1,000-point scorers: how much play to give?

Since we cover about 80 schools, we have somebidy -- bnoy or girl -- hitting 1,000 almost every week.

Of greater interest, in the history of the county that is our main coverage area, there have been 7 boys and 7 girls hit 2,000. In the next month we'll have two boys for sure and possibly two girls hit 2,000.

 

Writing about a kid who averages between 10 and 12 points a game for four years is setting a real lousy precedent. Just because the school presents them with a special reward doesn't mean newspapers have to.

 

First off, I don't think 1000 pts should be celebrated. It is just a number, and it is quite attainable. For many small schools that have 3 and 4 year starters on the team, 1000 point scorers are quite common.

I don't think 1000 points is a big deal at all. All you have to do is average 16 ppg over 60 games. If the person is a 4 year player, they are probably playing more than 80 games which would mean about 12.5 per game for the career.

I think it is worth a mention in a roundup and even a pullout. But to advance it? I think not.

2,000 pts is a huge deal. Even 1,500. Almost every good high school player is a threat for 1000.

 

How many freshmen are out there getting 10-15 points on a given night? Not happening too much in my neck of the woods, can think of a couple, but that's it.

 

That is over the course of their career. If they can score 150 pts as a freshman (7.5 ppg), all they have to do is average 14 pts a game over their soph, jr. and senior years.

 

Wow that's an assload of points.

I've had it out with several people recently about the significance of 1,000 points. Standard line for a paper that covers 60+ schools is, good for him/her, but 20 kids will hit that mark this year, and it's going to be tough for us to run a feature on every one. Shotglass is right, it's all about context.

Then, of course, you have the liars who stop a game, have a ceremony and shoot photos with the ball emblazoned with "1,000" ... except that a few days later your statistician says "You know, by my count Joe Senior only has 763" ... and then you're left with 8 miles of fuck to sort out. Lots of fun.

 

BYH summed it up pretty well:

If you've got a kid playing for four years, 1,000 points isn't a big deal.
We are very heavy on local and have a 1,000-point scorer (at least one, usually two) every year (32 high schools). We'll mention the milestone, but a 17-inch feature??? No way.
If you haven't had many 1,000-point scorers maybe its a big deal, but it sure seems like a lot of kids are hitting that mark because they play four years.

 

What about 1,000 points in a single season?

A team in my coverage area has a player on pace to achieve that feat the final week of the regular season.

I don't think my area has had a player accomplish that yet, boy or girl.

 

That might warrant a before and after story.

 

This has come up a couple of times in this thread, and I want to clarify something.

1,000 points isn't the big deal it used to be, but the freshman-playing factor should NOT be a case against it.

Playing and starting varsity ball as a freshman is still a pretty big thing. Those kids have marked themselves as being able to play against competition in some cases 20% older than themselves.

No, in some cases, the fact that a kid has held down a significant varsity role for four seasons IS the biggest thing about hitting 1,000. And perhaps that should be celebrated ... at least acknowledged, even by papers with a lot of schools to deal with.

 

Wow! Yeah, that merits a story, for sure. How many games has he/she played, and what are they averaging?

I've NEVER heard of that. Pretty impressive.

 

teams in our area -- if they make it out of area tournament play -- will have played around 30-33 games by the end of the season. We use the 1,000-point barrier more as a notebook item. And we have some kids at smaller schools who have started as seventh graders.