Jump to content

Shot clock


mondo44
 Share

Recommended Posts

I do not want to get into a huge debate on pro's and con's of the shot clock.  And I have not read every post on here, so forgive me if I repeat something someone else said.  But, I am Pro Shot Clock.

Below is just one example of many of why I like the shot clock.

The shot clock would separate good strategic coaches from bad ones.  Think about this...Your team is in foul trouble, you are down 2 with 45 seconds left.  You do not have to extend your defense to try and steal, possibly giving up an easy layup to the other team.  You do not have to foul to stop the clock and possibly lose one of your better players to fouling out, the team probably having the ball in their best free throw shooters hands and adding points to the score board. And if you get the stop then you get the last possession.  You just have to play defense for 30-35 seconds(Probably leading to the other team running the shot clock down and taking a bad percentage shot) and if you get a stop, then you have a possession to tie or win the game. 

Anyways, just one of many scenarios that could happen or not happen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, WestTennRaider said:

I do not want to get into a huge debate on pro's and con's of the shot clock.  And I have not read every post on here, so forgive me if I repeat something someone else said.  But, I am Pro Shot Clock.

Below is just one example of many of why I like the shot clock.

The shot clock would separate good strategic coaches from bad ones.  Think about this...Your team is in foul trouble, you are down 2 with 45 seconds left.  You do not have to extend your defense to try and steal, possibly giving up an easy layup to the other team.  You do not have to foul to stop the clock and possibly lose one of your better players to fouling out, the team probably having the ball in their best free throw shooters hands and adding points to the score board. And if you get the stop then you get the last possession.  You just have to play defense for 30-35 seconds(Probably leading to the other team running the shot clock down and taking a bad percentage shot) and if you get a stop, then you have a possession to tie or win the game. 

Anyways, just one of many scenarios that could happen or not happen.  

Tons of scenarios like this. I'm for the shot clock

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, WestTennRaider said:

I do not want to get into a huge debate on pro's and con's of the shot clock.  And I have not read every post on here, so forgive me if I repeat something someone else said.  But, I am Pro Shot Clock.

Below is just one example of many of why I like the shot clock.

The shot clock would separate good strategic coaches from bad ones.  Think about this...Your team is in foul trouble, you are down 2 with 45 seconds left.  You do not have to extend your defense to try and steal, possibly giving up an easy layup to the other team.  You do not have to foul to stop the clock and possibly lose one of your better players to fouling out, the team probably having the ball in their best free throw shooters hands and adding points to the score board. And if you get the stop then you get the last possession.  You just have to play defense for 30-35 seconds(Probably leading to the other team running the shot clock down and taking a bad percentage shot) and if you get a stop, then you have a possession to tie or win the game. 

Anyways, just one of many scenarios that could happen or not happen.  

I like the shot clock for the defensive purposes of it... there is no doubt that it will benefit defense much more than offense.... however, it is precisely these scenarios that make me think otherwise... Why would the offense "have to" give up possession.... that is the benefit of being up at the end of a game... you get a chance to control to ball (well coached, fundamental teams, with  a good strategic plan will do just this).  If the defense wants it, then they must do to get it.  They must earn the possession of the ball.  I don't think a rule should punish the team that has earned the lead in the first 31 mins and 15 seconds of the game, yet benefit the team who is behind... so they don't have to "extend" they defense for the last 45 secs of the game. 

Edited by threeball
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also hear some people say in these posts about a shot clock would separate good coaches from bad coaches... are bad coaches the only ones not wanting a shot clock?   I believe, that a shot clock actually would take an element of coaching away from the good coaches.  A shot clock would force all teams to play within a boxed pace of play.... which eliminates parts of strategy that is beneficial to the game.  

Before 1933, there was no 10-second rule for the ball to cross half court.  The rule has been beneficial for defenses.  In the early 2000's the NBA and FIBA changed it to 8 seconds while college, high school, middle, and elementary have kept it at 10 seconds.  Should all basketball levels also change that to 8 seconds? I don't think so.  What would be the benefit?  We don't need to box players and coaches into a certain pace of play.  Various styles and strategies are what makes our game unique, fun and beneficial to the masses.  It also allows good coaching strategies (either fast or slow pace of play).    

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2021 at 10:50 AM, threeball said:

I also hear some people say in these posts about a shot clock would separate good coaches from bad coaches... are bad coaches the only ones not wanting a shot clock?   I believe, that a shot clock actually would take an element of coaching away from the good coaches.  A shot clock would force all teams to play within a boxed pace of play.... which eliminates parts of strategy that is beneficial to the game.  

