My writing on this site has slowed. However, I am writing new blogs several times per week for the Youth Basketball Coaching Association.
Most of my training-related writing appears at Train for Hoops or in my Hard2Guard Player Development Newsletters.
Please use the “Topics” bar on the right to search through the archives here.
I thought I wrote about Brandon Jennings far more than I actually did. I guess I spent more time responding to posts on forums than I did writing blog posts. Also, I spent much of last year writing and editing a documentary that was supposed to feature Ricky Rubio and Brandon Jennings for a Canadian film company. Ultimately, Sonny Vaccaro used his influence to prevent the documentary from being made, so the story has been changed and hopefully the new documentary will be filmed this winter.
Anyway, here is a look at the blogs that I wrote about Jennings:
Can your Combo Guard Run the Point? (July 4, 2008):
However, I find it hard to believe that a top European club would sign Jennings. Few top clubs like American rookies from college programs; they typically want a player with NBA or European experience. So, I imagine that Jennings is looking at the bottom tier teams in the top leagues (Spain, Greece, Russia and Italy) or a second-tier league like France, Germany, Belgium, Israel, Turkey, etc.
If Jennings and his representatives are smart, they should be contacting Angelico Biella in Italy, which has developed a reputation as a club that develops players who leave for bigger contracts after a year or two.
Lute Olson, Jason Whitlock and the Importance of Coaching (July 21, 2008)
Playing in Europe might be good for Jennings. However, playing for a high profile club in a high profile league is a more pressure filled job than the NBA. Coaches do not have the power they have in the NBA, in terms of multi-year multi-million dollar contracts that a club must buyout, so they lack security. With a job potentially on the line, how much patience will a coach have with a 19-year-old PG adjusting to FIBA rules, European culture, etc?
Brandon Jennings and The “Euro” Movement (September 27, 2008):
If he fits in with his teammates and learns to play the point within a team game, it will surely enhance his value to teams. While a gamble, after a season in Europe, Jennings will certainly be more ready physically and psychologically for the grind of the NBA season. And, while college kids play for free (or their one year of colleg education), Jennings is making a million dollars this year. Is there a negative?
Brandon Jennings’ Italian Education (December 6, 2008):
Jennings plays against professionals every day. His numbers are low because of the European style of play and his coach’s philosophy; the same reason why Josh Childress’ numbers are low in Greece even though he is an established NBA player…
Jennings is already in a professional environment and will play 60 games against professional competition. His teammate is Allen Ray, the former Villanova star and Boston Celtic. It’s a much different environment than college. It’s not for every 19-year-old kid, but there is a reason why NBA teams like drafting players from Europe: they are already professionals. They understand how to practice, how to take care of their bodies, and more.
Jennings will not be just “potential” in June when the NBA Draft occurs. He will be seasoned. He will have experience in a professional environment…
He may not have stats to match Stephon Curry or Blake Griffin, but NBA teams will know that he can handle coaching and the professional environment. His skills will be tested against players playing in the EuroLeague, which is much more competitive than even the best college league.
2009 NBA Mock Draft (June 21, 2009)
7. Golden State: Brandon Jennings, Lottomattica Roma. He has as much talent as anyone in the draft if he puts it all together. GSW needs a PG to move Ellis to SG. An athletic big like Jordan Hill makes sense, but Nelson plays four guards anyway.
Over the last week, I have seen several threads discussing coaching, player rankings, and recruiting and the way they come together. I decided to write this in reaction to a tweet that said:
I don’t get why players suited to play an uptempo style of ball continue to go to UCLA and USC.
As a UCLA alumni, I am biased. However, I think this comment is endemic of a mentality that sees college basketball simply as a showcase for the NBA. I don’t think Russell Westbrook is complaining that UCLA held him back.
On another site, someone compared Ben Howland and Coach K:
Howland needs to adjust to his personnel. His offense is the reason they’ve been losing so many games! Look at Coach K at Duke. No post play, so he spreads it out and wins with spacing/outside shooting. If Coach K had the UCLA personnel (especially the guards) and ran that system, you have a Pac-10 champ and a 2-3 seed. Not only that, you wouldn’t have these Jrue Holiday overrated threads.
Offense: UCLA finished the regular season #1 in field goal percentage shooting and was in the top 5 in the nation in offensive efficiency all season.
