Shot Clock Success

[HowieT3]

I agree that it was a success. It definitely accomplished the goal I always wanted, taking away the judgement call as to whether a team was stalling. The only change I would make is to go to 60 seconds on the reset, like basketball now goes to 20 seconds instead of a full 30-second shot clock after an offensive rebound. We're never going to eliminate the offense/defense substitutions without making enforcement unwieldy (I'll be kind), so people should let that one go.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I agree that it was a success. It definitely accomplished the goal I always wanted, taking away the judgement call as to whether a team was stalling. The only change I would make is to go to 60 seconds on the reset, like basketball now goes to 20 seconds instead of a full 30-second shot clock after an offensive rebound. We're never going to eliminate the offense/defense substitutions without making enforcement unwieldy (I'll be kind), so people should let that one go.

PLl and MLL makes subs. The 1980s isn’t coming back. BTW, there were subs back then. On the horn b

[HowieT3]

I agree that it was a success. It definitely accomplished the goal I always wanted, taking away the judgement call as to whether a team was stalling. The only change I would make is to go to 60 seconds on the reset, like basketball now goes to 20 seconds instead of a full 30-second shot clock after an offensive rebound. We're never going to eliminate the offense/defense substitutions without making enforcement unwieldy (I'll be kind), so people should let that one go.

PLl and MLL makes subs. The 1980s isn’t coming back. BTW, there were subs back then. On the horn b

Of course there were subs on the horn back in the day. I really liked the rule change that only allowed horns when the ball went over the sideline. There were like, what, 4 or 5 such opportunities at most each game? People on LP used to act like the horn blew every other whistle when that just wasn't so.

[ABV 8.3%]

Anyone have access to overall shot clock violation statistics. You would figure a "governing" body would want to track the success, or lack of, for the shot clock. n$aa lacrosse stats has no such cat. for shot clock violations. Liet's put a new rule in place and NOT track it. This is the group the educators hand money too. Brilliant.

I don't see where any of this matters, the eye test tells us the pace of the game is much better with the hard clock. Trust three people to pack my chute, you ain't one of them Clears are attempted with a much greater sense of urgency but the same 20 seconds to get to.......so what changed? coaching than they were prior to the clock which has sped the game up, and while the clock still leaves plenty of time for different kinds of offenses, it doesn't let you screw around nearly as long as you could pre clock era (depending on where you were in the game timewise...the subjectivity sucked).
Don't think there's any question that it's easier to use the clock to your advantage as the game is winding down with the hard clock either, and I don't have any problem with that. Clock management is part of a lot of games and it's okay (with me) that it's part of lacrosse too. Coaches can practice their strategies knowing how much time they have and fans (players too) aren't in the dark as to how long before the thirty second "clock" (counted down by the ref...not too much consistency there) comes on. The clock is all good in my book (again, I'd have no problem with the sixty second reset...gives you less stall time as the game is counting down...but I'm good with the way it is too). My two cents.

our freshest memories.........we are treated to the BEST, by far, post season Div. I lacrosse run in history......in terms of competitive games. (how many OT;s ) So, yeah, eye ball test says..........it worked.
Did it?

Again, you ain't packing my chute, so what is wrong with some data to back up the shot clock worked wikipedia page?

Could it just not be an alignment, speaking of last season, including the "play in " games, league tourneys games, mostly all very competitive....of the shot clock stars. Parity . (what happened to all those ZONE whiners )

was the shot clock the placebo Div. I coaches needed to loosen the reigns and let the boys play ?

[DMac]

Anyone have access to overall shot clock violation statistics. You would figure a "governing" body would want to track the success, or lack of, for the shot clock. n$aa lacrosse stats has no such cat. for shot clock violations. Liet's put a new rule in place and NOT track it. This is the group the educators hand money too. Brilliant.