Before 1933, there was no 10-second rule for the ball to cross half court.  The rule has been beneficial for defenses.  In the early 2000's the NBA and FIBA changed it to 8 seconds while college, high school, middle, and elementary have kept it at 10 seconds.  Should all basketball levels also change that to 8 seconds? I don't think so.  What would be the benefit?  We don't need to box players and coaches into a certain pace of play.  Various styles and strategies are what makes our game unique, fun and beneficial to the masses.  It also allows good coaching strategies (either fast or slow pace of play).    

I agree, well stated. A shot clock takes a strategy away from the great coaches especially late in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2021 at 12:15 PM, warmachine7954 said:

The Shot Clock is not evolving the game. The shot clock's only purpose was to prevant teams from stalling and losing fans for professional sports. The NBA introduced it in 1954 the NCAA in 1985. 

I coached overseas with a shot clock in HS. In 2 seasons we never had a shot clock violation because the 35 sec clock was never in play because the teams, no matter how good or bad, they were were constantly taking quick shots. The team that I coached was bigger, more athletic, and stronger than every team we played. 2 seasons, 2 losses and destroyed just about everyone we played just because we physically out mathced people. We didn't have good basketball players or highly skilled players we were just bigger, faster, and stronger.

Before the shot clock teams could work the ball, make teams play defense, and play the game to give themselves a chance to win. When that went away the level of play went down and it became Darwin's Theory.

Absolutely the best post on the subject...coming from someone with firsthand experience with and without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2021 at 3:55 PM, WestTennRaider said:

I do not want to get into a huge debate on pro's and con's of the shot clock.  And I have not read every post on here, so forgive me if I repeat something someone else said.  But, I am Pro Shot Clock.

Below is just one example of many of why I like the shot clock.

The shot clock would separate good strategic coaches from bad ones.  Think about this...Your team is in foul trouble, you are down 2 with 45 seconds left.  You do not have to extend your defense to try and steal, possibly giving up an easy layup to the other team.  You do not have to foul to stop the clock and possibly lose one of your better players to fouling out, the team probably having the ball in their best free throw shooters hands and adding points to the score board. And if you get the stop then you get the last possession.  You just have to play defense for 30-35 seconds(Probably leading to the other team running the shot clock down and taking a bad percentage shot) and if you get a stop, then you have a possession to tie or win the game. 

Anyways, just one of many scenarios that could happen or not happen.  

If you've been outcoached/outplayed for the first 31:15, why do you deserve the other team to be forced to allow you an "unearned" possession? I've seen many more games lost than won by stalling too early and having to maintain possession of the ball...there's the half court line, five second rule, and the option to trap from the zone, or man pressure to force turnovers. There's also the option to foul and gain several possessions in the last 45 seconds. That's why coaching isn't easy...there are multiple options in your scenario, and you want to remove most of them and make it as easy as following a recipe on the label of a soup can.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2021 at 9:32 PM, Bkbfan4ever said:

I’m a coach too.  I’m also retired which makes me a fan.  I don’t want to go watch games and witness kids throwing up shots that have no chance of going in.  As three ball stated the NBA players can’t make those shots so what makes anyone think kids can.  This will only hurt the high school game 

I also don’t want to attend a high school basketball game and see a team hold the ball for 60+ seconds. It goes both ways.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, tradertwo said:

If you've been outcoached/outplayed for the first 31:15, why do you deserve the other team to be forced to allow you an "unearned" possession? I've seen many more games lost than won by stalling too early and having to maintain possession of the ball...there's the half court line, five second rule, and the option to trap from the zone, or man pressure to force turnovers. There's also the option to foul and gain several possessions in the last 45 seconds. That's why coaching isn't easy...there are multiple options in your scenario, and you want to remove most of them and make it as easy as following a recipe on the label of a soup can.

Hahaha easy as following a recipe on the label of a soup can.  I never said that coaching was easy. I guess that is what all the college coach's do since they have a shot clock(Just follow the recipe). And just because you are down two with 45 seconds remaining, does not mean you have been out coached.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2021 at 12:01 PM, CoachAnderson said:

I love the idea of implementing the ELAM ending, but I think it is way too radical for a lot of coaches.

Coach Troy Allen has used it for years at his summer team camp play days. 