Talent: Compare the rosters. Duke has had more talent enter UCLA for the past five seasons, yet UCLA has three Final Fours, while Duke has zero. The comment mentioned UCLA’s talent: Malcolm Lee and Jrue Holiday were McDonald’s All-Americans, while Duke has Kyle Singler, Gerald Henderson, Greg Paulus, Jon Scheyer, Elliott Williams and Lance Thomas.
Now, the poster said that UCLA’s guard are more talented than Duke’s. Duke has four guards who entered Duke as All-Americans to UCLA’s one, plus Duke has Nolan Smith who was a Parade All-American and Martynas Pocius, a national team player from Lithuania. Besides Holiday, Darren Collison was lightly recruited out of Etiwanda High School; Michael Roll turned down U.C. Santa Barbara to go to UCLA; Josh Shipp was the third best UCLA guard in his recruiting class (Jordan Farmar and Arron Afflalo); and Jerime Anderson was highly recruited in high school, but Carolina’s Larry Drew made the McDonald’s AA Game over him.
How do you argue that UCLA’s guards entered as more highly regarded players? That leads to two other arguments:
First, if UCLA’s players develop, doesn’t that answer the first question? Players choose UCLA because they improve and are ready to play in the NBA when they leave. Just look at Russell Westbrook and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute. I believe both were three-star players at best in high school, and both are contributing NBA players as rookies. How many other rookies who are contributing for their teams this season were three-star players? Golden State’s Anthony Morrow, maybe. Anyone else?
This is from a Milwaukee Bucks post after the win against Boston:
“Ray just struggled all night. Moute did a hell of a job on Ray. I think that’s the best defensive job in the two years I’ve been here, on one guy. They didn’t do anything special. They just put Moute and Bell on him.
“He (Mbah a Moute) comes from a great program (UCLA) that plays defense in college. We played them early in the year, and I remember making the comment, ‘Man, that kid plays defense far beyond his age.’
“I didn’t know he was going to be this good, but he’s good.”
That is why kids go to UCLA regardless of the style points that they may lose by foregoing Carolina, Arizona or Gonzaga. People do not realize, however, that when NBA scouts evaluate players, they wonder how much of a player’s success at Carolina is attributable to the system. Will Lawson be as effective in the NBA when he has to slow down and play a half-court game? Can he defend? How will Daye transition to the physicality of the NBA? Sure, they showcased their skills, but scouts still have questions. They know what they will get from UCLA players: good skills, competitive and great defenders who are able to play from Day 1.
That’s why players choose USC or UCLA. Not to mention the fact that UCLA has been to three Final Fours in a row. Why wouldn’t you choose UCLA? You get a chance to win and you’re prepared for the NBA. Look at Singler versus Love: if Singler went to UCLA, he probably would have helped UCLA win a championship and he would be in position to go to the NBA if he wants, whereas now the commentators are labeling him a “great college player” (personally, I like him at any level).
As for player rankings, they are inherently flawed (sorry if i move to girls’ examples, as I responded to a post on a girls’ basketball forum). Rankings are pure conjecture and opinion because nobody tracks the accuracy over time and because there are so many variables that affect the talent development process. Was a girl over-rated or did she pick a school where she did not fit the system very well? Was a girl underrated or did she develop in college? Ashley Walker is an example. People cite Walker as someone who developed greatly during college, but Caren Horstmeyer, the coach who signed her, thought she was the best recruit that she signed, better than McDonald’s All-Americans AGL and Hampton. As it has played out in college, she was right. The “experts” were wrong.
Walker developed in college, but not to the extent that some would have you believe. She was a great high school player who was overlooked and under-hyped. Was Elena Delle Donne over-rated or did emotional burnout cause her not to maximize her potential on the college level? How many other players does that affect? There are so many factors, and the “experts” know so little about the subject, so they base their rankings on comparisons of physical traits and game performance in 1-2 games without knowing very much about the important factors in a player’s overall development.
On a boys’ site this morning, someone listed about 20 of the area’s top rated players and asked who will make the biggest impact at the next level. How does anyone know? The people on the outside – the people doing the rankings, the people reacting to the rankings, the media, etc. – are not close enough to the situation to know. The player who will make the biggest impact is probably the player who picked a coach who believes in him, who has a growth mindset (see the newsletter this week), who has a tremendous work ethic, etc. Heck, maybe the player who will have the most impact is a 6′2 shooting guard who grows four inches over the summer and fills out.
