Any chance for a shot-clock yet?

Doublehelix said:
The point of a shot clock is that both teams have an equal amount of time to generate offense (or defense). It has nothing to do with how quickly you shoot. It creates a uniform and consistent pace and flow for the game. Again, that's the POINT of a shot clock that you continue to ignore and push aside.
Click to expand...
I love watching football. The only reason that football has a play clock is that it forces action every 40 seconds. Teams cannot hold the ball while the defense is helpless to take the ball away.

With that said, Time of Possession is a huge metric in the sport. The team that holds the ball the longest, wins more often than not. The offense can hold the ball the entire quarter. There are no guarantees of an equal amount of time to generate offense. The offense can hold the ball indefinitely until the end of each half. In theory, with a successful onside kick, one team may never get their offense on the field.

There is a reason that we see grind-it-out offenses in football that use every possible second and at the opposite end, high-flying offenses that score as fast as they can. It works great in football. Right now, it works great in basketball. Sadly, we may lose this because some people want a shot clock to equalize time of possession even if the defense does nothing.
 
Yappi said:
I love watching football. The only reason that football has a play clock is that it forces action every 40 seconds. Teams cannot hold the ball while the defense is helpless to take the ball away.

With that said, Time of Possession is a huge metric in the sport. The team that holds the ball the longest, wins more often than not. The offense can hold the ball the entire quarter. There are no guarantees of an equal amount of time to generate offense. The offense can hold the ball indefinitely until the end of each half. In theory, with a successful onside kick, one team may never get their offense on the field.

There is a reason that we see grind-it-out offenses in football that use every possible second and at the opposite end, high-flying offenses that score as fast as they can. It works great in football. Right now, it works great in basketball. Sadly, we may lose this because some people want a shot clock to equalize time of possession even if the defense does nothing.
Click to expand...
If you do things as a team that allows you to continue to be on offense, like actually playing the game and getting first downs, you win the right to continue to play on offense. Each team gets a play clock and 4 downs. It's standard and uniform.

No different in basketball, each team gets the allotted time to score. If you get a rebound or draw a foul, you get rewarded with more opportunities to score.

Does a football team get rewarded with more opportunities if they just kneel? I guess they should just be able to kneel forever because maybe they're an inferior team.

What in the world are we talking about?

How on earth is this really a conversation? Twilight zone stuff.
 
Yappi said:
Because you want to change a rule that has 100 years of precedence without providing any sufficient reason to make the change.
Click to expand...
Again, how blatantly ridiculous.

You may disagree with my ideas, but to say "without providing any sufficient reason" is just beyond bizarre. Again, complete twilight zone in here. It really is scary.

This concept is the hottest basketball topic at the high school level, probably across the entire country, and people act like it's not real. Like the reasons for adopting it are just made up. So bizarre.

And just to make themselves feel right. It's so odd.
 
Yappi said:
I gave a sufficient reason for not changing it.

Do you agree?
Click to expand...
No.

And I gave many reasons for changing it. Yet you said I gave none. Are you blind, or can't read?

I respect your reason for not changing, but I don't agree. But to say I didn't give any reasons is really really weird. I've been giving reasons for 5 years.

Like really weird. Bizarre.
 
Doublehelix said:
Why would I deny my true intentions for having a shot clock?

What do I have to gain from denying what you say I'm denying?

If I wanted it to change because I like a preferred style of play, I would just say that. Why would I try to hide that?

You make zero sense. You act like I'm trying to subvert the establishment with some secret code to get this approved. If I wanted all games to just be run-and-gun games, I would just say that.

When have I ever taken the round-about approach to any topic on this forum?
Click to expand...
You have said multiple times that holding the ball, running long offensive sets, etc is not-competing. That is your personal opinion. You even went so far to say that both coaches involved should be fired for allowing it to happen.

You keep running to flow and pace of game as your real reason. When presented with evidence that the average possession is already less than the proposed shot clock times....you go back to stalling and holding the ball. You're all over the place.

