Game Scoring Averages

[Lamoni]

Looking through the 4A Substate scores I am consistently shocked at how low scoring these games are. I have been to a large amount of 4A games in the past 5 years and the brand of basketball (at least in the DM Metro) has gotten really bad.

I listened to this podcast today with Troy Skinner, whose Palmer teams of the 80s averaged 103 ppg, and thought I would share it here to get some more thoughts on why this is happening. I know a small school in the 80s is a far cry from 4A basketball now but something needs to change. Will the shot clock help out or is it the style of basketball?

https://www.moonlightgrahamshow.com/podcast/2018/2/26/ep-50-palmer-hero-troy-skinner

 

[makelovenotwar]

Shot clock might help. But it would add another paid person at the game spending money high schools already don't have. Budgets are tight. Even at 4A I have been surprised how many small crowds I saw at Hempstead home games I went to. So while it might help the scoring average (note, the last decrease in NCAA shot clock had very little--statistically insignificant?--change in scoring), it will even increase even more the importance of guard play in high school, increase the cost of running a game while removing a coaching strategy from the game.

 

[EastIowaHawk]

I don't mind the low scores. Defense is as important as offense, and the best defensive teams seem to succeed. I've noticed some of the low scores in the CIML, but is that holding the ball, or good defense? I watch a lot of MVC games and I think the overall quality of play has actually gotten better, overall. I am not opposed to a shot clock, though, although it penalizes teams with really good guards and weaker front courts, and it favors the more powerful team, in my estimation. If we end up with a shot clock, so be it. I haven't seen a single game this year in which a team stalled and held on to ball, except in the last minute of a half, and much of the time, that strategy backfired.

 

[FarmFam]

If a shot clock is adopted the increase in fans will more than cover the expenses. People are more entertained by an uptempo offense and more scoring. The NFL gets this, thus why offenses are favored regarding rules and penalties. College basketball gets that it puts more fans in the seats and the NBA gets it as they have the shortest possession time around. I'm not saying high school sports should mimic all professional and college sports but I think we certainly can learn a few things.

 

[rk#5]

Shot clock might help. But it would add another paid person at the game spending money high schools already don't have. Budgets are tight. Even at 4A I have been surprised how many small crowds I saw at Hempstead home games I went to. So while it might help the scoring average (note, the last decrease in NCAA shot clock had very little--statistically insignificant?--change in scoring), it will even increase even more the importance of guard play in high school, increase the cost of running a game while removing a coaching strategy from the game.

Yet South Dakota is able to have it. Don't give me the budget issues. South Dakota schools have a lower budget, yet they make it work. Consistent games in the 60s to 70s is more entertaining. Coaching strategy? It adds more to coaching because there is more possessions. Kids have to be better coached to find your shot earlier. Been to many games in both Iowa and South Dakota, the shot clock creates a better product.

 

[mylameusername]

In central Iowa, the Valley coach (Windhorst) and Hoover's coach are both notorious for slowing it down and making it a possession by possession game. Windhorst had the same MO at Southeast Polk as well. He's been known to hold the ball for extended periods of time on occasion. But, it has paid off for them in terms of success.

I would prefer a shot clock.
But if a coach wants to stress defense and ball control/quality possessions, that is part of strategy too. Boring as it may be...

 

[makelovenotwar]

rk#5, I really don't want to start a battle over this as I am not crazily opposed to the shot clock, but you are really comparing the economic health of SD to Iow?. Below is a link of state fiscal rankings by the Mercatus Center at George Mason. Note SD is #3, Iowa is #28. We're closer to IL than to SD in terms of our financial health.
https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

 

[rk#5]

rk#5, I really don't want to start a battle over this as I am not crazily opposed to the shot clock, but you are really comparing the economic health of SD to Iow?. Below is a link of state fiscal rankings by the Mercatus Center at George Mason. Note SD is #3, Iowa is #28. We're closer to IL than to SD in terms of our financial health.
https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

That shows how the states themselves are doing, but doesn't tell you where they are putting the money. The South Dakota schools are not even close to the Iowa schools. There are many more small town low budget schools in SD than there are in Iowa. SD schools do have a lower budget. Worked in both settings.

 

[sarcastico]

rk#5, I really don't want to start a battle over this as I am not crazily opposed to the shot clock, but you are really comparing the economic health of SD to Iow?. Below is a link of state fiscal rankings by the Mercatus Center at George Mason. Note SD is #3, Iowa is #28. We're closer to IL than to SD in terms of our financial health.
https://www.mercatus.org/statefiscalrankings

You really don't know much about South Dakota do you? The numbers you posted are incredibly skewed by Sioux Falls and the surrounding area which is nothing like the rest of the state. West River is like an entirely different state and much poorer than anywhere in Iowa.

