Tennessee....Shot Clock or Not?

[warmachine7954]

22 hours ago, kwc said:

Thanks for the correction guys ... IMG.

I don't know I wouldn't think it happens that often. However, that's not the point either. Playing keep away isn't basketball, even if it is within the rules.

It happened first in the NBA. Trickeled down to college. It will make it's way to a high school near you.

The game will continue to grow and evolve. Most folks thought that the 3-point shot was the end of the world when it was first introduced. The players and coaches have adapted adequtely. This will be no different. Sure, there are going to be folks who don't like it ... no change will be accepted 100%, especially by baasketball purist. But, it will eventually arrive and those who don't like it will continue their montra.

The game grows and adapts. To some people, for the worse, and to others, for the better. But one thing you do know ... if the pros are doing it ... it will eventually make its way DOWN. College is already doing it and they have been doing it for a while now. HS is next. Just like girls baketball now resembles the game more with five players on the court playing both offense and defense, like the men do. The shot clock in HS basketball is the next eveloution.

The shot clock was introduced because the team that was ahead just stalled the whole 4th quarter in the NBA. Spectators didn't like that so they lost money.

High school basketball is about more than spectators and money. It's about teaching the game properly. I'm sorry but if you can't come out and guard a team that is stalling you don't get a chance to win. 

This year is a prime example of how AAU has "evolved" the game in a negative way. College ball weak, this years draft is weak, the NBA isn't growing like it should. The future superstars of the league are not American. High school baketball has kids dominating on athletisicm and not skill or a combination. 

A shot clock costs up front, then cost to add another official to run it, and then makes teams force a shot instead of running an offense. Stalling doesn't happen nearly as much as people want to believe. 

When I coached in South Korea we had to us a shot clock and it was garbage. Our team was bigger, more athletic, and better than almost every team in our league. Our coach knew that so our kids didn't have to guard for very long as a unit because we knew that other team had to shot the ball every 40 seconds regardless of the situation. It didn't make for good games unless the two teams that were playing shot it quick anyway. In one instance it worked if two teams could shoot well. However, if you were a poor shooting team then you had to get a layup or take a shot that you didn't want in 30-40 secs. 

What if you play a pressing team? 7-8 seconds in the back court and you've lost even more time off the clock in the half court. 

There is already too much 1-on-1 in games now because the kids emulate the NBA game. There is much more to the game of basketball than ooh's and aahh's from the crowd and money from gates. The state of TN has already given the soul of the game away by restricting high school coaches from practicing wiht they're kids and giving way to AAU

Ridgeway did it to Dyer County back in 2002. DC wouldn't come out of the match-up zone. Ridgeway held the ball and made them come out. DC couldn't guard very well man-to-man. (because DC played the Match-up 99.9% of the time. I played at DC a few years before this) DC got beat. 

[kwc]

On 1/14/2020 at 12:33 PM, warmachine7954 said:

The shot clock was introduced because the team that was ahead just stalled the whole 4th quarter in the NBA. Spectators didn't like that so they lost money.

High school basketball is about more than spectators and money. It's about teaching the game properly. I'm sorry but if you can't come out and guard a team that is stalling you don't get a chance to win. 

This year is a prime example of how AAU has "evolved" the game in a negative way

Doesn't matter why the NBA put it in. It's there and it's a vital part of the NBA game. College ball now has it as an intrical part of the game. HS is next.

So, teaching the game properly will change. Coaches will incorporate time management when they teach BBal in HS. They will adapt. 

Until the NCAA can come up with a better way to expose the cream of the crop HS basketball players to college coaches in one setting events by actually having them play against other ... AAU is here to stay. 

No college coach wants to spend valuable time scouting an event and have to be subject to Briarcrest vs IMG. It's a waste of their time. The EYBL Peachjam and events like it aren't. Folks hate AAU but it's meeting needs that HS just can't. The shoe companies are getting a return on their investment. It's a perfect marriage for them. I don't see it going away anytime soon.

Edited January 16, 2020 by kwc

[warmachine7954]

14 hours ago, kwc said:

Doesn't matter why the NBA put it in. It's there and it's a vital part of the NBA game. College ball now has it as an intrical part of the game. HS is next.

So, teaching the game properly will change. Coaches will incorporate time management when they teach BBal in HS. They will adapt. 

Until the NCAA can come up with a better way to expose the cream of the crop HS basketball players to college coaches in one setting events by actually having them play against other ... AAU is here to stay. 

No college coach wants to spend valuable time scouting an event and have to be subject to Briarcrest vs IMG. It's a waste of their time. The EYBL Peachjam and events like it aren't. Folks hate AAU but it's meeting needs that HS just can't. The shoe companies are getting a return on their investment. It's a perfect marriage for them. I don't see it going away anytime soon.

AAU is is nothing more than pimping kids out for everyones benefit. Shoe companies get to benefit off the backs of kids and parents. 

Where else can a college coach go see players?