I proposed use of the ELAM ending for boys and girls JV games this year in my league. I think using it on a trial basis (1 year) in JV is an appropriate place. It should also help with keeping JV games on schedule. Too many JV games are forced to play 6-7 min quarters or 16-20 minute running clock halves to stay on schedule. (***Speaking of staying on schedule, I will never understand the girls HC's that want their girls on the floor for 45 mins prior to their game. Trust me, the extra shooting time isn't going to help. LOL). It doesn't cost any extra money or require an extra person (most of the anti shot clockers chief complaint) and it makes the ending a lot more exciting.

I love the thought of doing the ELAM ending for the JV games.. I will need to bring that up to our coaches and see what they think. 

They are all in on the shot clock and I know they love the ELAM ending cause we talk about it during the summer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


  • Recent Posts

    • Way late on this post, but I do believe that I want to at least weight in so to speak lol. I wrestled NAIA competed against some of the best wrestler over all a crossed the divisions and felt great about my college wrestling experience. I think people make the mistake in believe that wrestling some how gets easier as a sport at the smaller college divisions it doesn't the training is mostly the same. I have that on good authority from a coach who was a D1 all-American. it's more the commitment level of the competitors that is different. There is talented wrestlers that can go D1 at any level in the smaller division. sub in Sammy Shires for one he would have done fine on a DI team. He chose a work life ratio that suited him. It's not about talent it's commitment are you going to make training and studying the sport the center of your world cause that's what it takes: NO MATTER HOW TALATENTED BEFORE HAND YOU ARE.  If so then D1 is for you and striving for success at that level is for you like Mr. Palmer said it's what your willing to put in. Now coaches if you have a successful wrestler who fits that bill then by all means D1 is a great option they will see some success no matter how small, but if they are not that committed along with being talented and a killer and you know it then your doing them wrong.  You don't have to tell athletes that you don't think they are D1 tell them to keep their options open to take all their visits to consider all the divisions regardless of their goals. college recruiting visits have you most times wrestle against their current wrestlers coaches and athletes  will find out real quick it's not easy no matter where you go. That way when they make their decision it's a sound one that's based on well rounded experiences.     BobCorker, and oceansize42 I believe what you are thinking is correct but for different reasons. TN wrestler's have the talent... it's a commitment level change. TN wrestlers aren't used to having to put themselves through the level of commitment required and kills them on the D1 level.    WrestlingGod, I agree you should push kids to pursue their dreams, but not at the cost of common sense period... we have to much of that going around this country already. Dreams can turn to poison when these wrestler are not educated on what it truly takes. In TN  a kid who understands wrestling to a high level can be successful with small amounts of hard work. They think their definition of hard work is enough for D1 that is the mistake not the "talent/understanding".  Over-all though we do not celebrate NAIA,D2,D3, or Juco success in this state like other states do. GA/AL celebrates all it's college wrestlers success a crossed the  board no matter the division. Why? because it's hard... I have gone to all the divisions National championships let me tell you to be a all-American at any is impressive especially D2 or NAIA. those guys can scrap and not one of those AA's are an easy match. all of them were state placers or champs multiple times in their high school careers. does that at all sound easy to place at? TN does not give those guys enough credit or shout outs period. it's an over sight because of this D1 or it's less than meaningless   mentality on this site and in this state. GA/AL is better then us on the highest stage because they send guys to D2,NAIA,D3 ect. they come back understanding the sport better then their pervious coaches, and give back and that cycles to athletes readiness to go D1 with clearer understanding of what it takes to be competitive day 1 freshman year.             My post isn't to support one way or the other but to just consider that both sides have merit and that both work when the system in TN. by system I mean coaches are the better educated on preparing athletes for each level they want and should pursue.        
    • If you think McKenzie could've beat Riverside I have a bridge you might like to buy. 
    • Hate to hear Ricky is heading to the old folk's home!
    • By recruiting, I mean members of a coaching staff are talking to, meeting with, giving tours, to students, and their guardians, that are not zoned for their school.    there’s no way that many non Bearden kids just showed up all at once without being recruited. It can’t be a coincidence that all those kids also went through the middle school all star game your boss puts on every year. 
    • Not sure how I would put it as recruiting perhaps kids trying to better their career by going to a head coach and coaching staff with connections all over college football that gets them the opportunity to go play college football and be coached by a coach with a pretty good track record.
×
  • Create New...