What states?

 

California

Maryland

Massachusetts

New York

North Dakota

Rhode Island

South Dakota

Washington

California

Maryland

Massachusetts

New York

North Dakota

Rhode Island

South Dakota

Washington

 

Out of that list, we are probably most comparable to Washington size and diversity (rural versus urban) wise. That to me is the one outlier. The rest are either extremely small population wise or bigger, metropolitan states.

If you're a fan of the shot clock, go watch AAU basketball, if you're not a fan of it, go watch HS basketball.

 

I agree with this- I like to watch a game where defense is played and not just run and gun. I'm old school.

Well if only 8 out of 50 are using shot clocks it must not be to big of a demand.

I don't think a shot clock is needed.

Remove the financial aspect, as well as the staffing issues, and I think there should absolutely be a shot clock in high school basketball. I think the staffing issue could be solved pretty much everywhere. The cost would be the biggest hurdle.

 

I disagree on this. I have experience with one of the bigger schools in the state and it is is still an issue to find people to cover the scoreboard, scorebook, etc, already. It would be one more thing you have to fill.

 

Maybe it could be something assigners organize, and be a job for older/retired officials to work for 15-20 bucks a game. Of course then you add to the financial burden.

This is an assumption. With the adoption of a shot clock rule, coaches would have to change how they coach, and I don't think that means sacrificing fundamentals.

 

This I agree with. It would be ugly initially, but coaches and players would adapt with time.

I disagree on this. I have experience with one of the bigger schools in the state and it is is still an issue to find people to cover the scoreboard, scorebook, etc, already. It would be one more thing you have to fill.

 

Maybe it could be something assigners organize, and be a job for older/retired officials to work for 15-20 bucks a game. Of course then you add to the financial burden.

 

I hadn't even thought about the assigners route, but that is definitely an option.

 

I think most coaching staffs have three to four coaches. Assign them to clock duty when/where parents/volunteers aren't available.

Bottom-line is that this isn't the NBA - or even college. In the NBA, even the worst teams are populated with players with great basketball talents....getting a shot off within the shot clock timeframe isn't all that hard. And - in the overwhelming majority of the time - that's true for college.

 

I'm talking about a "good" shot. Not just one that is 90% certain to produce a rebound.

 

What hasn't been mentioned so far is that these are HS kids. They're mostly playing for fun (most will not play after HS) and are - in theory, LOL - still learning. At this stage, they still struggle to know the difference between a bad shot, an OK shot, and a great shot - and that's without a shot clock adding pressure.

 

What you're going to get with the addition of the shot clock is some fundamentally bad basketball.

 

Yes, a byproduct will be that the better teams will suffer fewer upsets, but when did upsets become a bad thing? If there were no upsets, we should simply seed up the games, and hand the game ball to the higher seed. No need to play.

 

I love high-scoring games as much as anyone, but I'm not sure at the HS level that speeding up the shot attempts is always going to dramatically change things. Increased points, certainly, but perhaps not the increase some might expect. (It might, however, produce a new state record or two in the rebounds department...LOL)

 

Let's quit trying to make 14-18 year olds into NBA players, and let them enjoy and learn the game...while we (the fans) can enjoy high school sports. If a game with a shot clock is what you want, there's a game for you at the college and pro levels.

 

CM

 

Bravo! Bravo!

Probably 99.4% of us that don’t advocate for a shot clock want to see Kentucky high school hoops unclassified and the Sweet 16 unseeded.

 

I'm in that .06. Not a fan of a shot clock at the high school level, but there's no good reason to not classify and seed the state tourney. But that's a whole other, beaten to death issue that isn't changing anytime soon.

 

Back to the shot clock, it will only serve to widen the gap between the top teams and the tiers below.

I hadn't even thought about the assigners route, but that is definitely an option.

 

I think most coaching staffs have three to four coaches. Assign them to clock duty when/where parents/volunteers aren't available.

 

Are you a volunteer?

Are you a volunteer?

 

Have been many times in the past and honestly would love to do it again.

Bottom-line is that this isn't the NBA - or even college. In the NBA, even the worst teams are populated with players with great basketball talents....getting a shot off within the shot clock timeframe isn't all that hard. And - in the overwhelming majority of the time - that's true for college.

 

I'm talking about a "good" shot. Not just one that is 90% certain to produce a rebound.

 

What hasn't been mentioned so far is that these are HS kids. They're mostly playing for fun (most will not play after HS) and are - in theory, LOL - still learning. At this stage, they still struggle to know the difference between a bad shot, an OK shot, and a great shot - and that's without a shot clock adding pressure.

 

What you're going to get with the addition of the shot clock is some fundamentally bad basketball.

 

Yes, a byproduct will be that the better teams will suffer fewer upsets, but when did upsets become a bad thing? If there were no upsets, we should simply seed up the games, and hand the game ball to the higher seed. No need to play.

 

I love high-scoring games as much as anyone, but I'm not sure at the HS level that speeding up the shot attempts is always going to dramatically change things. Increased points, certainly, but perhaps not the increase some might expect. (It might, however, produce a new state record or two in the rebounds department...LOL)

 

Let's quit trying to make 14-18 year olds into NBA players, and let them enjoy and learn the game...while we (the fans) can enjoy high school sports. If a game with a shot clock is what you want, there's a game for you at the college and pro levels.

 

CM

 

Agreed.

 

And here's something I've noticed over the years. You used to see - particularly in the NBA - a team down a couple of points with 35 seconds on the clock race down the floor and fire off a shot at the first opportunity to get "two possessions to one". That doesn't happen nearly as much as it used to.

 

Which kinda supports a theory I've had for years. One good shot is usually better than two crappy shots.

I'm in that .06. Not a fan of a shot clock at the high school level, but there's no good reason to not classify and seed the state tourney. But that's a whole other, beaten to death issue that isn't changing anytime soon.

 

Back to the shot clock, it will only serve to widen the gap between the top teams and the tiers below.

 

Yep.

Have been many times in the past and honestly would love to do it again.

 

What would be your choice of schools if you were to get back into it?