USA Basketball Recommendations.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I read this article on USAToday.com. USA Basketball makes some very good recommendations.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ock/441134002/

MTD, Sr.

[biz2]

Some very good: smaller basketball, lower hoop, no 3's, no zone all for younger kids (11 yo and younger)

Some I don't care for: Adoption of FIBA rules for HS, 24 second shot clock for HS. (too short. I would advocate for 30 or 35 seconds)

[sdoebler]

Good suggestions overall. I think that a shot clock needs to be common than it is today. It was touched on a bit at the end in terms of cost, I haven't done any research but my guess is that baskets in which the height can be adjusted would bear a larger cost for facilities. Most likely difficult for smaller gyms or schools. I think that the shot clock usage also is hindered by costs, that is our states excuse every year.

[#olderthanilook]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

Good suggestions overall. I think that a shot clock needs to be common than it is today. It was touched on a bit at the end in terms of cost, I haven't done any research but my guess is that baskets in which the height can be adjusted would bear a larger cost for facilities. Most likely difficult for smaller gyms or schools. I think that the shot clock usage also is hindered by costs, that is our states excuse every year.

I would think it would be a pain to adequately staff the table with someone that knows and consistently runs a shot clock correctly.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by sdoebler

Good suggestions overall. I think that a shot clock needs to be common than it is today. It was touched on a bit at the end in terms of cost, I haven't done any research but my guess is that baskets in which the height can be adjusted would bear a larger cost for facilities. Most likely difficult for smaller gyms or schools. I think that the shot clock usage also is hindered by costs, that is our states excuse every year.

There are clip on hoops that attach to the 10' hoops. My kids played on them at the Y when they were little.

Yes, that adds costs, but I think it is a huge value. With a 10' hoop, young kids are throwing the ball, not shooting.

[todd66]

personally, I think the shot clock ruins high school basketball. It takes a lot of strategy out of the game. No shot clock emphasizes ball control and free throw shooting. 2 areas that are disappearing from the game.

[LRZ]

HS shot clocks and kiddie-height baskets/smaller basketballs are very different issues.

I like the idea of lower baskets and smaller basketballs for little kids. I've ref'ed enough games with scores like 12-4, and making it easier to shoot and score would make for better skills development and thus better games, imo.

Shot clocks seem to me a solution in search of a problem. Nothing wrong with basketball being a game of tactics and strategy. Spread offense, running the clock? Learn to trap, force turnovers.

[todd66]

Could not agree with LRZ more. Do not change the essence of the game. Make the changes that will instill proper mechanics and promote playing the game fundamentally.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by LRZ

HS shot clocks and kiddie-height baskets/smaller basketballs are very different issues.

I like the idea of lower baskets and smaller basketballs for little kids. I've ref'ed enough games with scores like 12-4, and making it easier to shoot and score would make for better skills development and thus better games, imo.

Shot clocks seem to me a solution in search of a problem. Nothing wrong with basketball being a game of tactics and strategy. Spread offense, running the clock? Learn to trap, force turnovers.

Agree on the lower baskets and smaller balls.

With all due respect, I disagree on shot clocks. I believe that a shot clock SHOULD be adopted, and not for the strategic reasons that many coaches want it for. A shot clock should reduce deliberate (note: not intentional, because that is a specific term in the rules) fouls at the end of the game, because fouling actually creates a disadvantage for the fouling team. Fouling does stop the clock, but the shot clock will reset, giving the offense a new possession and a better chance to run out the shot (or game, depending on time remaining) clock.

If teams do not foul near the end of the game, we as officials do not have to guess on which deliberate fouls to rule as intentional fouls, and which deliberate fouls to rule as common fouls. This will eliminate the need for NFHS to constantly put intentional fouls as a point of emphasis every year, because intentional fouls would then only happen in excessive contact/dangerous play situations, or if a player did not try to play the ball. In addition, fewer fouls would mean a safer game, because players who are not fouled will not be as likely to retaliate or talk trash to other players. Officials' jobs would be easier, because they will not have to rule every touch as a foul in the last few minutes, as is currently the accepted practice in non-shot clock games.

