Pinewood 58 San Leandro 43 (Elle Ladine is VERY good)

[TheHillZ]

Non-league tilt on Senior Day at Pinewood, and Elle Ladine left a lasting impression. 36 points. 24 rebounds (plus lots of assists, steals and smiles) against a solid San Leandro squad. I think she could've scored 50 if she had wanted to.

Doc's club is as fun as ever to watch, but I suspect they're going to have a tough time with VC or Mitty in CCS.

 

[colhenrylives]

...and to think that Lowell, by rule, kept her on the JV team as a frosh three years ago.....small wonder she hightailed it south to Pinewood...

 

[ClayK]

The San Francisco Section is incredibly archaic. JV games are seven-minute quarters -- and why?

It's no wonder high school sports struggle in the City.

 

[Cranky29er]

Hey Klay…a little bird mentioned the SI jv coach lost their mind during your game. Definitely seems like a lot more have nots than haves at the JV level. Your squad must be pretty solid.

 

[ClayK]

It was pretty bad. It was a very physical game and I would think both sides thought the other team was too rough, but we kept our composure, for the most part. I have to say I was disappointed by the game's atmosphere. The three technicals called on SI (two on the coach, one on a player for taunting after she was fouled by one of our players) were the first I saw all year at the JV and frosh level.

That said, the gap between the top teams and the bottom teams is, as mentioned, very great. My JV team is better than most, if not all, the teams I had at Bentley, and if I'd had this group at Bentley, in most years, we'd be going deep in the D5 playoffs. (We made 13 threes against SI.)

Our frosh team was even more dominant, going running clock almost all games, and the difference was depth. Both our lower level teams had seven or more players who were very good for their level, and few teams we played could counter with more than one or two. (San Ramon Valley, which was a split for the JVs, was the only one comparable, but their frosh weren't as deep as ours.)

It's a reflection of the continuing basketball talent drain, as more girls are opting for volleyball, and the CIF decision to have soccer and basketball in the winter has also affected the talent pool.

 

[letsski]

The San Francisco Section is incredibly archaic. JV games are seven-minute quarters -- and why?

It's no wonder high school sports struggle in the City.

All CCS JV games are 7 minute quarters.

 

[ClayK]

Really? What's the point? So kids can play less?

There aren't enough minutes to go around as it is. In Minnesota, they play 18-minute halves -- I'd love to see nine minute quarters here.

 

[ankleassassin]

Really? What's the point? So kids can play less?

There aren't enough minutes to go around as it is. In Minnesota, they play 18-minute halves -- I'd love to see nine minute quarters here.

those extra 4 minutes per game on the lower levels tend to take 20 minutes. that usually puts the varsity game behind schedule.

 

[observer22]

those extra 4 minutes per game on the lower levels tend to take 20 minutes. that usually puts the varsity game behind schedule.

So what? I’d rather see the younger kids play regulation minutes.

 

[ankleassassin]

So what? I’d rather see the younger kids play regulation minutes.

the admin and parents probably disagree

 

[ClayK]

Parent want their kids to play. Playing time is always an issue, especially for the younger girls. You lose 14% of the playing time by cutting out four minutes a game, and why? Do teenagers get exhausted playing the game?

And as for the varsity games starting late, what does that have to do with anything? Shorten the varsity games, then. Why are minutes for better players more valuable than minutes for worse players? It's not like professional careers are at stake.

If sports have educational value, the same value applies, pretty much, to all athletes, regardless of level. And much of that value comes from competing in games, and I've yet to hear any reason why JV games should be shorter than varsity games.

 

[OnBall8]

@ClayK if affects you for maybe 1 or 2 games a season.. why the big deal about it?

 

[Cranky29er]

It’s like the Dr office though. If you start playing games at 4:30 and you have 3 games set…girls and boys at 1:30 intervals, there is a good chance you will run late which impacts folks and refs. The upper tier frosh and jv games are likely pretty smooth but as has been noted most are ugly with fouls and stoppages similar to CYO B league with older kids. Mix in an OT…woof. Or a double OT with coach fouling even with game out of reach. 730 game is now 7:50 or 8:00. Short of running clock, the games drag. It may be worth it to develop kids but….on a weekday night. I can see both sides. More ball is not necessarily better ball.

 

[ankleassassin]

It’s like the Dr office though. If you start playing games at 4:30 and you have 3 games set…girls and boys at 1:30 intervals, there is a good chance you will run late which impacts folks and refs. The upper tier frosh and jv games are likely pretty smooth but as has been noted most are ugly with fouls and stoppages similar to CYO B league with older kids. Mix in an OT…woof. Or a double OT with coach fouling even with game out of reach. 730 game is now 7:50 or 8:00. Short of running clock, the games drag. It may be worth it to develop kids but….on a weekday night. I can see both sides. More ball is not necessarily better ball.

that is what i was trying to say. most or way too many freshman girls teams can learn in 7 minute quarters.

 

[ankleassassin]

Parent want their kids to play. Playing time is always an issue, especially for the younger girls. You lose 14% of the playing time by cutting out four minutes a game, and why? Do teenagers get exhausted playing the game?

And as for the varsity games starting late, what does that have to do with anything? Shorten the varsity games, then. Why are minutes for better players more valuable than minutes for worse players? It's not like professional careers are at stake.

