Basketball Training-oriented Articles

For those of you looking for more information on basketball training:

• Individual defense and the crossover step (featuring a female player looking to play in Spain)
• Training and Skill Progressions
• Shooting Footwork with Austin Nichols
• Dealing with Soreness
• Why Basketball Skill Trainers Fail

2009 NBA Draft: First Look for the Sacramento Kings

Alright, Sacramento lost the lottery. So, not knowing who everyone will draft, here are my three choices for each of the Kings three draft picks. I believe in drafting for talent, not position. However, in a perfect world, I would like to see the Kings get a small forward, point guard and post with the three picks. The Kings have two promising young posts with Jason Thompson and Spencer Hawes and two shooting guards with Kevin Martin and Francisco Garcia. The Kings desperately need to upgrade at the point even though they invested a lot of money in Beno Udrih and need to find a small forward, as Andres Nocioni is not the answer at this stage in his career, and the staff hardly played Donte Greene last season so he is still an unknown. As for the post, a shot blocker or a brawny rebounder/hustle guy like Paul Milsap would be perfect. So, here are my picks:

#4
Top Choice: Tyreke Evans. I see a big physical potential star in the mold of Rodney Stuckey or, best case, Chauncey Billups. Probably not the best fit for the Princeton-offense and he needs to improve, but he seems to have the personality that he wants to be great.

Next Choice: Terrence Williams. Call me crazy, but I think he is a great fit and I think he has the size and skill to be a great guard. He can play some point-forward, makes good decisions and can be a lock down defender on the wing, which is important in a division with Kobe Bryant and a conference with Carmelo Anthony, Brandon Roy and others.

Other: Stephen Curry. If the Kings stick with the Princeton-offense, he is the best fit. He's not a true point guard, but neither was Mike Bibby. Curry's a purer shooter than Bibby and has a high I.Q. He's dropping on other's draft boards, but I don't know why. All he did was score, hit tough shots and exhibit a high level of intelligence. Many may call him a reach at #4, but I would be happy with him at #4.

It should be noted that I am big on the mental, emotional and psychological side. I want to know who has the killer instinct and who is driven to be the best, like Kobe Bryant or LeBron James. So, my ultimate pick would depend largely on the personal interviews and conversations with their coaches. I want a player unafraid of high expectations who wants to lead from day one.

#23
It's hard to know who exactly will be available at #23.
Best Case: Sam Young. I'd like to see Young play small forward with the Kings. He grew on me as I watched him play and he showed more perimeter skills. He has a great shot fake and a good offensive game.

Next Choice: Tyler Hansborough. I want Hansborough. The Kings have not had a player like him in years,maybe since Mark Ohlberding. He is a winner and a kid who will do everything possible. I draft him and hope that his intensity, his desire and his winning attitude rub off on all his teammates. I want a player like Paul Milsap and I think he has the relentless motor to be that guy.

Other: Patrick Mills. I would be happy to draft Mills at this point. Anyone who watched Aaron Brooks against the Lakers got a glimpse of the type of positives that Mills could bring. Brooks is a better finisher, but Mills is a savvy player with Olympic experience and is another tough player and a good shooter who just wants to win.

#31
It's always a crap shoot judging who will be here at #31, so here are a couple options:
Best case: Nick Calathes. I like Calathes. I think he is an underrated point guard because people question his ability to play the point with his height. But, he runs the pick-and-roll well and he's a good passer and shooter. If somehow the Kings get to this point and have yet to pick a PG, I'd love to see Calathes in Sacramento.

Next: Toney Douglas. I loved Douglas when I watched him. He can defend, and the Kings desperately need a defender. Plus, he's a shooter and he wants the ball. As I write this, I get more and more excited about him. Even if the Kings take a PG early, I could see Douglas playing the old Bobby Jackson-role for the Kings.

Next: Taj Gibson. I watch the Pac-10 a lot, so I saw him play frequently. Gibson blocks shots, has great timing and finishes around the basket. He's the type of player that you need to have off the bench.

AAU vs. High School Basketball

For some reason, I could not embed this on my wordpress blog, so I'll put it here. I am not going to comment on the argument, as I have written on the subject numerous times before, and the argument and animosity on each side is one of the major reasons why I advocate the Elite Development League. It's not that high school is right and club basketball is wrong, or vice versa. It's that the combination of the two is a less than ideal situation and a sanctioned EDL could prevent many of the problems discussed.

For what it's worth, I was consulted and spent several hours on the phone in the writer's research for this piece, though I am not mentioned in the story.

This is the discussion that followed on OTL:


I agree with some of the comments by Dru Joyce II and Gary Charles, especially in regards to ego and the coaches needing to work together for the best interests on the players, not their own personal interests. I suppose the problem is that each side typically differs on its opinion as to the "best interests."