 

[Greenway12]

But nationwide, there certainly hasn’t been a rush for high school programs to experience the benefits, as South Dakota is one of only seven other states that utilize the timer, with at least Wisconsin joining the group in the 2019-2020 season.

So why haven’t more states hopped on the shot clock bandwagon? Mostly it’s the financial burden.

Of those who have been interviewed most are in agreement that introducing the shot clock has represented a fairly significant financial obligation on part of South Dakota schools, as the clocks themselves can cost as much as $2,000 to $2,500 per clock.

For some schools, after the cost of the clocks, installation, and service-agreements, the investment has hovered at, or just beyond, the $10,000 mark.

Obviously that up-front investment has been easier for some schools than it has been for others, as has been finding operators, whom the schools must also pay for their services.

http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/lo...cle_a10c141d-9c39-582e-99d8-b3ce92c53152.html

 

[sarcastico]

But nationwide, there certainly hasn’t been a rush for high school programs to experience the benefits, as South Dakota is one of only seven other states that utilize the timer, with at least Wisconsin joining the group in the 2019-2020 season.

So why haven’t more states hopped on the shot clock bandwagon? Mostly it’s the financial burden.

Of those who have been interviewed most are in agreement that introducing the shot clock has represented a fairly significant financial obligation on part of South Dakota schools, as the clocks themselves can cost as much as $2,000 to $2,500 per clock.

For some schools, after the cost of the clocks, installation, and service-agreements, the investment has hovered at, or just beyond, the $10,000 mark.

Obviously that up-front investment has been easier for some schools than it has been for others, as has been finding operators, whom the schools must also pay for their services.

http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/lo...cle_a10c141d-9c39-582e-99d8-b3ce92c53152.html

Do you read the whole series of articles? The next one goes over how it affected play where the majority of people agreed it had a beneficial impact on the games;

"Were the on-court benefits of having a shot clock at the high school level the only deciding factor in its adoption, we’d likely be living in a country where all 50 states utilize it, as most people around the game believe it’s a benefit."

The next article goes over the cost and how people paid for it. While the upfront cost could be quite high, especially for smaller schools, every school in South Dakota was able to pay for it either through planning well or just fundraising within the community.

"At least one class B school representative commented that the cost of the shot clocks wasn’t an enormous financial burden. No matter the cost, no matter how it was paid for, whether schools did it with a smile, or with a groan, the deed has been done, and outside of repair costs and payments to operators, much of the financial burden has come and gone for South Dakota high schools."

So it seems that it has been beneficial and the cost has been dealt with. This in a state with poorer school districts than you will find in Iowa. I understand the cost is intimidating, which is why many opposed it in South Dakota as well. But I like to think Iowa is a great basketball state and I would love to see us playing the best basketball possible. A shot clock would be a nice step in that direction.

 

[iowalongs230]

Looking through the 4A Substate scores I am consistently shocked at how low scoring these games are. I have been to a large amount of 4A games in the past 5 years and the brand of basketball (at least in the DM Metro) has gotten really bad.

I listened to this podcast today with Troy Skinner, whose Palmer teams of the 80s averaged 103 ppg, and thought I would share it here to get some more thoughts on why this is happening. I know a small school in the 80s is a far cry from 4A basketball now but something needs to change. Will the shot clock help out or is it the style of basketball?

https://www.moonlightgrahamshow.com/podcast/2018/2/26/ep-50-palmer-hero-troy-skinner

Thanks for posting this podcast, it was a great listen.

I'm not sure we should use the Palmer teams in 1A as a benchmark. As someone who played 1A ball in Iowa and now has 2 sons who've played it, it is certainly easier to score at an extreme level vs. inferior competition, especially if you play a pressing, run-and-gun style. That's what we saw to some extent last year with Grand View Christian and are seeing this year with North Linn. As Skinner himself mentioned in the podcast, when you press teams who don't have guards with any kind of decent ball skills, you're going to get a lot of steals and opportunities to shoot. (That's not to diminish in any way his talent or the accomplishments of the Palmer teams. He was obviously talented enough to play at Iowa, and I love the stories of how the Palmer teams with just a couple of additions were able to compete nationally in the equivalent of AAU ball.)

HSAT, I would love to see shot clocks in Iowa as I agree it would make for a more interesting style of basketball, especially come tourney time when some teams purposefully slow it way down to make every possession count.

