What rule changes do you want to see?

[dviss1]

This may be mentioned, but players gain possession on their tippy toes and call time out before falling out of bounds. That's fun to see, which is why I watch basketball.

Or they are hurt or who knows, maybe they see something the coach doesn't.

The coaches should have a button to use if you can't hear them. At any point they have a time out and the ball, the button would light up, if they push it everything stops.

In HS/college if you're falling out of bounds you can't call for time. And just like a coach can tell his player to run a play they can tell a player to call for time.

 

[oldfisherman]

More specifically, move "offensive player initiated contact" to the non-call category. If you hip check a driving player, that should still be a foul, but shit like you talk about should be a non-call. That said, it'd probably reduce guard effectiveness and we just invested a quarter of a billion dollars in two guards...

Your wording is better than mine, and closer to what I meant.

But, our guards do not draw that many fouls. Free throw attempts per game;
Dame is #17 (6.3 PG) last season,
Mason #48 ( 3.96),
CJ #89 (2.99).

If you go by free throw attempts per minutes played, Ed Davies has more than CJ.

Guess I am tired of watching Harden score so many points off of this silly blocking rule.

 

[dviss1]

Eliminate blocking fouls.

Get rid of fouls that reward an offensive player for lowering his shoulder and plowing over a defender just because the defender's "feet weren't set".

Jesus guys....

Your feet don't have to be set to draw a charge. You can be moving.

I wanted to THROW something at Rice every time he said "he wasn't set".

Very common misconception.

 

[dviss1]

Every time a player flops, he should be fitted with a 2.5 pound ankle weight on each ankle. The next flop, take half a pound from one ankle weight at move it to the other. Next, move one pound in the other direction.

Hate Beirdo all you want it's not his fault. It's the referee's fault who rewards the flop.

 

[riverman]

Jesus guys....

Your feet don't have to be set to draw a charge. You can be moving.

I wanted to THROW something at Rice every time he said "he wasn't set".

Very common misconception.

So what you're saying is you wouldn't change a thing in the NBA rule book?

 

[BlazerWookee]

Hate Beirdo all you want it's not his fault. It's the referee's fault who rewards the flop.

Then make the refs wear the ankle weights!

 

[dviss1]

I'm really not trying to be condescending when I say this:

There's lots some of you don't know.

Foul: Illegal contact that disrupts a players BSRQ. Balance, Speed, Rhythm, Quickness.

 

[oldfisherman]

Under the basket, inside the semi-circle, the defenders feet do not need to be set.
Outside the semi-circle, defenders get called for a blocking foul if their feet are not set.

 

[dviss1]

So what you're saying is you wouldn't change a thing in the NBA rule book?

There's not a lot I'd change. Above I said I'd make it so only players could call time. I'd also change goaltending to the FIBA rule. I'd have to think deeper but I wouldn't change a lot. I'd change nothing about the rules of illegal contact.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Your wording is better than mine, and closer to what I meant.

But, our guards do not draw that many fouls. Free throw attempts per game;
Dame is #17 (6.3 PG) last season,
Mason #48 ( 3.96),
CJ #89 (2.99).

If you go by free throw attempts per minutes played, Ed Davies has more than CJ.

Guess I am tired of watching Harden score so many points off of this silly blocking rule.

What. you have Mason, as in Mason Plumlee as our guard?
Or your just listing our highest on the roster period?

 

[oldfisherman]

What. you have Mason, as in Mason Plumlee as our guard?
Or your just listing our highest on the roster period?

The rankings are for all NBA players regardless of position, not just guards. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[dviss1]

The one that has been mentioned the most--and that I certainly think makes perfect sense--is only resetting the shot clock to 14 on offensive rebounds. We already do that on kickballs and on non-shooting fouls. I see no reason not to apply the 14 second clock to any situation in which possession doesn't actually change teams.

I disagree. Then you punish the team for working hard for offensive boards. If you do something good you should be rewarded. This IMHO would lead to worse shot percentages.

 

[BBert]

Some of you guys have never refereed a basketball game.

ONLY players should be allowed to call time outs. I'd take that right away from the coaches (coaches can inform their players to call them. They do it all the time.) Here's why:

It is EXTREMELY hard to hear a coach (especially when they call ignorant-ass plays like "5 out") call for time out when the stadium/gym is packed and extremely loud. I have to focus on competitive play while this IDIOT coach holds his hand like a letter T without verbalizing his time out. Not all coaches have loud voices. Lots of ladies who coach don't either.

Only players should be able to. We are focused on them like a laser and they will always be heard.

Good points.

Would you be OK with it if only coaches could call a time out and they could ONLY call a time out during a dead ball, and not during live play?

 

[dviss1]

Your wording is better than mine, and closer to what I meant.

But, our guards do not draw that many fouls. Free throw attempts per game;
Dame is #17 (6.3 PG) last season,
Mason #48 ( 3.96),
CJ #89 (2.99).

If you go by free throw attempts per minutes played, Ed Davies has more than CJ.

Guess I am tired of watching Harden score so many points off of this silly blocking rule.

This just sounds silly. It's not the rule that creates this at all. It's out of position referees and referees who thusly call outside of their primary area of responsibility that created the flopping problem. Notice how it isn't a problem at the NCAA/NFHS level?

 

[dviss1]

Good points.

Would you be OK with it if only coaches could call a time out and they could ONLY call a time out during a dead ball, and not during live play?

This would be the best compromise.

This is genius.

 

[dviss1]

Under the basket, inside the semi-circle, the defenders feet do not need to be set.
Outside the semi-circle, defenders get called for a blocking foul if their feet are not set.

