Another MN state boys basketball miracle

[Armchair_QB]

I have mixed feelings about the shot clock at the high school level, but I find it equally ridiculous that some coaches will have their players just stand there with the ball for four minutes at a time... and I read one example in which that happened in the second quarter.

Running an offense designed to burn the clock can certainly be good strategy and it can be exciting to watch if the other team plays good defense, because there's anticipation that they might force a turnover, or the other team might find a teammate wide open and get an easy shot.

The best thing for opposing coaches to do is to send their best defender up to the kid holding the ball, or just say "heck with it" and have two kids come up for a trap, thus forcing the one holding the ball to make a decision. Just because one coach instructs a kid to hold the ball and stand there, doesn't mean the other coach is obligated to keep his players away from him.

Yeah, stall ball is as much the defensive team's fault as the offensive team.

 

[fossywriter8]

D-3 Fan,
I graduated from Danville in 1987. The next year, Danville lost a sectional game 10-7 to Van Buren. The alma mater, which went in out-gunned and out-manned, ran stall ball the whole game and missed a 3 at the buzzer.
From what I heard afterward, the opponent's crowd went berserk all game long.

 

[pressboxer]

Had a girls game a few years ago where the home team jumped out 10-0 in the first two minutes. When the visiting team finally got the ball across midcourt without turning it over, that coach ordered his players to hold it for the rest of the quarter.

"God damnit, we'll just get beat 10-0!"

 

[Small Town Guy]

Postscript: Hopkins lost tonight in one of the best state finals in recent Minnesota history -- 84-82, missing a 3 at the buzzer. Hopkins was up four with 20 seconds. Kid hit a 3 and got fouled. Missed the FT but the team got the offensive board and scored to take the lead. Kid who's going to Xavier had 43 for the victors.

See, Minnesota has exciting hoops.

 

[hondo]

Sometimes, the cowards inherit the earth.

You should do that if you think you are absolutely outgunned, out(wo)manned and outtalented, and you believe that every shot, every pass and every rebound which happens in the game increases the chance you are going to lose.

I guess if I were a coach I'd rather not believe that was the case.

Another motivation is to cut the actual time of the game involved in actual competitive play down to an absolute bare minimum so the game will not be decided on the performances of your players but on some brilliant telepathic stroke of strategic genius dreamed up by you, Hoopie Wan-Kenobi, Jedi Basketball Guru.

If this Hopkins team was such a powerhouse and averaging 90 points a game, why would they want to hold the ball?

 

[LongTimeListener]

f this Hopkins team was such a powerhouse and averaging 90 points a game, why would they want to hold the ball?

I am guessing Hopking wanted to draw the defense out to give its better one-on-one players some space, and the other team didn't go for that and stayed packed in, and at that point it became a deck-measuring contest between the coaches.

 

[93Devil]

I covered a game nice where the visitors, who had not lost a conference game for a decade, were on the road and won the tip for three straight overtimes and held the ball for the last shot against knee-to-knee man to man d each time. In the fourth OT the AAA visitors won the tip and the hosts fouled just so they could get the ball.

Visiting Blackhawk would up winning in 5 OTs, and it was the most amazing thing I had ever seen. Al Campman, the coach of the visitors, was weeping like his child just died after the game. If you know the history of these two schools and ever saw Campman in action, you would appreciate this more.

But holding the ball is so impressive.

 

[Small Town Guy]

f this Hopkins team was such a powerhouse and averaging 90 points a game, why would they want to hold the ball?

I am guessing Hopking wanted to draw the defense out to give its better one-on-one players some space, and the other team didn't go for that and stayed packed in, and at that point it became a deck-measuring contest between the coaches.

From what I've read I think this is probably the most accurate reason.

 

[Starman]

I covered a game nice where the visitors, who had not lost a conference game for a decade, were on the road and won the tip for three straight overtimes and held the ball for the last shot against knee-to-knee man to man d each time. In the fourth OT the AAA visitors won the tip and the hosts fouled just so they could get the ball.

Visiting Blackhawk would up winning in 5 OTs, and it was the most amazing thing I had ever seen. Al Campman, the coach of the visitors, was weeping like his child just died after the game. If you know the history of these two schools and ever saw Campman in action, you would appreciate this more.

But holding the ball is so impressive.

1. If you have a 10-year conference winning streak, it's extremely safe to assume you probably have a decisive raw-talent advantage over almost all opponents.

2. If you win the tip and they are in a tight man defense, that talent advantage should come to the fore.

3. If you stall anyway, you deserve to weep after the end of the game -- at your own stupidity.

 

[93Devil]

I covered a game nice where the visitors, who had not lost a conference game for a decade, were on the road and won the tip for three straight overtimes and held the ball for the last shot against knee-to-knee man to man d each time. In the fourth OT the AAA visitors won the tip and the hosts fouled just so they could get the ball.

Visiting Blackhawk would up winning in 5 OTs, and it was the most amazing thing I had ever seen. Al Campman, the coach of the visitors, was weeping like his child just died after the game. If you know the history of these two schools and ever saw Campman in action, you would appreciate this more.

But holding the ball is so impressive.

1. If you have a 10-year conference winning streak, it's extremely safe to assume you probably have a decisive raw-talent advantage over almost all opponents.

2. If you win the tip and they are in a tight man defense, that talent advantage should come to the fore.

3. If you stall anyway, you deserve to weep after the end of the game -- at your own stupidity.

Losing coach was crying, and if you know you gave last shot in OT and will either win or play another OT, you take that every time.

And they were not substantially better talent wise. This was the second highest class in PA playing the number two team in the conference.

 

[Starman]

Um, OK, it was kinda unclear from the original post which coach was weeping.

Personally, I don't think you stall unless you think you have an across-the-board talent disadvantage at almost every position; if talent is relatively equal, you play basketball, and resolve to execute better, be in better condition, make more shots and grab more loose balls (rebounds, steals).

Then you get into the real deck-measuring contest.