 

[makelovenotwar]

Sarcastico wrote: "You really don't know much about South Dakota do you? The numbers you posted are incredibly skewed by Sioux Falls and the surrounding area which is nothing like the rest of the state. West River is like an entirely different state and much poorer than anywhere in Iowa."

Huh? What? The numbers or STATE level fiscal health as reported by a neutral 3rd party. Obviously, the data is influenced by Souix Falls just as data in Iowa is influenced by Des Moines metro or Illinois data is influenced by Chicago metro. Geez.....that's obvious. The point I was making and am making is that Iowa has real long term challenges in school funding. Adding additional costs which are easily avoidable is probably not a good idea

The point you are made, that parts of SD are much poorer than anything in Iowa is irrelevant. South Dakota's fiscal health is much better than Iowa's. There is not magic bullet of funding coming to solve the huge problems in Iowa. Adding avoidable costs is a mistake. Small town schools in Iowa and SD are struggling while the larger schools want to impose yet another cost on them. Again, I am open to the shot clock idea, but perhaps it should be limited to large schools.

Finally, I laughed out loud in my office at your strange dig about not knowing South Dakota. I worked the Powder River coal fields (MT and WY) for a decade working in their heavy metals contamination, abatement and development areas. Much of our work was in the geology to the east and north of the Powder River.......SD......where the interface deposited heavy metals. I've lived in the area for a long, long time. So, yes, know SD well. Will probably be back as the Chinese are desperately looking for gold, silver and (most importantly) cobalt deposits. . FYI: Having spent extensive time on both, I would tell you the Rocky Boy in Montana is poorer than Rine Ridge or Rosebud in SD.

 

[Greenway12]

Do you read the whole series of articles? The next one goes over how it affected play where the majority of people agreed it had a beneficial impact on the games;

"Were the on-court benefits of having a shot clock at the high school level the only deciding factor in its adoption, we’d likely be living in a country where all 50 states utilize it, as most people around the game believe it’s a benefit."

The next article goes over the cost and how people paid for it. While the upfront cost could be quite high, especially for smaller schools, every school in South Dakota was able to pay for it either through planning well or just fundraising within the community.

"At least one class B school representative commented that the cost of the shot clocks wasn’t an enormous financial burden. No matter the cost, no matter how it was paid for, whether schools did it with a smile, or with a groan, the deed has been done, and outside of repair costs and payments to operators, much of the financial burden has come and gone for South Dakota high schools."

So it seems that it has been beneficial and the cost has been dealt with. This in a state with poorer school districts than you will find in Iowa. I understand the cost is intimidating, which is why many opposed it in South Dakota as well. But I like to think Iowa is a great basketball state and I would love to see us playing the best basketball possible. A shot clock would be a nice step in that direction.

Yes, I did. I don't feel strongly either way to be honest. Sometimes the clamor for a shot clock seems like a solution in search of a problem. Simply providing background that the financial aspect is a concern for many and shouldn't be discounted. There's obviously a reason 42 states don't have it.

I've been to numerous SD hs games with the shot clock and many times it really has very little effect on the game. One of the main reasons SD went to it was the same as in Iowa, the AA game scores were in the 30s and painful to watch. I would argue that the B schools didn't need a shot clock but I get that it is hard to have a class with and a class or two without it. The state of Washington went to a shot clock in 2008/2009 and after six years the scoring average per team was up 2.06 points per game. In South Dakota, AA scoring went up but not significantly. Those that think scores will automatically go up and all games will be 85-82, will be disappointed. High school is not college. I know some SD coaches and one had a game a couple weeks ago (Huron vs Pierre, two AA teams who are below average this year). Final score 43-39 with a shot clock.

I do think most players like the shot clock and that sways me a bit more toward having it. In my opinion, coaching and how the games are officiated have more to do with low scores.

 

[sarcastico]

Sarcastico wrote: "You really don't know much about South Dakota do you? The numbers you posted are incredibly skewed by Sioux Falls and the surrounding area which is nothing like the rest of the state. West River is like an entirely different state and much poorer than anywhere in Iowa."