I don't see where any of this matters, the eye test tells us the pace of the game is much better with the hard clock. Trust three people to pack my chute, you ain't one of them Clears are attempted with a much greater sense of urgency but the same 20 seconds to get to.......so what changed? coaching than they were prior to the clock which has sped the game up, and while the clock still leaves plenty of time for different kinds of offenses, it doesn't let you screw around nearly as long as you could pre clock era (depending on where you were in the game timewise...the subjectivity sucked).
Don't think there's any question that it's easier to use the clock to your advantage as the game is winding down with the hard clock either, and I don't have any problem with that. Clock management is part of a lot of games and it's okay (with me) that it's part of lacrosse too. Coaches can practice their strategies knowing how much time they have and fans (players too) aren't in the dark as to how long before the thirty second "clock" (counted down by the ref...not too much consistency there) comes on. The clock is all good in my book (again, I'd have no problem with the sixty second reset...gives you less stall time as the game is counting down...but I'm good with the way it is too). My two cents.

our freshest memories.........we are treated to the BEST, by far, post season Div. I lacrosse run in history......in terms of competitive games. (how many OT;s ) So, yeah, eye ball test says..........it worked.
Did it?
Yes, it not only worked, it worked bigly. There were several people opposed to a shot clock coming to the game, I was one of them. What the possession clock did for the wlax game brought my thinking around one-eighty. I thought the ninety second clock would do the same for the men's game that it did for the women's and it has, IMO, (am good with the eighty seconds too). The pace of the wlax game is what sold me, the game itself didn't really change very much. Same with the men's game, IMO. The only thing that's different is that you can't phartt around as much as you once could. Am pretty sure there's not one who was opposed who hasn't changed their mind after giving it the eye test. Doesn't matter what the stats say, they like what they see.

Again, you ain't packing my chute, so what is wrong with some data to back up the shot clock worked wikipedia page?
Nope, no chute packin. Bet you'd trust me rollin' a fatty though.
Aint nothin' wrong with making another column in the Wiki page to put some (more) stats numbers in.
What are we backing up? That we know we're seeing a better game?

Could it just not be an alignment, speaking of last season, including the "play in " games, league tourneys games, mostly all very competitive....of the shot clock stars. Parity . (what happened to all those ZONE whiners )


was the shot clock the placebo Div. I coaches needed to loosen the reigns and let the boys play ?
My answer to this would be yes. Another reason for the high eye test results.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Anyone have access to overall shot clock violation statistics. You would figure a "governing" body would want to track the success, or lack of, for the shot clock. n$aa lacrosse stats has no such cat. for shot clock violations. Liet's put a new rule in place and NOT track it. This is the group the educators hand money too. Brilliant.

I don't see where any of this matters, the eye test tells us the pace of the game is much better with the hard clock. Trust three people to pack my chute, you ain't one of them Clears are attempted with a much greater sense of urgency but the same 20 seconds to get to.......so what changed? coaching than they were prior to the clock which has sped the game up, and while the clock still leaves plenty of time for different kinds of offenses, it doesn't let you screw around nearly as long as you could pre clock era (depending on where you were in the game timewise...the subjectivity sucked).
Don't think there's any question that it's easier to use the clock to your advantage as the game is winding down with the hard clock either, and I don't have any problem with that. Clock management is part of a lot of games and it's okay (with me) that it's part of lacrosse too. Coaches can practice their strategies knowing how much time they have and fans (players too) aren't in the dark as to how long before the thirty second "clock" (counted down by the ref...not too much consistency there) comes on. The clock is all good in my book (again, I'd have no problem with the sixty second reset...gives you less stall time as the game is counting down...but I'm good with the way it is too). My two cents.

our freshest memories.........we are treated to the BEST, by far, post season Div. I lacrosse run in history......in terms of competitive games. (how many OT;s ) So, yeah, eye ball test says..........it worked.
Did it?
Yes, it not only worked, it worked bigly. There were several people opposed to a shot clock coming to the game, I was one of them. What the possession clock did for the wlax game brought my thinking around one-eighty. I thought the ninety second clock would do the same for the men's game that it did for the women's and it has, IMO, (am good with the eighty seconds too). The pace of the wlax game is what sold me, the game itself didn't really change very much. Same with the men's game, IMO. The only thing that's different is that you can't phartt around as much as you once could. Am pretty sure there's not one who was opposed who hasn't changed their mind after giving it the eye test. Doesn't matter what the stats say, they like what they see.

Again, you ain't packing my chute, so what is wrong with some data to back up the shot clock worked wikipedia page?
Nope, no chute packin. Bet you'd trust me rollin' a fatty though.
Aint nothin' wrong with making another column in the Wiki page to put some (more) stats numbers in.
What are we backing up? That we know we're seeing a better game?