It sounds to me that you have a long history of lying, multiple screen names, etc on yappi. So hard telling what you have done in the past.
 
winbypin said:
You have said multiple times that holding the ball, running long offensive sets, etc is not-competing. That is your personal opinion. You even went so far to say that both coaches involved should be fired for allowing it to happen.

You keep running to flow and pace of game as your real reason. When presented with evidence that the average possession is already less than the proposed shot clock times....you go back to stalling and holding the ball. You're all over the place.

It sounds to me that you have a long history of lying, multiple screen names, etc on yappi. So hard telling what you have done in the past.
Click to expand...
No, I said teams that blatantly refuse to play the game as a means of competing should be ostracized.

Again, for the 985th time now, there's a clear difference between strategically running clock and holding the ball for an entire quarter. The fact that you argue this is, again, the twilight zone and completely bizarre.

And to add to it, you actually think you're making solid arguments. You have to be arguing just to argue, otherwise, you are the dumbest human in the world.
 
Doublehelix said:
No, I said teams that blatantly refuse to play the game as a means of competing should be ostracized.

Again, for the 985th time now, there's a clear difference between strategically running clock and holding the ball for an entire quarter. The fact that you argue this is, again, the twilight zone and completely bizarre.

And to add to it, you actually think you're making solid arguments. You have to be arguing just to argue, otherwise, you are the dumbest human in the world.
Click to expand...
Name calling again. The universal sign for waving the white flag.
 
Doublehelix said:
Yes.

Or as an alternative, develop a deeper offensive skill-set for more kids where many kids have the ability to create a shot in those situations.
Click to expand...
That is already a goal for every coach I have ever known. Kids improve, but there will still be those who are significantly better on most teams. The better players get the shots. It’s not about taking turns shooting if you’re trying to win, and if you’re not trying to win then the lessons taught by team sports won’t be taught.
 
Doublehelix said:
Again, how blatantly ridiculous.

You may disagree with my ideas, but to say "without providing any sufficient reason" is just beyond bizarre. Again, complete twilight zone in here. It really is scary.

This concept is the hottest basketball topic at the high school level, probably across the entire country, and people act like it's not real. Like the reasons for adopting it are just made up. So bizarre.

And just to make themselves feel right. It's so odd.
Click to expand...
And, people everywhere oppose it.
 
winbypin said:
The average length of possession in basketball is already less than the proposed shot clocks time. On average, that means the flow and pace of the game really won't change.

It will prevent some teams from holding the ball at half court (typically in the tournament) and will also prevent some teams that run motion (or even just passing it around) for a minute or so to chew up the clock before taking a shot. So teams that like to take the air out of the ball when ahead won't be able to do that any longer in the shot clock world.

In agree with what you're saying. Somehow preventing the other team from scoring, no matter the method, is somehow a bad strategy.
Click to expand...
I go back and fourth, it will be super tough to manage the clock, especially on Friday Nights with part time/volunteer help.
I would dispute the time of possession because it seems skewed. When a lesser team tries to stall and turns it over after 60 secs for a five second layup it taints the average. I wonder what the average half court possession is?
I just think shot clock basketball is funner and absolutely encourages more players to shoot. Coaches have to reassess what is a “ good look” because if you wait til 10 seconds left it can be tough. At that point inferior defenders can belly you up.
 
?????? said:
I go back and fourth, it will be super tough to manage the clock, especially on Friday Nights with part time/volunteer help.
I would dispute the time of possession because it seems skewed. When a lesser team tries to stall and turns it over after 60 secs for a five second layup it taints the average. I wonder what the average half court possession is?
I just think shot clock basketball is funner and absolutely encourages more players to shoot. Coaches have to reassess what is a “ good look” because if you wait til 10 seconds left it can be tough. At that point inferior defenders can belly you up.
Click to expand...
Turnover points will continue to exist and they are already included in the time of possession average. As is that 60 second possession you talked about.