Huh? What? The numbers or STATE level fiscal health as reported by a neutral 3rd party. Obviously, the data is influenced by Souix Falls just as data in Iowa is influenced by Des Moines metro or Illinois data is influenced by Chicago metro. Geez.....that's obvious. The point I was making and am making is that Iowa has real long term challenges in school funding. Adding additional costs which are easily avoidable is probably not a good idea

The point you are made, that parts of SD are much poorer than anything in Iowa is irrelevant. South Dakota's fiscal health is much better than Iowa's. There is not magic bullet of funding coming to solve the huge problems in Iowa. Adding avoidable costs is a mistake. Small town schools in Iowa and SD are struggling while the larger schools want to impose yet another cost on them. Again, I am open to the shot clock idea, but perhaps it should be limited to large schools.

Finally, I laughed out loud in my office at your strange dig about not knowing South Dakota. I worked the Powder River coal fields (MT and WY) for a decade working in their heavy metals contamination, abatement and development areas. Much of our work was in the geology to the east and north of the Powder River.......SD......where the interface deposited heavy metals. I've lived in the area for a long, long time. So, yes, know SD well. Will probably be back as the Chinese are desperately looking for gold, silver and (most importantly) cobalt deposits. . FYI: Having spent extensive time on both, I would tell you the Rocky Boy in Montana is poorer than Rine Ridge or Rosebud in SD.

OK, so SD has better fiscal health. Does that mean they are doing better with their school funding? Nope. In fact they spend less per student than Iowa. Only 2.6% of SD's budget goes to education, below the national average. So while the state may be better off financially than Iowa that money isn't making its way to the schools. Yes they could pump more money into schools, but they aren't and have not been for some time. Because of this South Dakota schools get most of their funding from local revenue not state, which is not the case in Iowa. This means there are many poor towns who are bearing the burden of funding their schools. Yet somehow they managed to all install and run shot clocks.

sources; https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...ity-states-best-and-worst-schools/1079181001/
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/econ/g13-aspef.pdf

I think South Dakota rolled it out very well. They started with the largest schools and worked down to the smaller classes. This gave those schools the time to plan ahead and get the money necessary to put in the clocks. I truly believe Iowa could do the same.

Look, at the end of the day if we don't institute a shot clock I am not going to stop watching basketball or anything. I know it won't drastically make scores go up. But I think it would be an improvement and has to be something the association seriously looks at.

 

[EHS1505]

Thanks for posting this podcast, it was a great listen.

I'm not sure we should use the Palmer teams in 1A as a benchmark. As someone who played 1A ball in Iowa and now has 2 sons who've played it, it is certainly easier to score at an extreme level vs. inferior competition, especially if you play a pressing, run-and-gun style. That's what we saw to some extent last year with Grand View Christian and are seeing this year with North Linn. As Skinner himself mentioned in the podcast, when you press teams who don't have guards with any kind of decent ball skills, you're going to get a lot of steals and opportunities to shoot. (That's not to diminish in any way his talent or the accomplishments of the Palmer teams. He was obviously talented enough to play at Iowa, and I love the stories of how the Palmer teams with just a couple of additions were able to compete nationally in the equivalent of AAU ball.)

HSAT, I would love to see shot clocks in Iowa as I agree it would make for a more interesting style of basketball, especially come tourney time when some teams purposefully slow it way down to make every possession count.

I'm a little more in favor of one for the same reason I like baseball. Having a shot clock forces games to be contested for the full allotment of time. Just like you can't take at-bats away from the trailing team in baseball (unless you mercy rule them I guess), having a shot clock stops the 2-3 minute stall possessions (that are so fabulous to watch as a fan...) and gives the trailing team their fair share of possessions.

Agree with iowalong's take on why some small schools average far more points. The talent discrepancy is generally much higher in the smaller classes. The overall athleticism is generally much higher in the bigger classes. If Ryan Miller from North Linn (45.8%/177) and Joe Wieskamp (35.1%/171) from Muscatine had an unguarded 3 point shooting contest, I would bet heavily on Wieskamp to win. I'm not taking anything away from Miller. Not many people can hit 46% of one hundred 3 point shots in an empty gym let alone in a game with other people on the floor, but I'll opine that far more of Wieskamp's shots (made and missed) are heavily defended by a better athlete than what Miller has faced in a vast majority of his attempts.

Edit: I think that point makes AJ Green's numbers even more impressive.

 

[brewcrewman1]

My personal opinion is that kids are attempting too many 3's and with all the missed shots because it is a lower percentage shot is a main reason you are seeing much lower scoring in HS games these days.

 

[Saywhat2]

My personal opinion is that kids are attempting too many 3's and with all the missed shots because it is a lower percentage shot is a main reason you are seeing much lower scoring in HS games these days.

I would agree with this. Secondly, if a shot clock would improve the quality of the game as measured by points scored, why hasn’t the college game improved significantly from before the implementation of the shot clock? So much of it is dribbling and jacking up a three as the clock winds down. No thanks.

