Georgia Adopts Shot Clock

TrueEagle

New member
Shot clock hands the game to the more talented team. Controlling tempo gives the less talented team a much better chance at winning. This will only help the recruited AAU teams disguised as high school teams. Rule changes should be few and far between, and when necessary, they should try to make the game more competitive, not less.
 

eastisbest

Well-known member
Shot clock hands the game to the more talented team. Controlling tempo gives the less talented team a much better chance at winning. This will only help the recruited AAU teams disguised as high school teams. Rule changes should be few and far between, and when necessary, they should try to make the game more competitive, not less.
Hands the game to the more talented team? I think you're working against your own argument here, which I presume is against shot clock? If the team is the more talented, they do not need the game handed to them. They'll earn it.

========================
Implementation of the shot clocks reduces the skills required by any team/coach. It moves the strategy from game and practice time more towards conditioning and natural selection time.

If the clockers would teach their teams defense, they would be less likely to be crying in their cereal the next day. Next they'll want the side court baskets lowered so the offense can choose from three baskets, turn it into a real one-on-one "team" game. Might actually be fun to play that game though. :D
 
Last edited:

carefree93

Active member
Hands the game to the more talented team? I think you're working against your own argument here, which I presume is against shot clock? If the team is the more talented, they do not need the game handed to them. They'll earn it.

========================
Implementation of the shot clocks reduces the skills required by any team/coach.
This makes negative sense.
 

carefree93

Active member
Shot clock hands the game to the more talented team. Controlling tempo gives the less talented team a much better chance at winning. This will only help the recruited AAU teams disguised as high school teams. Rule changes should be few and far between, and when necessary, they should try to make the game more competitive, not less.
You can absolutely control tempo with a shot clock, but you can’t stall with a shot clock. That’s a good thing, and a significant difference.
 
Last edited:

TrueEagle

New member
Hands the game to the more talented team? I think you're working against your own argument here, which I presume is against shot clock? If the team is the more talented, they do not need the game handed to them. They'll earn it.

========================
Implementation of the shot clocks reduces the skills required by any team/coach. It moves the strategy from game and practice time more towards conditioning and natural selection time.

If the clockers would teach their teams defense, they would be less likely to be crying in their cereal the next day. Next they'll want the side court baskets lowered so the offense can choose from three baskets, turn it into a real one-on-one "team" game. Might actually be fun to play that game though. :D
Three pretty ridiculous points that suggest you never played the game competitively, and really know very little about it. The quicker the game the bigger the advantage of the team with the most talent. This should be obvious to even a casual fan. I have no idea what you’re trying to say with your second argument. Regardless of the tempo you play, skill development is paramount. With possession basketball you learn to play without the ball, and offensive skills are maximized. To your third point, playing possession basketball offensively has nothing at all to do with how good you are defensively.
 

carefree93

Active member
True, but still to the advantage of the team with the most talent.
The team with the most talent already has the advantage. This isn’t handicapped horse racing. The name of the game isn’t to ensure an equal chance. If that was the case, talent would be distributed equally.
 

carefree93

Active member
Great question. I asked the OHSAA the same question about competitive balance.
Scoring metrics shouldn’t be the barometer here. I don’t know if there are any metrics around game flow or pace of play, but those would be more appropriate.

Also, this change would be gradual over YEARS of play. Theres no way teams and coaches could grasp this change over night. It would take some time, but would benefit the game and the development of more players in the long run.
 

eastisbest

Well-known member
Three pretty ridiculous points that suggest you never played the game competitively, and really know very little about it.
I get it, if you use the word "ridiculous" and attack the person as opposed to the opinion, yours is more right. That's called a fallacy BTW.

My thought after reading your post was that you were either confusing or equating "athletic" with "talented" or maybe had a definition of "talented" that didn't actually include skills. So I addressed the issue, thinking you might actually be able to provide a mature response. I take the blame for my false presumption that you could display maturity.
 
.
Top