If you're of the opinion that coaches try to control too much of the game now you're kidding yourself if you think they will stop because of the shot clock. It's not equal opportunity shooting in the NCAA or even the NBA. Why do we think it will be so in HS. Coaches will continue to put their best shooters in situations where they take the most shots.
 
Redandgold said:
And, people everywhere oppose it.
Click to expand...
Again, how on earth can you make this claim when it's literally the hottest topic across the country for HS basketball?

To make this statement is so blind and myopic, and it borders on insanity. And again, to double down, you are saying everyone else is the problem with it.

The fact that you say people everywhere oppose it is beyond bizarre.

The polling is literally the opposite of your statement, yet you will still double down on you being right.
 
Redandgold said:
That is already a goal for every coach I have ever known. Kids improve, but there will still be those who are significantly better on most teams. The better players get the shots. It’s not about taking turns shooting if you’re trying to win, and if you’re not trying to win then the lessons taught by team sports won’t be taught.
Click to expand...
I never said it should be an equal opportunity offense. Of course the better players get more shots.

But it's also significantly better if your role players can actually make a move or a shot. It's much harder to guard a team that has threats everywhere on the floor.

Again, why do you people literally talk in the extremes? I say it develops more kids, and you take that to mean "man, you want every kid to get equal shots". Never said it, and never implied it. Completely fabricated and attributed to me.
 
Last edited:
Doublehelix said:
Again, how on earth can you make this claim when it's literally the hottest topic across the country for HS basketball?

To make this statement is so blind and myopic, and it borders on insanity. And again, to double down, you are saying everyone else is the problem with it.

The fact that you say people everywhere oppose it is beyond bizarre.
Click to expand...
"People everywhere oppose it" is not the same as "everyone opposes it".

You're welcome.
 
?????? said:
I go back and fourth, it will be super tough to manage the clock, especially on Friday Nights with part time/volunteer help.
I would dispute the time of possession because it seems skewed. When a lesser team tries to stall and turns it over after 60 secs for a five second layup it taints the average. I wonder what the average half court possession is?
I just think shot clock basketball is funner and absolutely encourages more players to shoot. Coaches have to reassess what is a “ good look” because if you wait til 10 seconds left it can be tough. At that point inferior defenders can belly you up.
Click to expand...
Another solid point - more kids capable of shooting a good look vs. waiting for the perfect look. That's a good thing.
 
Yappi said:
*sufficient
Click to expand...
The reasons are straight out of the playbook for adoption of the rule. Do you live under a rock?

If you honestly don't think those are sufficient reasons, you should just start the keep-away league and see how much interest you get.

So weird what people will say just to avoid ego abuse. So bizarre.
 
Doublehelix said:
And yet so dumb it's pointless to even write it.

It's the same as saying "people everywhere hate sex" - you're welcome.
Click to expand...
There are people everywhere that hate sex but probably safe to say not everyone hates sex.

Maybe have someone help explain the difference to you.
 
winbypin said:
Turnover points will continue to exist and they are already included in the time of possession average. As is that 60 second possession you talked about.

If you're of the opinion that coaches try to control too much of the game now you're kidding yourself if you think they will stop because of the shot clock. It's not equal opportunity shooting in the NCAA or even the NBA. Why do we think it will be so in HS. Coaches will continue to put their best shooters in situations where they take the most shots.
Click to expand...
I ain’t kidding myself. I have watched enough basketball with the shot clock and without, at all levels. Your kidding yourself if you don’t think coaches become more tolerant on shots taken with a shot clock. No kiddin, coaches are gonna get their best shooters the best look’s possible captain obvious. They just cant do it on the fourth reversal
 
?????? said:
I ain’t kidding myself. I have watched enough basketball with the shot clock and without, at all levels. Your kidding yourself if you don’t think coaches become more tolerant on shots taken with a shot clock. No kiddin, coaches are gonna get their best shooters the best look’s possible captain obvious. They just cant do it on the fourth reversal
Click to expand...
Very few HS teams have the depth to allow free reign of their number 4-8 players. Coaches will still control those guys shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top