As for shoe companies involvement with young kids, what's the adidas Phenom Camp if it isn't an attempt to get the top 5th and 6th graders clothes in adidas gear?

Sacramento Kings Coaching Search

According to Tom Ziller and Sactown Royalty, the Sacramento Kings coaching search falls into two categories: Plan A - Eddie Jordan and Plan B - an affordable alternative.

In February, I suggested Jordan or Houston Rockets' assistant coach Elston Turner, as General Manager Geoff Petrie assembles players who fit a certain style of play, and Turner and Jordan fit the system. In fact, the Kings have been a "system team" for years and part of the struggles over the past several years has been the struggle between the old system and the new coach's system (along with a lack of talent and injuries, among other things).

The next coach either needs to be a coach like Jordan or Turner who embraces the Petrie-system or a coach willing to make a clean break and run his own system, hopefully working with Petrie to acquire the players that fit his own system. However, the half and half style does not work. Coaches who do not coach their own system and style are never going to be as successful as those who do (see Terry Porter's struggles in PHX).

Therefore, the two camps should be: Princeton-style coaches and other candidates. Along with Jordan and Turner, other "Princeton-style" candidates could include Los Angeles Lakers' assistants Kurt Rambis or Brian Shaw, as Adelman's "Princeton-style" system is similar to the Triangle and would use the current Kings' personnel in a similar way. The outside the box candidates in this group would be Dynamo Moscow and Russian National Team Head Coach David Blatt, a former Princeton player or Oregon State Head Coach Craig Robinson, another former Princeton Tiger.

The other candidates vary greatly. The most prominent name mentioned is current Dallas Mavericks executive Paul Westphal. Other Kings' fans throw out former Toronto Head Coach Sam Mitchell, CSKA Moscow Head Coach Ettore Messina and ESPN's Avery Johnson. I would add other names like San Antonio assistant coach Mike Budenholzer, Boston assistant coach Tom Thibideau, Cleveland assistant coach John Kuester, Dallas assistant coach Dwayne Casey, University of Oregon assistant coach Mike Dunlap, Portland assistant coach Dean Demopoulos, Miami assistant coach Keith Askins, Oklahoma University Head Coach Jeff Capel, Boston College Head Coach Al Skinner and Bradley University Head Coach Jim Les. Heck, what about former Sacramento State Head Coach and current San Antonio assistant Don Newman?

Honestly, the names are unimportant to me. Instead, I am more concerned with the decision-making process. Many Kings' fans seem to want a safe coach after the turmoil of the past several years. They do not want to take a risk. They seem content with any former head coach with a record hovering around .500 willing to coach for a below market rate salary.

To me, that is terrible thinking and I hope Petrie does not fall victim to this sentiment. I am not worried about experience. I want coaching talent. Petrie identified coaching talent several years ago: Oklahoma City Head Coach Scott Brooks. However, he was too inexperienced or too young or too something else to promote to Head Coach. Instead, he went to Oklahoma City and did very well as an interim Head Coach after P.J. Carlesimo was fired.

When athletic directors and general managers hire coaches, they tend to hire from within their professional circle and base their decisions on things like experience, won-loss record and an interview. However, I am unsure these are the best qualifications. After all, a coach's won-loss record is not always within his control: Phil Jackson has a much greater opportunity to win games with the Los Angeles Lakers' roster than did Reggie Theus with the Kings' talent - especially considering the injury problems with this year's Kings.

In November, I wrote about the NFL hiring process, as a columnist criticized the lack of experienced candidates:

Easterbrook never really makes an argument, since he points out that most college coaches flop as NFL coaches even though they have head coaching experience (Spurrier, Saban, etc). So, in a sense, he argues against NFL coordinators because they do not have head coaching eperience and college coaches because they do not have NFL experience. So, the answer is always a recently fired NFL Head Coach.

However, what makes a recently fired HC a better candidate than an assistant coach or a college coach? The experience that led him to be fired?

In one of my favorite books, First Break All the Rules, Marcus Buckingham argues that the best managers [Athletic Directors, Head Coaches] hire based on talent, not experience or connections. Unfortunately, how can a Head Coach or Athletic Director measure coaching talent? One interview? A practice session?

If the Kings hire for talent, not experience, who are the most talented candidates? Miami president Pat Riley saw coaching talent in Erik Spoelstra and gave him on the job training to nurture and develop his talents. Then he hired him. Few organizations are as progressive in hiring, nurturing and developing their own coaches, as Head Coaches do not want to hire and develop their replacement - few coaches are so secure. However, in great business organizations, leaders ensure that they develop their replacements.

When I directed UCLA Special Olympics, I made every possible effort to assist the directors who would replace me when I graduated. We created a system to develop new directors. During the years that followed, the program remained strong. Now that the program has moved away from or lost these principles, it struggles to recruit and retain leadership. When I left a job as a manager for Special Olympics Northern California, my replacement was a college senior who had worked with me to start a new program at U.C. Santa Cruz. In these cases, I/we identified candidates, put them in positions to learn and gain experience and then turned over the program when they were ready, much like Riley did with Spoelstra. How come few other basketball organizations are so proactive?