Frankly, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[BBert]

There's not a lot I'd change. Above I said I'd make it so only players could call time. I'd also change goaltending to the FIBA rule. I'd have to think deeper but I wouldn't change a lot. I'd change nothing about the rules of illegal contact.

But clearly, you'd actually enforce them properly. That would be a change.

 

[dviss1]

But clearly, you'd actually enforce them properly. That would be a change.

I'm a purist.

 

[dviss1]

I don't know if any of you get out and watch any Varsity HS games. But I'd be happy to post my schedule. Any of you feel free to come watch me work.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I don't know if any of you get out and watch any Varsity HS games. But I'd be happy to post my schedule. Any of you feel free to come watch me work.

I would, especially if Madison High is involved.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I disagree. Then you punish the team for working hard for offensive boards. If you do something good you should be rewarded. This IMHO would lead to worse shot percentages.

How is that a punishment? You honestly don't think 14 seconds is enough to get a decent shot up after an offensive rebound?

I'd really be curious to see what the average clock usage time is on second-chance shots, and the percentages thereon. I'd wager that shortening the clock would have a negligible effect on shooting percentages, but would (as BC suggested) increase overall possessions, and thereby shots, scoring, and overall action.

 

[dviss1]

How is that a punishment? You honestly don't think 14 seconds is enough to get a decent shot up after an offensive rebound?

Nope. You get the rebound. If you don't have an immediate putback you kick it out. Now your down to 10-11 seconds. Just time for a bad shot.

Conversely, if your opponent gets the o-board, the defense should be penalized by having to play defense for another 20-24 secs. It's really on averge like 6 seconds we'd save for every o-board.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

How is that a punishment? You honestly don't think 14 seconds is enough to get a decent shot up after an offensive rebound?

I'd really be curious to see what the average clock usage time is on second-chance shots, and the percentages thereon. I'd wager that shortening the clock would have a negligible effect on shooting percentages, but would (as BC suggested) increase overall possessions, and thereby shots, scoring, and overall action.

Actually, I'd call for a small overhaul of the entire shotclock: it shouldn't reset to 14 on a half-court possession (i.e., when a foul occurs and play resets with the same team holding possession), it should reset to 16 (14 is a holdover from the "10 seconds to get over the half court line" era). Now, with that set up, I'd make any shot clock resets that result in the offensive team retaining the ball in their half of the court result in 16 seconds because there's no need to go back over half court.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Nope. You get the rebound. If you don't have an immediate putback you kick it out. Now your down to 10-11 seconds. Just time for a bad shot.

Conversely, if your opponent gets the o-board, the defense should be penalized by having to play defense for another 20-24 secs. It's really on averge like 6 seconds we'd save for every o-board.

But the reset to 14 vs 24 had to do with being in your half of the court already (the 10 seconds being reserved to get over half court). If you kick it out, you have the same amount of time as an inbound after a stoppage foul.

 

[dviss1]

How is that a punishment? You honestly don't think 14 seconds is enough to get a decent shot up after an offensive rebound?

I'd really be curious to see what the average clock usage time is on second-chance shots, and the percentages thereon. I'd wager that shortening the clock would have a negligible effect on shooting percentages, but would (as BC suggested) increase overall possessions, and thereby shots, scoring, and overall action.

Meh. How many offensive boards are there a game? Not enough to institute this great of a change. This doesn't fix a problem. And of it ain't broke....

 

[oldfisherman]

http://videorulebook.nba.com/archive/blocking-ra-play-defenders-foot-is-on-the-arc-line/

 

[Orion Bailey]

How is that a punishment? You honestly don't think 14 seconds is enough to get a decent shot up after an offensive rebound?

I'd really be curious to see what the average clock usage time is on second-chance shots, and the percentages thereon. I'd wager that shortening the clock would have a negligible effect on shooting percentages, but would (as BC suggested) increase overall possessions, and thereby shots, scoring, and overall action.

Nope. You get the rebound. If you don't have an immediate putback you kick it out. Now your down to 10-11 seconds. Just time for a bad shot.

Conversely, if your opponent gets the o-board, the defense should be penalized by having to play defense for another 20-24 secs. It's really on averge like 6 seconds we'd save for every o-board.

Actually, I'd call for a small overhaul of the entire shotclock: it shouldn't reset to 14 on a half-court possession (i.e., when a foul occurs and play resets with the same team holding possession), it should reset to 16 (14 is a holdover from the "10 seconds to get over the half court line" era). Now, with that set up, I'd make any shot clock resets that result in the offensive team retaining the ball in their half of the court result in 16 seconds because there's no need to go back over half court.

Beat me to it. Compromise. 16 seconds. Your allowed 8 in the backcourt, so give them the 16, not 24.

 

[dviss1]

But the reset to 14 vs 24 had to do with being in your half of the court already (the 10 seconds being reserved to get over half court). If you kick it out, you have the same amount of time as an inbound after a stoppage foul.

It doesn't address a problem. This is making a rule for the sake of making one.

Rule changes should fix problems.

JUST like I predicted: The flopping fines didn't fix one thing. It did exactly what I said the new rule would do. It created a new revenue stream for the NBA.

 

[dviss1]

Beat me to it. Compromise. 16 seconds. Your allowed 8 in the backcourt, so give them the 16, not 24.

It doesn't address a problem. This is not fixing anything.

 

[Natebishop3]

Honestly, I love the way the game is designed.

It's the politics that piss me off. The favoritism towards star players. Get rid of that shit, and the game will flourish. I don't want to see James Harden shoot 25 free throws in a game. That's the one thing that I appreciate most about the Olympics is watching refs simply not give a shit who you are or what team you play for.