.com.au/forum/30613-imagine-if-basketball-was-first-to-100/

*Anything* to improve the ending of games is worth considering, and it seems some people are spending quite a bit of their time pondering how to do it. Good luck to them.

Topic #43503 | Report this topic


Anonymous  
Years ago

He's talking about this with respect to the 2 million dollar league in USA. he's not suggesting it should be implemented in the NBA or FIBA

Reply #692957 | Report this post


Isaac  
Years ago

3X3 has a target score...

Reply #692959 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Interesting idea, some Cairns matches may need to go over 2 days though lol

Reply #692963 | Report this post


Hogwash  
Years ago

Good for preseason blitz maybe.
Have each quarter go first to 20, 40,60 and 80.

Similar to a 9 point super goal in that you wouldn't implement it into mainstream season.

Reply #692966 | Report this post


Dave  
Years ago

Would be horrible for TV deals

Reply #692978 | Report this post


Melbourne Boy  
Years ago

The time of the game is the same, even Cairns, basically take whatever the score is with 4 mins left, and its first to reach whatever the score of 7 points more than the team is in front, could be 55 or could be 105.

It probably finishes faster because there are no intentional foul situations, when you're behind you just play D to get stops.

Reply #692993 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I disagree that a team that's behind in this situation would just play D to get stops. To me, if I'm playing a team that puts a poor FT shooter on the floor in an otherwise dangerous offensive lineup, I would still be intentionally fouling that guy sometimes.

This doesn't work, to me. For one, the team that's winning is highly incentivised to foul as soon as the clock ticks under 4 minutes to trigger the 7-points-to-go mark. That's a one-off intentional foul as opposed to repeated fouls of a poor FT shooter, but it's still not a basketball play. So given the predictability, why not just shorten the game by 4 minutes, and when the buzzer goes, add 7 to the leading team's score and resume?

And explain to me why I wouldn't foul - ahead or behind - when the opposing team is 3 points away from the target score? If I let them shoot, they potentially win the game without me getting the ball back. If I foul them, I'm guaranteed to get the ball back. Part of the reason that target scores work in 3x3 is that 3 pointers are only worth 2.

Add the fact that a stupid number of timeouts and replay delays are the worst thing about crunch time, and I don't see the value of this proposal. I love Zach Lowe and I'm glad someone's being creative about making end game situations more interesting, but I think it would be simpler to allow teams 1 time out each in the final two minutes and work really hard on scrapping protracted replay decisions.

Reply #693015 | Report this post


Melbourne Boy  
Years ago

Anon above...

Your point 1, the intentional foul of a poor ft shooter can be anytime in bball, regardless of this proposal.

Your point 2, a foul doesn't trigger the 7 points to go rule, its whatever the score is with 4 min to go. Fouling stops the clock and gives a team more points, no value in fouling.

You point 3, if the trailing team fouls when their opponent needs 3 points to win, it makes no sense because on the next possession they'd potentially only need 1 or 2. Fts are the most efficient type of score so analytically fouling when down 3 gives you the lowest percentage chance to win.

Your point 4, I agree the replays and timeouts are annoying, but only in the NBA, and they cut back the timeouts this season which helped.

Reply #693020 | Report this post


koberulz  
Years ago

Your point 2, a foul doesn't trigger the 7 points to go rule, its whatever the score is with 4 min to go.
No, it's the score after the first dead ball after the four minute mark. A foul would create that dead ball.

You point 3, if the trailing team fouls when their opponent needs 3 points to win, it makes no sense because on the next possession they'd potentially only need 1 or 2.
You assume they'd get another possession. If a team is one or two points away from victory and the other team is three points away with the ball, fouling is the smart option.

Reply #693021 | Report this post


Melbourne Boy  
Years ago

If it's the score after first dead ball that's different from the original proposal I read, I'll stand corrected, I think it should be first change of possession after the 4 min mark.

And to foul when your opponent needs 3 points to win rather than try and get a stop I guess thats a coaching decision, makes some sense if you only need 1 or 2 points to win yourself, but I'd accept the 1 or 2 potential fouls instead of fouling the entire last minute of a game when behind but in reach.

Personally I'd make all non shooting fouls in the last 4 mins 1 shot and possession like a tech, problem solved.

Reply #693022 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

I think it's first dead ball under 4 mins...

Reply #693028 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Thanks kobe, saved me some typing.

Sure, to foul when your opponent needs 3 is a 'coaching decision.' I think it would get made pretty frequently under the proposed rule, whereas under current rules, it's only worthwhile in a very specific situation: the leading team doing it with fewer than 4-5 seconds on the clock.

I also understand that deliberate fouling is already an issue, my point was that I don't believe this proposal addresses it more effectively than changing the penalty to, say, possession instead of FTs, or making it the fouled teams' choice what they get, or doing as Melbourne Boy suggests and making it 1 and possession.

I don't like the idea of play to a target because I don't think it addresses the problem it's designed to solve. I would rather allow teams a max of 1 time out in the last two minutes and give an offensive team that would normally have been entitled to FTs a choice between possession and shots.

Reply #693038 | Report this post


Hoopie  
Years ago

As long as there's that slim chance of getting the win by fouling in the last minutes, then it will continue. You either need to remove that slim chance completely, or penalise so hard that it’s not worth fouling, which will piss off the owners & coaches & players but improve the viewing.

While it’s great to examine different approaches, the only way I can see the current slug n zzz happening is to give an automatic basket PLUS the existing penalties, and enforce the rules accurately.

Reply #693189 | Report this post


UseTaHoop  
Years ago

Hoopie

But if the "slim chance of winning" is removed by any means, what's the point of playing out the game at all?

That “slim chance of winning” keeps people (players, coaches, spectators, tv audience) interested.

The sport needs interest maintained throughout the game and especially at the end. What it could do without is the constant breaks for foul shots in the end game. Advertisers and broadcasters love breaks at the end (hence a commercial interest to have some breaks) but too many make the end game disjointed and spoil the spectacle.

It’s always going to be an issue because basketball games are often close, with both teams being in with a chance until the final whistle.

Reply #693191 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.
Serio: Tourism photography and videography

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 10:19 pm, Tue 19 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754