Imagine a coach having knowledge of a player that not many others did not. Wouldn't that create a more competative NCAA all together? People's perceptions of the game and college basketball in general would change if we didn't see Duke, Michighan State, Kentucky, Lousiville, etc... at the top every year. It would be awesome to see a coach and his staff find a kids that played the gae well together and competed. Instead we have kids that aren't ready teaming up for 1-2 year at schools that give them exposure because of money. 

The shot clock isn't needed in high school for any reason. 

 

[kwc]

8 minutes ago, warmachine7954 said:

AAU is is nothing more than pimping kids out for everyones benefit. Shoe companies get to benefit off the backs of kids and parents. 

Where else can a college coach go see players?

Imagine a coach having knowledge of a player that not many others did not. Wouldn't that create a more competative NCAA all together? People's perceptions of the game and college basketball in general would change if we didn't see Duke, Michighan State, Kentucky, Lousiville, etc... at the top every year. It would be awesome to see a coach and his staff find a kids that played the gae well together and competed. Instead we have kids that aren't ready teaming up for 1-2 year at schools that give them exposure because of money. 

The shot clock isn't needed in high school for any reason. 

 

Thats nice to imagine but the general public could care less and the college coaches just don't have the time nor the inclination to hope they find a star someplace that noboday else has seen or heard of. Too much money on the line for all involved. The Kentucky's and the Louiville's of the world dominate the sport because that's what the mass public wants. And, of course the shoe company's make money off of the kids. In return, the kids get to play against other kids of their caliber.

The shot clock is coming ... needed or not. The sport has evolved and it's going to drag the HS level into it, even if it it to go kicking and screaming.

Edited January 16, 2020 by kwc

[threeball]

Many good points in both ways.  I can see value in it both ways.  However, one of biggest reasons that people are for a shot clock is that "holding the ball ins't basketball".  You hear it in every argument for a shot clock.  My response is that if a team is holding the ball for minutes at a time... that's on the defense, not the offense.  The defense is allowing that to happen.  Also, this happens very rarely.  I also wouldn't make changes to rules (or laws for the matter) for a small minority of the population.  3% roughly will go on the play college basketball. Those players are already playing aau with shot clock and thus are being prepared for it... the better way to prepare the player for the next level is by helping become a well rounded player and person through fundamentals, accountability, and hard work. 

In coaching, the object is to give your team the best chance they have to win.  If keeping the ball in your favor gives your team the best chance to win, then do it.  I know that many will think I'm an old school and don't like to play an exciting style of ball.   I've been a part of teams that have won games in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60', 70's, 80's, 90's, and 110's (yep, skipped 100's) in the same year.  I believe teams can win in multiple different ways.  Teams that typically make double digit three pointers on any given night.  However, play styles that help your team win...that's what smart coaches do. I feel with a shot clock, it will become more of a game about who has the most athletic players.. and coaching will be less influential. 

A question I have is this:  why is forcing a team to shoot part of basketball?  Isn't basketball about defending your own goal and trying to score in the other person's goal.  Why should I have to take a shot that I don't want to.  Possession of the ball is very important.  Look at how many bad shots are taken at the end of quarters now... there are only 4 opportunities in a regulation high school game to shoot when the clock is winding down (unless overtimes).  Of those 4 opportunities, how many high quality shots are taken?  Very few.  Most come down to a 1v1 contested shot or a long 3...each with poor offensive movement.  

The ball is very precious...the most precious thing in the game... without it you can't play... possession of it is the key.

[crimsontide43]

I do shot clocks for local colleges in Nashville. It is not hard, but the refs spend the whole game watching the shot clock rather that what is happening on the floor. Heaven forbid you have a clock that is a half second slow in starting, it drives them crazy. NO shot clock for high schools. Refs are bad enough already.

[Red Rebels]

2 hours ago, crimsontide43 said:

I do shot clocks for local colleges in Nashville. It is not hard, but the refs spend the whole game watching the shot clock rather that what is happening on the floor. Heaven forbid you have a clock that is a half second slow in starting, it drives them crazy. NO shot clock for high schools. Refs are bad enough already.

Blount County football officials don't care about the play clock in relation to the game clock. 

[gatorchomp04]

A 30 second shot clock would improve the game

[creekerballer]

I’m in favor of a shot clock, but with some changes from the college game. Make it longer for one, 45 seconds seems like a good start for high school. Then add in a mercy rule of some sort. If it’s 25 point lead in the second half the shot clock turns off or something of that nature. 

[FBfan26]

On 1/9/2020 at 10:27 AM, old24eagle said:

This is 100% why there should never be a shot clock in High School. Officials catch enough heat as it is, I cant imagine the trouble it would cause if daddy running the shot clock messed it up. Also the expense for some small schools would be tough.

Every disagreement its always about the small schools. Most small schools got the money but just TIGHT with it lol

[FBfan26]

Yes for it

[Tigercub10]

Absolutely yes for it