Bluegrassrivals

I just watched a start to a second half on Facebook were a team held the ball for 2:19 just passing the ball around. Immediately shut the stream off and came here to gripe. I’m sure this topic has been discussed at length multiple times on the site, but I’m bring it back up. There needs to be at least a 40 second shot clock in high school.

I don’t think it will ever happen.
Most schools lucky to find a decent clock keeper. Be even harder to find someone to work the shot clock. When to reset it, have to judge if a shot hits the rim on shots that graze the rim or don’t hit the rim.

It makes the game hard to watch but adding the clock would be hard for smaller schools.

14th region fanman Wrote:I don’t think it will ever happen.
Most schools lucky to find a decent clock keeper. Be even harder to find someone to work the shot clock. When to reset it, have to judge if a shot hits the rim on shots that graze the rim or don’t hit the rim.

This would definitely be the drawback for sure. Adding shot locks to gyms would be a tough ask for schools in our area.

I'd like to see a shot clock set at a minute or slightly more. Basically enough to keep it simple for those running the clock and experiencing growing pains & nothing so radical that players or coaches have to really adjust unless they are just outright stalling.

If nothing else, have it in all tournament play (or at least all regional tournament play where any place capable of hosting already has the capacity to add it tomorrow if they had to) and any school who wants to use it can opt-in (with the incentive being to better prepare for tournament play). Eventually the schools who'd be least likely to be capable of adapting could make accommodations-- the "cost" argument is somewhat defeated from an economic supply and demand standpoint when hundreds of shot clocks and related electronics are suddenly flying out of inventory.

I know a few states either already are or are going to experiment with it on a trial basis to try and make a push for it nationally.

14th Basketball fan Wrote:It makes the game hard to watch but adding the clock would be hard for smaller schools.

Why would that be hard for the smaller schools?

Been saying this for years, too many teams milk the game minutes at a time.

Redneck Wrote:Why would that be hard for the smaller schools?

Finding the funds to redo and add shot clocks to gyms wouldn’t be a cheap thing to do.

I think it’s stupid. It allows teams to game plain to slow down tempo to compete against bigger and better teams. Why take that away from them. So it’s more entertaining for you. I like it the way it is.

Spud6 Wrote:Finding the funds to redo and add shot clocks to gyms wouldn’t be a cheap thing to do.

That's why either easing it in (most regional tournaments are at places where they could buy one tomorrow if they wanted) or an outright requirement that everyone has to do it makes the most sense. If every school had to have one, you've suddenly got hundreds needing purchased. Letting each region coordinate the deal to buy them is suddenly a good amount of purchasing power that will be more likely to get competitive rates. Teaching kids to hold the ball minutes at a time is the same as asking the shortest kid on the Little League team to go squat at the plate & refuse to swing in hopes of getting walked-- it does nothing to actually teach the game in a way that prepares you for the next level.

It's harder for smaller schools because typically (but not in all cases), smaller schools are not "as good" larger schools for the fact that larger schools have a larger pool of kids which have better chances of having better talent that can play that style. Smaller schools can compete better by limiting the amount of possessions of the other team to keep it low scoring, which is a good strategy. This method was used against LeBron James in high school and almost knocked them out of the state tournament. This is how you defend against better offensive talent. Just like football in some cases. Personally, I don't like the shot clock at the high school level because I think it will just teach kids that's they need to play and shoot the ball fast. I already think a bad habit that young kids do is throw the ball up ad shoot a 3 as fast as possible. That's not fun to watch either. I think it'll take the importance of defense away. Just "try to score more than the other team" which is technically the name of the game, but there's more to basketball than that. Now I personally don't like milking the clock all game long. That's not typically fun to watch, but milking it during late game situations I'm completely fine with.

Spud6 Wrote:I just watched a start to a second half on Facebook were a team held the ball for 2:19 just passing the ball around. Immediately shut the stream off and came here to gripe. I’m sure this topic has been discussed at length multiple times on the site, but I’m bring it back up. There needs to be at least a 40 second shot clock in high school.

I think 35 seconds is plenty of time and it keeps teams from stalling. I don’t want to hear about how it lets weaker teams stay in the game. Play better. Just totally hate that mentality, we aren’t that good so let’s basically not play for 85% of the game and hope to get lucky. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the best team winning. And this is completely different than a football team running the ball and chewing up clock because they still have to execute. 35 seconds still allows for some of that but I have seen teams win the tip in overtime and hold the ball for the last shot. Gutless.

Shot clock no.

One can argue that a team's ability to milk the clock for time management is only due to the other team's lack of defense. It's extremely hard to milk the clock if the other team is applying great pressure. Be better at denying the passing lanes, on ball pressure, and getting low and guard. That's why there's a 5 second violation. A good team can score the ball, but a great team is achieved on the defensive side in my opinion.

2000PHS Wrote:I think 35 seconds is plenty of time and it keeps teams from stalling. I don’t want to hear about how it lets weaker teams stay in the game. Play better. Just totally hate that mentality, we aren’t that good so let’s basically not play for 85% of the game and hope to get lucky. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the best team winning. And this is completely different than a football team running the ball and chewing up clock because they still have to execute. 35 seconds still allows for some of that but I have seen teams win the tip in overtime and hold the ball for the last shot. Gutless.

Absolutely. In football you still have to execute. Not even comparable. I wouldn’t even care if it was a 45 sec shot clock. I’ve seen too many games that are spent holding the ball. What a coach is saying is “ either I don’t have faith in my kids ability or my own coaching enough to where we can be successful, so let’s just chew up the clock by stalling as much as possible”! You can’t have that type of mentality to support stall ball AND also gripe if a team runs the score up on ya in another game.

I’ve just always been the type of person that’s like, you believe in your ability, I believe in mine so let’s line up, go at it from start to finish and see who the best is. Some don’t look at it like that though.

I think most people (not everyone) but most, would agree that a shot clock would add to the game; however, the costs of employing an additional official to keep the shot clock would be an expense that many schools aren't willing to agree to assume. Plus, unlike college, it would be impossible for a "replay" to look at shot clock violations, which, event though probably wouldn't happen a lot, would still be another thing to complain about from fans, coaches etc, i.e.. was there an actual shot clock violation or not. So, in theory it would be great I think, but a tough thing to implement.

Not going to happen to much money !!

eky.sports.fan Wrote:I think most people (not everyone) but most, would agree that a shot clock would add to the game; however, the costs of employing an additional official to keep the shot clock would be an expense that many schools aren't willing to agree to assume. Plus, unlike college, it would be impossible for a "replay" to look at shot clock violations, which, event though probably wouldn't happen a lot, would still be another thing to complain about from fans, coaches etc, i.e.. was there an actual shot clock violation or not. So, in theory it would be great I think, but a tough thing to implement.

As far back as the early 2000's, various Christmas tournaments experimented with a one minute shot clock. I explicitly remember that one of those was the 5th/3rd at Lexington Catholic. In almost all of those games, there were maybe 1 or 2 violations, tops.

Replay is out of the question but a one minute shot clock gives you so much time that an official is probably going to be able to whistle play dead and ask the scorers table to reset it if needed.

A minute is just such a long time that it lessens the likelihood that a blown reset is going to effect the outcome of a game.