I may have limited experience as a basketball official (3 years overall, 1 season at the high school sub-varsity level), but I have worked games both with and without the shot clock, and have noticed that teams who play with a shot clock play basketball throughout all 32 minutes of the game, instead of just for 28 minutes. I have also noticed fewer deliberate fouls with a shot clock than without a shot clock in my games, whether in boys or girls games, whether in urban public school games or private school games.

A 30-second shot clock would be the easiest to use for high school games, because a visible 10-second count would not be required (if the official sees that the ball is still in the backcourt with 20 seconds on the shot clock, there is a violation) while the shot clock is on. This would free the official to concentrate on a wider area of the court in transition. This is why I would recommend a 30-second shot clock for high school play. If high school chose to go with a 24-second shot clock, then a visual count would be needed, because the FIBA/NBA backcourt count is 8 seconds, not 10.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

A 30-second shot clock would be the easiest to use for high school games, because a visible 10-second count would not be required (if the official sees that the ball is still in the backcourt with 20 seconds on the shot clock, there is a violation) while the shot clock is on. This would free the official to concentrate on a wider area of the court in transition. This is why I would recommend a 30-second shot clock for high school play. If high school chose to go with a 24-second shot clock, then a visual count would be needed, because the FIBA/NBA backcourt count is 8 seconds, not 10.

Why would it matter? 24 second clock, the violation occurs at 14 (or 16 if you have an 8 second count). Regardless of the starting point of the clock and the length of the count, I'd hope that most officials would be able to recognize whatever time it is that creates the violation.

That said, I think 30 is way too short for many HS games. 30 would be fine for upper level varsity, but a lot of teams just don't have the skill to make it a good game with a 30 second clock. It would be a game of turnovers and desperation heaves/airballs. For HS, 40 or 45 seconds would be about right for ALL games.

[HokiePaul]

Interesting that they propose introducing the shot clock at the same time (Age 12) where they propose allowing zone defense and 3-point shooting.

Personally I don't see much need for a shot clock before high school, but I'm 100% for the other recommendations. Having a shorter basket/smaller ball for the young kids helps develop better form on their shots.

[sdoebler]

I will say that I used to be in the realm of not wanting a shot clock as that is how it worked in when I played ball in high school. Starting to work some higher level tournaments with teams from different states my view has drastically changed. The high school game needs a shot clock. I don't know how many games you have done where the stalling starts in the 2nd or 3rd quarter but I get one or two each year and it is brutal.

Additionally, someone mentioned end of the game fouling. While this is obviously part of the game it is so much less prevalent with a shot clock. 45 seconds left down by 2 without the ball and with a 30 second shot clock. Now the team has to step up and play great defense without fouling, really makes the game better.

In terms of how many seconds for high school I would have to look at some of the statistics that take place and what effect 35 to 30 did to the game. Speaking to Camerons point about needing it to be 40-45 seconds, I understand where you are coming from and can't say I completely disagree. However, those teams that would make those desperation shots and run out of time frequently often times in my experience can't possess the ball for 30-35 seconds let alone 40-45 which is why I would lean toward 30-35. I think that a review of studies done in college and states with shot clocks would provide a great resource for making the decision.

[Rich]

As an official, I couldn't possibly care -- as long as we can use the clock to count the 10 seconds in the backcourt. Not having to count that in HS games would make the shot clock worth it....to me as an official, that is.

[so cal lurker]

CA uses 35 (at least for boys--I have a vague sense that girls might be 30, and I believe they have used the shot clock longer than the boys). The 35 seems about right to me--certainly doesn't need to be longer from what I've seen (though my son's league is one of the better leagues, so I can't speak to lower level play). I'm not sure if it is universally used below varsity or is league by league.

But I'm pretty sure they don't let the refs use the shot clock for back court count.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by LRZ

HS shot clocks and kiddie-height baskets/smaller basketballs are very different issues.

I like the idea of lower baskets and smaller basketballs for little kids. I've ref'ed enough games with scores like 12-4, and making it easier to shoot and score would make for better skills development and thus better games, imo.

Shot clocks seem to me a solution in search of a problem. Nothing wrong with basketball being a game of tactics and strategy. Spread offense, running the clock? Learn to trap, force turnovers.

I have played and reffed in both shot-clock and non-shot clock states. If you think shot clocks aren't needed you are about 30 years behind the time. Varsity games need 35 and fresh/jv need about 40. You can still spread the offense and play basketball. But most of this is so dated it's scary.