There is so much that enters into the talent development process that most people fail to understand. These internal and psychological traits and skills affect development. To rank or evaluate players effectively, you have to know the character of the player and know his work ethic. After watching a player in a couple AAU games, you can guess about his character and his coachability and his effort, but you cannot make a definitive conclusion.
At the very top, the exceptional players are exceptional because they combine these positive traits with great understanding and athleticism. Watching Maya Moore, it was not hard to predict greatness. Watching O.J. Mayo, it was not hard to see his talent and potential.
However, once you dip beyond the top 15-25 players, there is great subjectivity and a player’s college performance depends on his relationship with the coach, his fit in the system, his work ethic, his physical maturation, etc.
That’s why rankings are just opinions and guesses to get people to traffic web sites and argue about their credibility and accuracy to increase site traffic and ultimately revenue through advertising or memberships.
They are what they are. In and of themselves, rankings are not bad for high school players. Only when people put so much faith in them and worry so heavily about them does their role become problematic. They are the opinions of the few, not a consensus of many experts. At the end of the day, opinions do not mean a thing. Performance counts.
The New York Times article written by Pete Thamel was pretty negative about Jeremy Tyler and his experience thus far, and the comments throughout the Internet have been worse.
However, I think the public needs to be fair. Is it unusual for an American player to complain about his European club, his contract, his living conditions or other issues? Not al all. When I coached in Ireland, my two American players – both attended four years of college, had one season of professional playing experience and were 25-years-old – complained constantly about the club, the living conditions, the lack of a car, etc. They complained about things written in to their contracts, as if they never bothered to read it before signing.
When I was an exchange student living in Sweden, our club had an American player who played at South Carolina. When he complained at the beginning of the season, the club flew over his girlfriend to try and keep him happy. However, he did not finish the season; he disliked it so much that he left half-way through the season.
Therefore, the complaints, while possibly showing some immaturity, are not so different than many American players who have a sense of entitlement. Imagine Tyler’s culture shock. Forget the actual culture and think only about basketball. Last season, he had ESPN and shoe companies flying his team around the country to play in showcase games against other top preps. Now, I imagine he takes buses or vans to games like many (most) European teams.
Last season, he was a celebrated prep player destined for stardom. Now, he is just another professional player questioning whether he has the mental and physical fortitude to be a successful professional.
Of course, that was the choice that he made. He wanted to be a professional player. However, when people sit at their computers in the States, few actually understand his situation.
Most high-level European teams do not want to play rookies, let alone 18-year-old Americans. Brandon Jennings played less than 18 minutes per game not because he was not good enough, but because coaches in Europe have one or two-year contracts and cannot risk allowing a player to grow and play through his mistakes in a high-level, ultra-competitive league.
I spoke to Maccabi Haifa during the summer, so I know that the management supports its coaches. They told the coaches that they have the patience to allow Tyler to develop and play through mistakes (of course, my club in Ireland told me that they wanted me to develop their young players, and I did, but when losses mounted, the development of young players who started the season languishing in the 2nd Division was not enough to save my job).
That being said, a young player trying to earn playing time has the responsibility to earn playing time. Unfortunately, I think Jennings and Tyler’s trips abroad have shown the level of entitlement that high school players develop once they illustrate their precociousness. Many young players have lost sight of the work ethic that helped them develop their skills initially, and instead expect to get things handed to them because of their name or perceived talent.
In the real world, however, their talent is not unmatched. While dominating average high school players comes easily, playing professional players trying to put food in their kids’ mouths is much different. Many NBA people have commented that Jennings’ Italian education humbled him and has helped him get off to a great rookie season not because he learned a ton on the court, but because he learned to be a professional. If Tyler learns the same lesson this season, he will go a long way toward being the high NBA draft pick in 2011 that everyone once predicted.
Tyler made the hard choice. It would have been much easier to transfer to Mater Dei and play with a team of Division I player in big tournaments across the country and then play one year of college basketball at Kentucky, Louisville Carolina or elsewhere.
Instead, he took a risk. The first couple months, according to Thamel’s article, have not gone as planned. But, the same could be said last year of Jennings. Remember, Jennings and Tyler did not go to Europe to be European stars – they went to Europe to prepare themselves for the NBA. For Jennings, it worked, as he is playing beyond expectations right now. Will it work for Tyler?
