#14 Wichita State @ Missouri State Official Game Thread

[giskard]

I thought 3G's buyout as of the new 2013 contract was in the neighborhood of $500K, decreasing each year of the contract's life?

Am I getting wires crossed here with regards to terminology? I mean if his buyout was $12M, we would have nothing to worry about when it comes to the coaching carousel. 3G would have effectively said as much through the stroke of a pen.

It depends on which buyout you are talking about. The buyout you are referring to is the buyout if another school was to hire him away.

If a school fires a coach, they still owe the coach a salary for all of the years remaining on the contract. That is why it would cost MSU over a million to fire Lusk. I'm sure the buyout for another school to hire him would be much lower.

[AZ Shocker]

Fun game to watch and listen too. My only gripe (although it didn't matter in this particular game)...was that the lowly Bears blocked a lot of shots in the paint last night. Arrgghhhh.....I heard Heartle say they were up to 4 blocks already about two-thirds into the 1st half. No biggie as it didn't affect the outcome but yes March opponents still concern me. I'd really hate to see a match-up were we just can't score and/or rebound inside. In the few losses we have had the past couple years...we have only lost by a few points each game. Could a match-up this March against a big quality opponent end that and expose us? I'm not willing to lose by double digits yet!!!! This has been too much fun!!!!!

[Ricardo del Rio]

Not really crazy about only 7 players scoring. But I am being pretty picky.

No, you are not being picky. I have been concerned about bench scoring for some time now.

Sometimes the bench minutes are quite high and the bench players hardly shoot the ball.

Examples:
Loyola game - 5 attempts in 38 minutes
UE game - 9 attempts in 58 minutes
MSU game - 13 attempts in 71 minutes

[Rosewood]

Re: The shot clock, the rule says reset "When a try for goal strikes the ring or flange and then possession is gained by either team;"

So that seems pretty loose for interpretation and I feel like I could argue it either way. For example, is it still a try if I airball it and it bounces off the rebounders head and hits the rim? If it bounces glass and rim, that's ok. Or what if I didn't try and I had a really bad bounce pass and it hit the rim?

But the standard reading is you reset it if it hits the rim (sorry, ring or flange). Plus that makes it sound like if the rebound goes out long and bounces down court you can't reset that shot clock until someone gets it. But we all know the clock gets reset every time the ball hits the rim.

After looking at this rulebook I've realized that half the reason the refs are so damn dumb is this rulebook that has been cobbled together over the years.

[jdshock]

Re: The shot clock, the rule says reset "When a try for goal strikes the ring or flange and then possession is gained by either team;"

So that seems pretty loose for interpretation and I feel like I could argue it either way. For example, is it still a try if I airball it and it bounces off the rebounders head and hits the rim? If it bounces glass and rim, that's ok. Or what if I didn't try and I had a really bad bounce pass and it hit the rim?

But the standard reading is you reset it if it hits the rim (sorry, ring or flange). Plus that makes it sound like if the rebound goes out long and bounces down court you can't reset that shot clock until someone gets it. But we all know the clock gets reset every time the ball hits the rim.

After looking at this rulebook I've realized that half the reason the refs are so damn dumb is this rulebook that has been cobbled together over the years.

I've absolutely never heard that bit about possession. I think you're right that the rest of it seems so arbitrary that the only logical method is to reset it every time the rim is hit. That other thing about possession is just weird, though.

[Ricardo del Rio]

I hope we see more of Tevis. There is just something about him. He seems to have a knack for making plays and being around the ball.

[ShockRef]

I have a question for @ShockRef: or any of the college officials.

In the 2nd half, Fred drives in from the right side and shoots an air ball just over the rim. In the battle for the rebound the ball is knocked around and clearly bangs against the bottom of the rim. WSU regains possession and resets the offense when the shot clock goes off. HCGM and the players were saying it hit the rim but on replay Bruce said because it wasn't a shot attempt they didn't reset. That can't be the rule can it? They just missed the call, kind of like Gonzaga right?

Doc,
Did not watch game or see this splay.
However, if during a legit shot, the ball does not touch the rim, the shot clock continues. If during the scramble, the ball makes contact but not from an attempted shot, the clock also continues.
The only reset during a live ball is after a legit shot makes rim (or flange) contact.

That is all.

[tgcshock]

I think the essence of the question is whether the contact is ruled as a legitimate attempt to tip the ball back in the basket or is just incidental. A virtually identical play occurred at the end of the Butler-Creighton game last night (which the officials reviewed). In that one the clock was viewed as reset after an attempted tip-in. The play looked very similar to what happened in our game but it just comes down to the ruling of the clock operator/officials as to whether it is ruled a shot attempt or not.

[AZ Shocker]

On the replay it sure didn't look like it hit the rim either on the attempted shot or scramble (tip).

[im4wsu]

Fun game to watch and listen too. My only gripe (although it didn't matter in this particular game)...was that the lowly Bears blocked a lot of shots in the paint last night. Arrgghhhh.....I heard Heartle say they were up to 4 blocks already about two-thirds into the 1st half. No biggie as it didn't affect the outcome but yes March opponents still concern me. I'd really hate to see a match-up were we just can't score and/or rebound inside. In the few losses we have had the past couple years...we have only lost by a few points each game. Could a match-up this March against a big quality opponent end that and expose us? I'm not willing to lose by double digits yet!!!! This has been too much fun!!!!!

A couple of practices against Carl Hall would do wonders.

[capnkirk]

Does it specify which rim?

What if you are trying to get the ball across half court to beat a 10 second violation and you are not going to make it. Can you run back to the opponents basket and miss a layup to restart the 10 seconds?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Would love to run the table again. Ironically, and sadly, it would probably hurt us more than help with ranking and seedings (perception of weak conference)

You think WSU would be ranked higher and seeded better if they finish with 3 losses than if they finish with 2?

I suppose that is possible. Depending on who you lose to and where the games were played. Wouldn't, for example, 2 home losses to say Bradley and SIU be worse than 3 road losses to UNI, Evansville and Illinois State.

I was responding to jocoshock's comments. He later said he was just being sarcastic.

My 2 vs 3 was meant to be at the end of the year, meaning the difference of the Shox winning out vs dropping a game somewhere.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

From one of the links that 1972 posted:

"The Shockers have outscored their last three road opponents 114-68 in the second half."

Wow, just wow!

[pinstripers]

Kelly's best defensive game by far.

[Aargh]

Springfield News Leader report on WSU @ MSU.

Springfield News Leader story on why Paul Lusk will not be fired.

From the story about why Lusk will not be fired:
He's making $371,000 a year AFTER he got a raise? The Bears are getting their money's worth, in other words - not much.

Can't afford the buyout? I guess they ran out of cows to sell. It's pretty obvious, now that JQH has is no longer around to donate things to put his name on, that there aren't any of the other forms of "cash cows" they can hit up to pay less for a four-year buyout than Marshall makes in a year.