Search results

Two year starter suddenly isn't any good? Unlikely. Definitely sounds like retaliation.

I bet they'll have a few freshmen who will play JV because they're pretty good players. And 22 is way too many for two freshman teams. Probably better to have 16-18 for the sake of playing time. Highly doubtful that #19 would have turned out to be a varsity player anyway.

Such pride in JV record. It's great but nobody cares. Just shows that the depth is there. Don't need large classes as someone stated. 3 good players a year gives you 9 deep on the varsity which most schools and coaches would love to have.

Given the relatively small sample size, I think this result might be truly statistically insignificant in the sense of a 95% confidence level that it wasn't random. But I don't have that table anymore to check lol.

Seriously? I'm a basketball guy but aren't 8/9 meant to be 50/50. So statistically speaking these results aren't crazy.

I get you can look up a given player. I was wondering more if there was an overall central list kept by the state or somebody else.

What's to handle if it's allowed? I think they'll do about as well as they've done with recruiting.

Assuming there would be public visibility. Which would be ok under the rules right? As least as long as the "public" reason wasn't anything that broke recruiting rules. Which don't get enforced anyway.

How can it be underhanded if it's allowed?

Are there public lists in the states that allow it? Who gets in trouble if one doesn't get posted?

No. You actually said: "But as others have mentioned, it will require a coach to be more lenient with shot selection, because they cannot control a dwindling shot clock, which is good for allowing more kids to develop some of those offensive skills."

Players don't develop skills in games. They come into the games with the skills they've developed. Which they are trying to do now so that wouldn't change.

You mean like soccer (the most popular sport in the world), hockey, lacrosse, and all the other timed team sports? Or just American football, which needs it because every piece of action is a separate play? So actually it's not at all typical but more of an exception.

Agree. It's not a coach's job to make the top seed's path harder. It's to help their team have the best odds of advancing in the tourney.

I agree with the physicality of play which has increased over the years. But working to get your best players a good shot? Oh the horror! Kids will develop themselves into scoring threats, hopefully with a coach's guidance and a ton of hard work. Shot clock won't do it. I still think shot...

Exactly! They don't have to play the team they're trying to avoid.

So we agree? It's hard to tell with you. Please tell me again why you favor a shot clock, especially how it will help the high school players and teams. Thanks.

Is HS basketball in a bad spot overall? Or just <1% of games people don't like to watch because it doesn't entertain them enough? Would this fix everything you think is wrong with HS basketball? I doubt it would make even a bit of difference overall.

He's allowed to have an opinion regardless of his role in the game. Same as sad sack fans.

:ROFLMAO: