Chad Courrier: Shot clock likely won't make much change
Dec. 24—It was inevitable that the shot clock would be approved for use during Minnesota high school boys and girls basketball games.
It was also inevitable that the reaction would be swift, and mixed.
That's the nature of this rule change. Two rational people can use the same argument to make the opposite conclusion.
To start, there is nothing wrong with the current boys and girls game. It's a great sport, played by athletes of differing talent levels, teaching life lessons of skill development, discipline and teamwork.
The game has survived, even thrived, after other rule changes, such as the 3-point line and the restricted arc. It will continue to be a great game once the 35-second shot clock is instituted for varsity games in the 2023-24 season.
There have been many who say the game will be cleaner with a shot clock, though there's no way to know until it happens. Teams won't have to foul as much at the end of games, knowing they'll get the ball back after 35 seconds, but there's also not much chance of closing a 10-point deficit in the final two minutes without sending the opponent to the free-throw line.
Some say that the more talented teams will have the advantage, given the game should speed up and athleticism and skills should shine. Others say the less-talented teams will have the advantage, needing only to defend for 35 seconds to force a poor shot.
Some think the shot clock will require more strategy, while others counter that there will be less ability to game-plan.
Proponents say the kids will like the change, given that's the way they see the game on television. Just because the NBA and colleges use a shot clock doesn't mean high schools need to have one.
It wasn't necessary, according to school officials; it was more of a want for the coaches.
However, the most likely result will be no change, given that few teams have the inclination, or ability, to hold the ball for more than 35 seconds per possession.
Those once-per-decade games where one team stalls, with teams figuring it's the only chance to win, are far less common than the running time blowouts that could result from forcing one team to shoot more often.
There are two certainties: smaller school districts will need to find some extra money to afford, install and operate the shot clocks, and all games will require three officials, which will stress an already shrinking pool of qualified whistle-blowers.
It was interesting to hear one coach suggest that the key to solving the shortage of officials is to play fewer games, instead allowing for more time to practice and develop the athletes' skills.
However, that's a change that will not be coming to high-school basketball anytime soon.
There has much been much debated about the shot clock in basketball. A shot clock won't make the game more "real" or better, but it will be a bit different, giving teams, officials and game-day staff one more thing to think about.
Chad Courrier is the Free Press sports editor. He's at 507-344-6353, ccourrier@mankatofreepress.com or on Twitter @ChadCourrier.
