Playing with a purpose

[tsull]

Not surprised at either of the GNAC firings this week. I saw one of the SFU-WOU games (they split on the season) and both teams had no identity, no plan, and no purpose. I think D2Rover, Goods, and others, with good basketball knowledge, agree with me.

The majority of programs have this theory: If we just run motion and make 3's, we're good. There's no attention to details.

I've covered and followed Northwest schools for a long time. WSU's teams under Kelvin Sampson (his current Houston team leads the nation in defense) and Tony Bennett (his WSU and UVa teams frequently led the nation in defense), played with great purpose. It started on the defensive end.

But you don't have to walk-it-up to win. Look at Gonzaga, they play pretty fast, but everything has a purpose, the passing, defense, rebounding, everything.

Speaking of the WCC, I was fortunate enough to receive courtside tickets to the St. Mary-Oregon State game this year. The Gaels win about 25 games a year. One should see their pre-game warm-ups. They jump rope, dribble with one foot on a block, practice taking charges. Their strength and conditioning coach is out there running around. It's like nothing I've seen at the D1 level. Randy Bennett wins in a 3,500-seat gym because he coaches with a plan and a purpose, and his players follow that plan.

These coaches that just roll the ball out baffle me.

[gratefuldad]

Not surprised at either of the GNAC firings this week. I saw one of the SFU-WOU games (they split on the season) and both teams had no identity, no plan, and no purpose. I think D2Rover, Goods, and others, with good basketball knowledge, agree with me.

The majority of programs have this theory: If we just run motion and make 3's, we're good. There's no attention to details.

I've covered and followed Northwest schools for a long time. WSU's teams under Kelvin Sampson (his current Houston team leads the nation in defense) and Tony Bennett (his WSU and UVa teams frequently led the nation in defense), played with great purpose. It started on the defensive end.

But you don't have to walk-it-up to win. Look at Gonzaga, they play pretty fast, but everything has a purpose, the passing, defense, rebounding, everything.

Speaking of the WCC, I was fortunate enough to receive courtside tickets to the St. Mary-Oregon State game this year. The Gaels win about 25 games a year. One should see their pre-game warm-ups. They jump rope, dribble with one foot on a block, practice taking charges. Their strength and conditioning coach is out there running around. It's like nothing I've seen at the D1 level. Randy Bennett wins in a 3,500-seat gym because he coaches with a plan and a purpose, and his players follow that plan.

These coaches that just roll the ball out baffle me.

+1 Tsull. Your take is at the heart of one thing that hasn’t changed about college basketball - coaching still matters. The good teams pay close attention to everything they do.

[tsull]

+1 Tsull. Your take is at the heart of one thing that hasn’t changed about college basketball - coaching still matters. The good teams pay close attention to everything they do.

Thanks Grateful Dad (great name, by the way). I went to a lot of college and prep games this year, I was stunned at the lack of coaching. Every big school team in Salem thought they could all run the other team out of the gym, as if they're all equal, when in reality each team had about 2 or 3 good players. EVERY player had the green light from 3, even though most couldn't hit out there. Coaches didn't give a crap, just let them run and jack. Saw one game where an underdog team was playing a league leader tough and the underdog's best player -- the coach's son -- didn't get a shot in the last 2 minutes, while his bricklaying buddies lost the game for them. Well, their coach lost it, I would've fired him after the game, but he's a big club coach in town.

College, even OSU and opponents in the WCC, often don't play with purpose. OSU is pretty good at home, could lose to Grandma Tech on the road. At times at home they'd decide to just not play hard for 10 minutes, it was so weird. I wish they'd either move the 3-point line back to half court or get rid of it. Everyone is so obsessed with it, even if 80 percent of players can't shoot well from out there. Growing up I don't remember college and prep coaching being so bad. WOU was one of the worst coached teams I've seen anywhere this year. How can one be in the profession for years and years and not know defense, passing, tempo, who the shooters are and aren't, etc. It's mind boggling. They pay these coaches decently, too. Turn on ESPN and they'll be screaming how great March Madness is ... no it isn't. It's really poorly coached, except for 10% of the teams, you know, the teams that win and get to the Elite 8.

[gratefuldad]

This newfound obsession with analytics and shooting the three pointer at a high rate reminds me of when everyone tried to copy Loyola Marymount in the 90’s and get a shots up within seconds of crossing half court. Eventually most teams realized that it isn’t easy to play at that pace unless you’ve got the right kind of players.

The danger of high school and college teams trying to play a pro style offense is that a lot of kids just don’t have the skills to shoot from deep. Shooting over 30 percent from the three point line isn’t that easy.

I will say that overall, most players and teams these days are much more skilled and athletic. The way they have to fly around on defense to cover the three point line and close out on shooters at a greater distance from the hoop is impressive.

Film, statistical analysis and scouting have drastically improved. Nowadays, everyone scouts the crap out of everyone and if a player can’t shoot or can’t go left or right, they get exposed quickly and have to adjust. Back in the 80’s and 90’s it was harder to study your opponents on film and gather that intel, so the game was much more random.

So the evolution of the game continues, but as coach Norman Dale (Gene Hackman) would say in Hoosiers - the fundamentals never change!!!

[Anchorage]

I think there are lots of ways to skin a cat. West Texas has been extremely successful for years playing with skill and quickness over size but they play an intense pressing and trapping up and down style and are extremely deep. Then you have UAA who tries to play small but runs a deliberate style, it doesn’t work as well. Other teams are extremely successful playing that slower, grind it out style but they rely a lot more in skilled size across the board. Success is truly having a coherent plan, a well thought out system and style but also the personnel whose strengths matchup with that system. And some teams are extremely successful being a bomb it away team with shooters up and down the roster…but the players matching the style is still the most important thing.