Could it just not be an alignment, speaking of last season, including the "play in " games, league tourneys games, mostly all very competitive....of the shot clock stars. Parity . (what happened to all those ZONE whiners )


was the shot clock the placebo Div. I coaches needed to loosen the reigns and let the boys play ?
My answer to this would be yes. Another reason for the high eye test results.

I did not want a 60 second shot clock. 80 seconds turned out to be fine. More turnovers in the clearing game provided more unsettled play as a hard ride ate into the shot clock. Better risk/return. With late possession restarts, teams packed it in and shot quality was low. The game was fine. I don’t see a need to keep making changes. Leave the shorter clock for the pros.

[billylax]

Slower play = Longer possessions = Outside shooting = BORING

Quicker shot clocks = More passing = Inside shooting = More goals = Exciting

The shot clock at 80 changed the math but not the scoring algorithm. We’ve forgotten that Lacrosse is fundamentally a transition game where the objective is asymmetrical advantage. The evolution and primacy of superior athletic dodging characteristics shifted the priority to a settled offensive game where static balance and symmetry became the desired end state.
The Objective should always be to disrupt not balance, and a quicker shot clock requires faster decisions, more movement and greater creativity. Continue to lower the initial clock time and the subsequent resets which will cause increased transition rates and creative offensive movement.

[DMac]

Welcome aboard, billylax.

The evolution and primacy of superior athletic dodging characteristics shifted the priority to a settled offensive game where static balance and symmetry became the desired end state.

Is this a very fancy way of saying the evolution of the stick to one that has a bag with "sick hold" that gives the O player a huge advantage has completely disrupted the balance of the game? It's the perverted stick, far more than any athlete with "superior athletic dodging characteristics", that slowed the game down and allowed for the over coached game we watched in the very recent past. Kind of a sad state of affairs when the girl's game is a faster game which brings us more and prettier passing as well as more running than the men's game...and it does. Bring those sticks to the men's game and we'll see about those superior athletic dodging characteristics...you'll no longer be bulling your way through three defenders, rolling on the turf, and coming up with the ball still in your stick if you do that.
The eighty second clock is perfect, IMO, no need to change it at all (again, am okay with the sixty second reset). There's also a beauty and flow to lacrosse and the current clock still allows for that, I don't want to see it turned into a rushed game which is nothing but chaos and the more you cut the clock back, the more you'll see that. We're fine where we are, time to leave the game alone.

[Oldbarndog]

Under two minutes in the half (both), reduced to 40?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Under two minutes in the half (both), reduced to 40?

No more changes. It’s artificial.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Welcome aboard, billylax.

The evolution and primacy of superior athletic dodging characteristics shifted the priority to a settled offensive game where static balance and symmetry became the desired end state.

Is this a very fancy way of saying the evolution of the stick to one that has a bag with "sick hold" that gives the O player a huge advantage has completely disrupted the balance of the game? It's the perverted stick, far more than any athlete with "superior athletic dodging characteristics", that slowed the game down and allowed for the over coached game we watched in the very recent past. Kind of a sad state of affairs when the girl's game is a faster game which brings us more and prettier passing as well as more running than the men's game...and it does. Bring those sticks to the men's game and we'll see about those superior athletic dodging characteristics...you'll no longer be bulling your way through three defenders, rolling on the turf, and coming up with the ball still in your stick if you do that.
The eighty second clock is perfect, IMO, no need to change it at all (again, am okay with the sixty second reset). There's also a beauty and flow to lacrosse and the current clock still allows for that, I don't want to see it turned into a rushed game which is nothing but chaos and the more you cut the clock back, the more you'll see that. We're fine where we are, time to leave the game alone.

I don’t like the short and running clock in the PLL. The game is rushed and disjointed and the caliber of player is much higher than college. Leave the college game alone. Nobody in college basketball wants it to look like the pro game. Too fast and the skill is much higher.

[Cooter]

Under two minutes in the half (both), reduced to 40?

I would really just like to see the old "keep it in rule" applied in end of the game situations - just to give the defense some chance at getting the ball away.

I am for the idea of just getting 60 seconds if the offense regains possession.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I don’t remember watching one game and thinking the reset to 80 is really slowing down the game.