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

 

I don't know that I'd have a choice really. I just enjoyed doing it.

I'm a little torn on this. Played HS ball and made it to the Sweet 16 when we won regional championship with a final score of like 37-32. So I appreciate teams that play with a lot of patience and good shot selection.

 

My son started playing wheelchair basketball a couple years ago and we have a 30 second shot clock at the HS level. Flow of the game is much better, especially compared to HS basketball in the postseason. I think a shot clock of even 40-45 seconds would be a good addition to the HS game.

 

As far as cost, our wheelchair team hosted a tournament this year. Bought a good used shot clock for $700. Would take a little training to get someone proficient at running it but I don't see the cost as being prohibitive at the HS level.

I'm normally in the camp to modernize things (such as classification), but I don't see the need for one. There aren't many teams these days outside the First Region that take more than 24 or 30 seconds to shoot. I also agree on who to get to run the shot clock. We already have 1-2 stoppages a game to correct the score or wake the clock guy up to start the clock.

 

If you want to make a change for the better, get rid of three-man officiating crews who focus on an area and not the ball and go back to two-man crews who pay more attention to the action and not a space on the floor.

I can see the points of not having it and having it just some games are just aggravating to watch due to some teams taking like forever per possession which is their right

 

but that's why you see a .500 team beat a top 20 team because they brought a team playing run and gun to taking only 10 shots a quarter

 

 

now as for seeding that's a tough a real tough one because then you will get teams that wont play big schools just small schools to go 30-0 so looks good on paper. Then you would have to come up with a statewide seeding committee. I like the way its blind draw you might get best team play the 2nd best round 1 but that's how it falls. I think leave way it is I haven't seen a Bad sweet 16 tournament where it consisted of nothing but blow outs

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

 

I believe if you asked these 14 to 18 year olds if they would rather have a shot clock. I think the majority of them would say yes they would want one. Quite honestly I don’t think the vote would even be close.

 

Not to mention these 14 to 18 year old kids want to compete. They don’t want to sit there and watch a team just hold the ball for the two minutes. They would want a chance to still be able to win at the end. When right now if a team is up two possessions with two minutes left it is almost impossible to win, because unless you can make the team turn it over, you won’t get the ball back.

 

At the end of the day these 14 to 18 year olds very much could play with a shot clock. Now should it be a 24 second shot clock not at all. However a 35 second shot clock is very reasonable.

 

The tough part would be assigning people to it and the money.

I believe if you asked these 14 to 18 year olds if they would rather have a shot clock. I think the majority of them would say yes they would want one. Quite honestly I don’t think the vote would even be close.

 

Not to mention these 14 to 18 year old kids want to compete. They don’t want to sit there and watch a team just hold the ball for the two minutes. They would want a chance to still be able to win at the end. When right now if a team is up two possessions with two minutes left it is almost impossible to win, because unless you can make the team turn it over, you won’t get the ball back.

 

At the end of the day these 14 to 18 year olds very much could play with a shot clock. Now should it be a 24 second shot clock not at all. However a 35 second shot clock is very reasonable.

 

The tough part would be assigning people to it and the money.

 

Totally agree! By my observations, holding the ball only seems to happen in the 4th quarter and usually way towards the end. And if the team holding the ball is yet to be shooting the bonus, it’s agonizing to watch it play out. That said, I would be in favor of experimenting with a shot clock in the 4th only.

As for expense, I can’t imagine it would be that terribly expensive. If schools can find ways to afford artificial turf for their football fields at costs over $500k, a shot clock, by comparison, would be a drop in the “bucket.” (Pun intended!)

Just for a reality check, I broadcast 60+ HS basketball games every year, and I've been doing this since 1979. I cannot tell you the last time I saw a team intentionally hold the ball for all/most of the game. I have seen very, very deliberate offenses that have taken time off the clock, but which have been run similar to a Princeton style attack. They weren't trying to slow the game down, just working for a particular shot.

 

I see teams mostly from the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 11th regions....perhaps this is more of a perceived problem in other parts of the state(?)

If a team just blatantly holds the ball, then the remedy is for the defending team to pressure the offense (it takes the consent of both teams to allow the ball to be held) or, and this may require a rule change, have the officials demand after a suitable time that the ball be moved with an intent to score.

New year, same discussion. Playing defense is the answer. If your favorite team plays defense for a full minute without forcing a turnover or a shot then let me be the first to tell you that a shot clock won’t help you.

 

I’ll also add, like I do every year, that a shot clock absolutely positively will not improve the quality of basketball in high school. It makes zero difference in preparation for college. Simply put, a shot clock is not nor ever will be needed in high school basketball.

 

People want to speed up the game and I get that. I just think it is stupid to add it to high school basketball in the state of Kentucky.

New year, same discussion. Playing defense is the answer. If your favorite team plays defense for a full minute without forcing a turnover or a shot then let me be the first to tell you that a shot clock won’t help you.

 

I’ll also add, like I do every year, that a shot clock absolutely positively will not improve the quality of basketball in high school. It makes zero difference in preparation for college. Simply put, a shot clock is not nor ever will be needed in high school basketball.

 

People want to speed up the game and I get that. I just think it is stupid to add it to high school basketball in the state of Kentucky.

 

Totally agree, very well put.

ColonelMike and PP92 dropping mics.

Fourteen years ago, I watched Apollo beat Mason County in the Sweet Sixteen in a very low scoring game, forty something to thirty something. Was i booing slow play/holding the ball? No. I was hollering for Mason County to apply some pressure.

 

It wasn’t all bad, though. My avatar was chosen to participate in the National Guard halftime shootout thingy. She may have scored more baskets than Mason County. So she crossed “scoring points at Rupp Arena” off her bucket list a long time ago.

Just for a reality check, I broadcast 60+ HS basketball games every year, and I've been doing this since 1979. I cannot tell you the last time I saw a team intentionally hold the ball for all/most of the game. I have seen very, very deliberate offenses that have taken time off the clock, but which have been run similar to a Princeton style attack. They weren't trying to slow the game down, just working for a particular shot.

 

I see teams mostly from the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 11th regions....perhaps this is more of a perceived problem in other parts of the state(?)

 

Go to the 9th region tournament and you will see it happen a lot. Especially end of half’s and end of games.

Go to the 9th region tournament and you will see it happen a lot. Especially end of half’s and end of games.

''

 

And what's wrong with trying to protect a lead at the end of halves and the end of games?

''

 

And what's wrong with trying to protect a lead at the end of halves and the end of games?

 

Since there is no shot clock, there is nothing wrong with it and very smart.