That is hard to say. I have never met Tyler so I do not know if he has the emotional ability to persist through the rough patches, learn from his mistakes and come through the experience as a better player and person. His physical tools are evident. Ultimately, his success in Israel and the NBA will be determined by his character and how he is able to turn the current situation – however he perceives it – into a positive one.
Last week, I heard a high-level coach criticize American basketball because there is too much dribbling and too many pick-and-rolls. He specifically said that there are far more pick-and-rolls in the U.S. than in European basketball. He characterized European basketball as passing and cutting with the occasional pick-and-roll.
I disagreed with the assessment of the two games, but I would not call myself an expert on European basketball. However, Jasmin Repesa, Head Coach of the Croatian National Team and Lottomattica Roma probably counts as an expert on European basketball.
As a clinic in Toronto last month, Repesa said:
In Euroleague/International basketball, 80% of set offense starts or finishes with the pick and roll.
This is the problem. We have coaches and media members who criticize American basketball, and hail European basketball, and they really have no idea what they are talking about.
I read a great article by USA Volleyball’s John Kessel titled “We Coach the Way We Were Coached” which questions much of the standard volleyball practice. Because I am a Kessel fan, I used some of the thoughts last season when I started as a volleyball coach, and some of the players and the Athletic Director/Girls’ Volleyball Coach acted as though I had no clue.
After reading the article, I found Dan Pink’s blog and saw an interesting factoid from Jerry de Jaager and Jim Ericson’s See New Now:
“A study of the top fifty game-changing innovations over a hundred-year period showed that nearly 80 percent of those innovations were sparked by someone whose primary expertise was outside the field in which the innovation breakthrough took place.”
The factoid made me think about college education: the hardest part of an elite college is getting admitted.
Unfortunately for innovation, the rules of nearly every industry (coaching included) are set up to keep out outsiders.
Think of the most innovative coaches. Many come from different backgrounds. Texas Tech football coach Mike Leach was not a football player; St Louis Cardinals pitching coach Dave Duncan is the only Major League pitching coach who was not a pitcher; Chris Paul and Carmelo Anthony’s off-season workout coach is a former lawyer, Idan Ravin; noted track coach and Velocity Sports Performance founder Loren Seagrave was an ice hockey player.
When we narrow our focus too much when hiring coaches, we potentially miss out on the next innovative mind.
This is a series of posts from socalhoops.com that provides an interesting commentary on basketball in the area. I am interested in any thoughts about the reasons for the declining interest in basketball as well as solutions to the problems.
From Just Watchin:
Has anyone noticed a drop-off in participation in girls basketball? It seems fewer and fewer girls are going out these days. 9 years ago we had close to 60 girls try-out. This year we have barely enough to field three teams–don’t even need to cut. The girls who are trying out are coming in with significantly lower skills than in years past. It’s not just my school either, but the four other schools in our city. There are probably about 4,000 girls in our high schools. It’s hard to believe only 120 of them play basketball. My theory is that basketball takes too much time to learn and that parents start their kids too early (1st grade) so by the time they get to HS, there is no novelty to the game. I think girls shouldn’t even think about playing until 4th or 5th grade. Would love to hear your thoughts on the state of the girls game.
From Witness Same:
We moved to Murrieta about 5 yrs ago and there were at least 3 travelteams in the area, but now 0..It’s just too far and costly to drive north or south so my daughter has taken up travel volleball which practices 10 mins from our house.. It’s really sad to see what’s happened to girls and boys basketball in our area.
From Cause fewer quality coaches staying in the game
Some of the best coaches have left the game. Parents make it no fun to to anymore. Civility has left the building!
From The sport is losing its value
It’s so true. But because of choices, I believe instead of playing two sports that are costly kids pick one.
Cal south soccer recorded 127,000 players playing club soccer that is boys and girls. That’s a lot of kids. Then you have girls volleyball at a high level.
Beside the fact parents ruining the game, kids quitting the game is seeing less kids.
Also some really bad coaches play a part. You go to any high school girl game they charge to get in and the only one there is parents. The cost to run the gym is not cost effective.
