Area coaches offer thoughts, opinions on shot clock

More action, more opportunities and maybe more participation in the sport of high school basketball are all good things that possibly could happen with the addition of a shot clock.

Rushed shots, lower shot percentages and additional expense for schools are some of the negatives that could materialize.

'The shot clock debate has been gaining a lot of steam lately and there is a lot of different opinions,” Washington boys head coach Collin Stark said. 'I do believe that it would make the game more enjoyable to watch having a shot clock of potentially 35-40 seconds. The game would be more up and down across the state.”

Highland girls head coach Jody Fink sees one of those problems with it.

'I don't think it is a good idea as most teams wouldn't utilize it and you have to train someone new to run it at the bench with it already being tough to find volunteers to run the scoring bench. If they make schools have to foot the bill to add in a visible shot clock, that could be a large cost that some schools just can't afford. If there was a way to install it at no cost to the schools, maybe by having the officials count it, but then other adjustments would have to be made. I think it could hurt the game with many more problems during the game.”

Iowa Mennonite School boys head coach Dwight Gingerich can see a couple of negatives of it.

'It may contribute to a lower field goal percentage, particularly for less skilled teams. I think it puts more of a premium on skill and will favor teams that have better players. Lesser-talented teams cannot level the field by shortening the game by having longer possessions. I think a shot clock may not be the best at the lower levels because it may not allow for the time younger players need to develop their individual and team skills.

'While it's not unusual to see shots go up early even now, I think we will see teams getting shots up even more after a single-play action, and there will likely be less continuity in the offenses.”

Washington girls head coach Shannon Rugg also has some reservations.

'In the first couple of years, it would hurt the game due to kids and coaches not having time to adjust. I do think that there would be some negatives for schools due to cost and having to find people to run the shot clock.”

Not only players and coaches but officials would have to adapt if a clock were implemeted.

'I think it could be good if they got rid of the seconds call and count by the official and made the lead official count to 25 or so,” Fink said. 'I also think once the ball is beyond halfcourt that you can't inbound the ball into the backcourt once across and that would increase defensive intensity. Those are areas may make it all right, but if the shot clock is mandatory on the wall and someone has to run the equipment I think it would hurt the game.”

All four coaches believe it would make a difference in the long run.

'Once coaches and players get a better understanding, I do think that it would help the game,” Rugg said. 'Shooting percentage would go down the first few years, but once players and coaches get time to adjust to it, then it would be better for the game.”

'I don't think it would do anything to the scoring or field goal percentages as most teams are shooting within the 20-25 seconds already,” Fink said.

'I do think it will force teams to be quicker to be in attack mode offensively, which can be good,” Gingerich said. 'It has a chance to create a quicker, more skilled game where teams and individual players will need to assert themselves more intentionally. For teams and individuals that do not work hard at it, it has a chance to become more of a run-and-gun phenomenon minus the beauty of teamwork. For teams that work hard at it, it has a chance to become a more dynamic game.”

'The scoring in other states that have incorporated the shot clock has increased scoring, but by only a couple points,” Stark said. 'The field-goal percentage will go down a little bit, but there won't be as big of an impact than most think with a shot clock.”

Both men and women play with a shot clock in college.

'I don't think it matters preparing the kids for college,” Fink said. 'As a fellow player in the college game, I never had an issue with it in transitioning to the college game.”

'It would help the game and the few kids that are looking to play college basketball would be better prepared for that game,” Rugg said.

”I do think playing with a shot clock allows players bound for college to gain that experience earlier,” Gingerich said. 'At the same time, good players can make that adjustment, and have.”

A clock would also bring a certain strategy to more parts of the game.

'There won't be a big difference with the shot clock except late in games and at the end of the quarters where teams are not able to hold the ball for a minute or two,” Stark said. 'Coaches will have to adjust their philosophies to take advantage of the shot clock, especially to end the games.”

'I personally can go either way,” Gingerich said. 'Strategy might be different, as a coach thinks about how to use the clock strategically in situations. Employing changing defenses, knowing there are just a few seconds left on the shot clock on a side out-of-bounds play, for example, might be something that we would see more of. It's like playing a lot of late-quarter situations many times through a game.”

While there is nothing definite in the future, change always happens.

'I realize there is movement in moving forward with the shot clock,” Gingerich said. 'I like the game as it is now, but I think changing could also be good. There are times in practice where we will put a count on things, because I like to see us be more intentional and aggressive offensively. For many folks, it feels like it's the way things are moving elsewhere and we need to keep up with the changes the game is making. I do think the shot clock will change things.”

'I would like to see the shot clock incorporated in the state for high school,” Stark said.