 

[ustabe]

I would agree with this. Secondly, if a shot clock would improve the quality of the game as measured by points scored, why hasn’t the college game improved significantly from before the implementation of the shot clock? So much of it is dribbling and jacking up a three as the clock winds down. No thanks.

I agree with dribbling down. Once the clock gets to 10, ball goes to point, he drives off high screen, chucks a three or hits man for three.
However, I’ll take this over a three minute stall with a five point lead.
Or a team has played good defense yet are down 5 with two minutes and only has 3 fouls for half, with 30 sec clock, they could choose to play defense. Without they have to foul 4 times to get other team to free throw line.
Pros n cons, but I’ll go with shot clock.

 

[Bulldog198240]

Yawn....that’s my feeling on this
conversation...

Move on

 

[CIML_Ref]

This is a mistake.

-1% allowable growth does not allow for much growth. Especially in the area of athletics. Until the republican legislature starts adequately funding schools to keep up with the cost of inflation, it's crazy to add expenses (especially for small schools).

-It's hard enough to find good people to work tables. Now you're adding one more thing for coaches and officials to worry about. I have officiated with men who work in SD and the shot clock sounds like a real pain because that person that's running it has to pay attention to every single possession and can't space out for a couple possessions like most people tend to do.

-Who cares if the games are low scoring? The point is not to entertain you. The point is to provide the kids an opportunity to play a sport and learn life lessons while having fun. I, for one, enjoy a well-defended game. I've officiated Ames varsity boys many times and enjoy their style because they don't take bad shots, they play solid defense, and they are well-coached. Teams (and their fans) know what type of game they're in for when they play Ames, much like Wisconsin/UNI.

Count me as a vote against.

 

[rk#5]

This is a mistake.

-1% allowable growth does not allow for much growth. Especially in the area of athletics. Until the republican legislature starts adequately funding schools to keep up with the cost of inflation, it's crazy to add expenses (especially for small schools).

-It's hard enough to find good people to work tables. Now you're adding one more thing for coaches and officials to worry about. I have officiated with men who work in SD and the shot clock sounds like a real pain because that person that's running it has to pay attention to every single possession and can't space out for a couple possessions like most people tend to do.

-Who cares if the games are low scoring? The point is not to entertain you. The point is to provide the kids an opportunity to play a sport and learn life lessons while having fun. I, for one, enjoy a well-defended game. I've officiated Ames varsity boys many times and enjoy their style because they don't take bad shots, they play solid defense, and they are well-coached. Teams (and their fans) know what type of game they're in for when they play Ames, much like Wisconsin/UNI.

Count me as a vote against.

Schools in South Dakota made it work. People were in your shoes also, thinking it was more of a pain, hard to find people. More people are for it than against it now.

 

[Kraftwerk]

Ok I think we can compromise here......a 1 minute shot clock. You wouldn't need to buy a new clock just use the scoreboard and have person watch that and after 1 whole minute hit the buzzer.. Forward this to the boys in Boone.

 

[iowalongs230]

Ok I think we can compromise here......a 1 minute shot clock. You wouldn't need to buy a new clock just use the scoreboard and have person watch that and after 1 whole minute hit the buzzer.. Forward this to the boys in Boone.

Wait wait wait that's way too difficult, some people might forget at the minute mark or be off by a split second.

How about an 8 minute shot clock, 4 per game.

 

[Kraftwerk]

Wait wait wait that's way too difficult, some people might forget at the minute mark or be off by a split second.

How about an 8 minute shot clock, 4 per game.

There could be some give or take. Like how the refs in soccers choose when to blow the final whistle. When the ref decides a team is stalling they buzz the shot clock .

 

[mtdew_fever]

I have a close friend that is a school administrator and long time Athletic Director at a very small South Dakota school. He was able to add it to their budget.

I think having a 45 second shot clock added for the 3A and 4A schools is needed. 45 seconds gives teams a chance to run their offense and allow strong defense to be a big part of the game. What it also does is stop teams from standing at the top of the key for the final 2-3 minutes of a quarter.....which ruins the game.

Yet South Dakota is able to have it. Don't give me the budget issues. South Dakota schools have a lower budget, yet they make it work. Consistent games in the 60s to 70s is more entertaining. Coaching strategy? It adds more to coaching because there is more possessions. Kids have to be better coached to find your shot earlier. Been to many games in both Iowa and South Dakota, the shot clock creates a better product.