From OC Mom
I too have witnessed similar situations at my daughter’s school…Girls basketball gets barely enough girls to field three teams. However, over 250 girls participated in pep squad try outs and another 200 for volleyball. I don’t think basketball is dead, because our boy’s program has 4 full teams (varsity, JV and two frosh/soph A/B teams!).
I think the problem is that soccer and volleyball has proven to be more attractive and more popular, hence children are playing these sports at a much earlier age. Also, there are limited girls basketball youth teams to develop new/younger players. The recreational leagues are drying up and NJB can’t field teams for every city. There is a significant shortage of players.
And, with cutbacks in sport programs at the public schools, there is little focus on team sports like basketball at the elementary and middle school levels. By the time these kids get to high school, they barely have any skills to play the game, even if they have the interest.
As discussed previously on this board and many have expressed that the sport is dying due to the interest in soccer and volleyball. It has lost its appeal….period…
Just my opinion…Thanks.
The popular explanations are competition from volleyball and soccer, poor coaching, bad parenting, fewer youth teams, players starting too early and others.
AAU Basketball offers the good and bad of youth basketball. The good is the opportunity to play against better competition and travel. The bad is the way that this system has developed around the shoe companies with an emphasis on exposure and player ratings, not development and meaningful competition.
Former NBA player Casey Jacobsen offered his feelings on the AAU system:
Somewhere along the line, however, a battle ignited between two athletic shoe companies that would change youth basketball as people knew it. Nike and adidas, in an attempt to sell more shoes, began sponsoring AAU teams and their coaches. There were not a lot of rules or regulations regarding summer basketball, and these companies took advantage. A lot of cash and apparel changed hands throughout the years in order to have the best basketball players wearing a certain brand of shoe. It was pretty crazy, but it was very real.
He highlights the real life saga of Schea Cotton, a prep legend who never made the NBA as anticipated:
Schea Cotton was caught in the middle of all of it. Everybody wanted a piece of this kid. He traveled all over the country playing basketball in Nike shoes. He was the one who Nike had pinned their hopes on being “the next Jordan,” a player/personality who could be successful at the professional level and earn Nike millions of dollars. So what happened to him? Schea couldn’t qualify for college after the NCAA invalidated his SAT score.
Did the constant basketball and travel have an impact on Cotton’s future? Jacobsen believes that it did:
Maybe instead of shopping in Las Vegas, he could have been going to summer school or working on his game with his high school friends. I believe that if Schea Cotton was born 10 years earlier, he would have had an NBA career.
As I wrote previously, AAU basketball and its coaches are not to blame. Instead, the problem is the overall system that promotes exposure over real competition and tournaments over training.
These all-star teams are only a small fraction of all the AAU teams, but they are the ones who draw everyone’s criticism. The answer is not eliminating AAU basketball, but changing the philosophy away from exposure and rankings to competition and training with a greater practice to game ratio, better coaching (rather than shoe marketers) and more periodization (a real off-season).
Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development, the 3rd Edition is available as a paperback (here) or an e-book (here). In the 3rd Edition, I eliminated many of the original chapters that focused on the problems with the way that we develop basketball players, and expanded the information on the solution.
Cross Over is now 207 pages outlining a teaching philosophy based on a long term athlete development philosophy and containing over 150 age-appropriate drills.
The original chapters which focus on the issues affecting youth basketball development appear on this site and have been renamed The Cross Over Movement Manifesto.
Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development
Table of Contents
The Cross Over Movement Manifesto is 12 chapters comprised of the original chapters from the 1st Edition of Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development with updated information and opinions from three years of writing blogs.
When I published the 3rd Edition of Cross Over, I focused the book on coaching information and the long term athlete development philosophy.
Cross Over outlines the solutions that a coach or organization can make at the grassroots level to emphasize long term athlete development, the development of global players and an athlete-centered philosophy.
The Manifesto, the chapters which appear here, presents many of the problems plaguing youth basketball and outlines some structural changes like the Elite Development League.
The Manifesto
Chapter 1: The Current State of Youth Basketball
Chapter 2: Early Specialization
Chapter 4: Talent Identification
Chapter 5: Introduction to Long Term Athlete Development
Chapter 7: Finding the Right Coaching Environment
Chapter 8: The United States Basketball Development System
Chapter 9: Worldwide Development Systems
Chapter 10: Elite Development League
Recent Comments