I really do not understand why it’s so hard for so many coaches to figure this out. I also realize that enough of the “right type of player” to what you need to run your system may not be available in recruiting. And if that’s the case then you may need to modify and shape your system to the players you have…and that’s where so many coaches get tripped up. They are so stubborn and egotistical about their style and system of play that they don’t modify it to fit the players that hey have available.

Also another thing I’ve learned is that a lot of coaches are bull**** with player development. We all just assume that these guys are masters of that aspect of coaching but I don’t think many are. You hear them talk about developing guys and it almost sounds like a chore for some of them, they would much rather have guys much closer to finished products come in. That’s really why the portal has taken off in my opinion, coaches don’t have as much need for the annoying player development aspect of the game. Again I’ll go back to my hometown UAA…I don’t remember the last kid that came through here that got considerably better in his time as a Seawolf.

Being an actual educator in coaching is becoming less and less frequent. Having patience with players and putting time into them, and being cerebral about how you want to play and putting guys into position to succeed? The ability to build a non-toxic culture. These are the things that the very best coaches do but in general are pretty scarce in the coaching ranks these days. But I’ll tell you what, I notice these qualities more in younger coaches than I do in a lot of these 50 and 60 years old old coaches still living under the old school Bobby Knight mentality of coaching. There just are a lot of phonies in coaching today, at all levels, in my opinion.

[tsull]

Thank you Grateful Dad and Anchorage for your wonderful responses. I know this topic might bore some people and that's okay. I'm passionate about it. Anchorage is so right in the lack of development today. At the division one level with the portal, coaches have abandoned development. In the past even at the D1 level, you had to look at a player and see what he could be two or three years from when you signed him. That's no longer true.

I certainly think at the division 2 level you should be more into development. These guys aren't portal happy as much as division one and where are they going anyway? Very few are leaping up to division 1.

The lack of fundamentals out there is stunning. I do agree with grateful in that the athleticism is greater, and one has to account for that. However, the lack of fundamentals and development is turning me off to the game.

That Western Oregon - Simon Fraser game I went to was just display of some of the worst basketball I've ever seen, and now both coaches are gone. It literally was who could make the most threes won And every time someone hit one, especially that Simon Fraser big man anantiny Western Oregon point guard, I had to have them flash the three sign up at the crowd. Did they know there was 180 people at the game?

I'm surprised all these young coaches getting into the game have completely neglected fundamentals, strategy, and player development. Turn on some of these mid major games on ESPN right now, it's some really bad basketball.

[Goods]

This is an interesting topic. And I never thought about it, but I liked your comment about the portal Anchorage. The portal can provide a developed player "more easily" than a coach wants to develop said player themself. I think the portal is an example of the "instant gratification" this world has today.

And the availability of potential recruits from season to season can really expose a coach's flaws. This year's Anchorage women's team (where they're all wearing jerseys that say "mayhem" on their backs) plays exhausting defense. But you wonder if that will be the same team in two or three years. What if you can't find that crazy conditioned type of player, but still try to play that game?

[tsull]

I read an interesting article recently that after the University of Oregon defeated Wisconsin on the road, UO coach Dana Altman took a plane to I think Missouri to attend a JC game to see a player. This is a rarity today. I never see coaches at prep games anymore, not even D3, NAIA, or D2. They sit in front of their computers watching Hudl. WOU coaches -- men and women -- are/were incognito in the state. I've heard the past few WOU wome's coaches refused to connect with local clubs, you know where all the prospects are. I can't tolerate bad coaching, I tolerate laziness even less.

There's a player in the Salem prep ranks I've seen a few times this year. Jumps out of the gym, great speed, length, good shooter. Probably mid-major, not sure. A good D2 school would've been all over him. (WOU never watched him live.) However, if a coach got off the computer and attended some games he would notice that the player: 1) Talks sh-t to his opponents and opposing fans; 2) takes 5 to 6 minutes off each game, kind of mails it in; 3) show boats when he makes a good play, 3 symbols, other garbage; you know, stuff a coach needs to know. Coaches are epically lazy these days.

Yogi Berra: "You can observe a lot by just watching."

[Anchorage]

I read an interesting article recently that after the University of Oregon defeated Wisconsin on the road, UO coach Dana Altman took a plane to I think Missouri to attend a JC game to see a player. This is a rarity today. I never see coaches at prep games anymore, not even D3, NAIA, or D2. They sit in front of their computers watching Hudl. WOU coaches -- men and women -- are/were incognito in the state. I've heard the past few WOU wome's coaches refused to connect with local clubs, you know where all the prospects are. I can't tolerate bad coaching, I tolerate laziness even less.

There's a player in the Salem prep ranks I've seen a few times this year. Jumps out of the gym, great speed, length, good shooter. Probably mid-major, not sure. A good D2 school would've been all over him. (WOU never watched him live.) However, if a coach got off the computer and attended some games he would notice that the player: 1) Talks sh-t to his opponents and opposing fans; 2) takes 5 to 6 minutes off each game, kind of mails it in; 3) show boats when he makes a good play, 3 symbols, other garbage; you know, stuff a coach needs to know. Coaches are epically lazy these days.

Yogi Berra: "You can observe a lot by just watching."

I hear you. I give them a little easier time because they are dealing with budgets and limited time during the season. I know a lot of them do most of their live scouting at the spring and summer AAU tournaments and showcases. JC showcases are becoming a thing these days as well.

I also know the good ones want to see full game footage along with the highlight reels. Highlight reels lure them in but most of the determination process happens with watching full game footage. They also contact the head coach but also opposing coaches in the league to get their perspective. And they all have JuCo and high school coaches and even scouting services they trust that puts prospects in their vision. It’s really hard to say how much due diligence they are doing on a kid or not because they all have their methods and people they trust.