If sports have educational value, the same value applies, pretty much, to all athletes, regardless of level. And much of that value comes from competing in games, and I've yet to hear any reason why JV games should be shorter than varsity games.

regarding professional careers at stake------ the way some parents act you would think professional careers are at stake

 

[MadHatter11]

...and to think that Lowell, by rule, kept her on the JV team as a frosh three years ago.....small wonder she hightailed it south to Pinewood...

Lowell should change that rule they have

 

[ClayK]

I don't get the assumption that frosh and JV games take too much time -- and if they do, shorten halftime to eight minutes. Everyone wants to play, and in fact play more, so why keep them from playing?

 

[OnBall8]

I don't get the assumption that frosh and JV games take too much time -- and if they do, shorten halftime to eight minutes. Everyone wants to play, and in fact play more, so why keep them from playing?

Thanks for taking up the noble fight that no one else seems to have a problem with.. been the rule in the south bay forever..

 

[ClayK]

I just want kids to play basketball. Ask the players who don't get to play whether they'd like an extra four minutes to go around.

 

[OnBall8]

I just want kids to play basketball. Ask the players who don't get to play whether they'd like an extra four minutes to go around.

If you cant find minutes in a 28 minute game its unlikely you'll find minutes in a 32 minute game. Practice is where you get better anyway.

 

[ClayK]

I have to say you're wrong here. Maybe it's just because I'm so sensitive to getting girls minutes after all the work they put in, but for that 11th or 12th player, an extra minute, or even an extra 30 seconds on the floor is gold. When you only get to play three minutes a game, adding a fourth is 33% more court time to prove to the coach he's dumb for not playing you more.

It's about kids playing basketball, and the more the play, the better it is for everyone. And the seven-minute quarters gain almost nothing of value ... at worst, it means the varsity games ends 10 minutes later.

Again, it's about boys and girls getting to play they game they practice four and five days a week for. What could possibly be wrong with giving them more time?

 

[colhenrylives]

In San Mateo County, it's the same thing in football: Fewer minutes per quarter for JV's. Not a peep from anyone.

 

[SouthBayHoopFan]

It's not only the players Clay, it's also the coaches. Here in the South Bay the JV coaches are only paid 7/8 the amount the varsity coaches are paid. Imagine if you were only making 7/8 what Kelly makes. :-|

 

[ankleassassin]

I have to say you're wrong here. Maybe it's just because I'm so sensitive to getting girls minutes after all the work they put in, but for that 11th or 12th player, an extra minute, or even an extra 30 seconds on the floor is gold. When you only get to play three minutes a game, adding a fourth is 33% more court time to prove to the coach he's dumb for not playing you more.

It's about kids playing basketball, and the more the play, the better it is for everyone. And the seven-minute quarters gain almost nothing of value ... at worst, it means the varsity games ends 10 minutes later.

Again, it's about boys and girls getting to play they game they practice four and five days a week for. What could possibly be wrong with giving them more time?

how many freshman girls teams have 12 players?

 

[ClayK]

The main point: There is no reason to restrict the length of games. There is no physical reason to play 28 instead of 32 minutes in basketball.

Players want to play. Ask the players, ask the students, if they want more time on the court. Coach a game, look down the bench and see if kids want to get subbed in and play some more. (How often do you think the subs don't want to go in?)

If sports are valuable, why decrease the access by artificially shortening games for no reason?

 

[ankleassassin]

The main point: There is no reason to restrict the length of games. There is no physical reason to play 28 instead of 32 minutes in basketball.

Players want to play. Ask the players, ask the students, if they want more time on the court. Coach a game, look down the bench and see if kids want to get subbed in and play some more. (How often do you think the subs don't want to go in?)

If sports are valuable, why decrease the access by artificially shortening games for no reason?

there are reasons. you just dont agree. in fresno city schools they also play 7 minutes. nobody wants to be leaving from mclane or roosevelt at 10pm. that aint safe

 

[OnBall8]

The main point: There is no reason to restrict the length of games. There is no physical reason to play 28 instead of 32 minutes in basketball.

Players want to play. Ask the players, ask the students, if they want more time on the court. Coach a game, look down the bench and see if kids want to get subbed in and play some more. (How often do you think the subs don't want to go in?)

If sports are valuable, why decrease the access by artificially shortening games for no reason?

Why stop at 32? Just make it all 10 minute quarters like college and everyone gets equal minutes. Problem solved.

Of course every kid wants to play more. Unfortunately whether there is 28 minutes or 32, there is rarely going to be even distribution of minutes. Such is life.

When you only get to play three minutes a game, adding a fourth is 33% more court time to prove to the coach he's dumb for not playing you more.

If I'm on your team, dont patronize me and tell me "if the game was longer you would play more". Either I earned playing time or I didnt. Doesn't take an extra minute of play to prove someone dumb.

 

[northbaybbguru]

The main point: There is no reason to restrict the length of games. There is no physical reason to play 28 instead of 32 minutes in basketball.

Players want to play. Ask the players, ask the students, if they want more time on the court. Coach a game, look down the bench and see if kids want to get subbed in and play some more. (How often do you think the subs don't want to go in?)

If sports are valuable, why decrease the access by artificially shortening games for no reason?

Im actually SHOCKED on the pushback to Clay on the 7 vs 8 min quarter discussion. For the record I agree with Clay. As a lifer in the NCS I see no downside to the 8 min quarters. I can only remember a handful of varsity games that got started late because of the frosh or jv games going long and that was ALWAYS because of OT. Even 1 OT usually didnt impact the start of the varsity game. I dont think the argument that somehow the varsity games would get late starts holds water IMO.