Without that close interaction where management can identify talent, how does an organization hire for coaching talent? How do you identify coaching talent?

Hiring based on connections, experience or won-loss record is hoping to make the right choice. None of these things ensure that a coach will succeed. We see these as predictors of success, but just as many people with the same background fail as succeed. For every former San Antonio assistant who succeeds (Mike Brown) another fails (Carlisimo). For every former college coach who succeeds (Larry Brown, Greg Popovich) another fails (MikeMontgomery, John Calipari).

The key is not finding a coach who has coached with Popovich, Brown or Phil Jackson and hiring him because of their affiliation with a great, championship coach. Instead, the answer is identifying a coach with the same personal traits and characteristics as a Popovich or Riley or Jackson. It's not the experience being in their presence that makes a coach great. The experience develops or enhances the talent, but the experience is not enough. This is why so many "no-brainer" hires do not work out as expected.

So, what are the commonalities between Popovich, Larry Brown, Riley, Sloan, Jackson, Adelman, Rivers, Mike Brown, Mike D'Antoni and some of the other top coaches?

I want Petrie to use his best judgment to hire talent. If he decides that Craig Robinson, after three years at Brown and one year at Oregon State, has the talent to be an outstanding coach, I want him to hire Robinson. If he decides that Vlade Divac would make an outstanding coach, I want him to hire Divac. If he decides that Jordan is an outstanding coach, I want Jordan.

However, I do not want a safe hire. I do not want a coach hired simply by his resume, connections or experience. I want a coach that the fans and players believe is a great coach. Sure, he might have to learn some things and gain experience, but Spoelstra exceeded expectations despite his youth and inexperience. Tampa Bay hired Raheem Morris because they see talent, not because of experience or connections.

I want a great coach. I would rather Petrie gamble on hiring someone who he believes to be a great coach and have the coach fail than hire a safe coach who sustains mediocrity.

In Jon Spoelstra's Marketing Outrageously, he writes:

There are 29 teams in the NBA. Of these 29, only three or four, at the most, are thinking during the off-season about winning the championship. These three or four teams ask themselves, "What's it going to take to win it all this year?"

Pat Riley...thinks championship...It's win the championship or nothing. Other coaches don't look at it this way. They think about improving their record or advancing one round in the play-offs

Hooray for those who think, plot and dream to win it all this year.

The Kings are not going to win it all next year. However, I hope Petrie hires a coach that he believes can take the Kings to a championship,not one who might be able to get the Kings the 8th seed in the play-offs. I want Petrie and his next coach to "think, plot and dream to win it all this year."

Jeremy Tyler and Education

I watched some of the ESPN OTL piece on Jeremy Tyler and I don't understand a few things:

First, Bob Ley says that Sonny Vacarro has been at the epicenter of player development since he signed Michael Jordan to a shoe contract for Nike. Vacarro is a businessman, and a very good businessman. In some ways, he is a visionary. However, I would not say that Vacarro develops players.

As for the piece, I don't understand the PhD's point of view. I agree with Vacarro that we should be far more concerned about kids dropping out of high school with no future, than someone dropping out of school to take a high paying job.

I do see a double standard. Nobody tells child actors that they should stop acting and go back to school. Nobody tells tennis players that they have to play one year of college tennis before they can turn pro and join the ATP Tour.

As for education and learning, I am biased. I was an exchange student as an 18-year-old. I took a year off from school between high school and college, much like Brandon Jennings. However, I knew many other exchange students who spent their junior or senior years of high school as exchange students. People congratulated them for taking advantage of an educational opportunity to meet new people and learn about a new culture.

However, when Tyler graduates from high school early - much like football players who graduate a semester early so they can enroll in college and play in spring football - so that he can move to a foreign country and play basketball, he gets labeled as a high school drop-out and people think all of society is going to fall apart.

Now, who knows if Jennings or Tyler uses the opportunity to enhance his education beyond the court? However, how many college freshmen have been exposed to a new culture, seen the Roman Colosseum, learned some Italian, etc? How is that not an educational experience?

I learned as much in a year as an exchange student as I did in four years of college. I am not anti-education - I am likely heading back to school to pursue a doctorate. However, I also do not think that a college education - especially one year of a college education - is everything people believe it to be.

"Only 31 percent of college graduates can read a complex book and extrapolate from it. That's not saying much for the remainder."While more Americans are graduating from college, and more than ever are applying for admission, far fewer are leaving higher education with the skills needed to comprehend routine data, such as reading a table about the relationship between blood pressure and physical activity, according to the federal study conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics.

Education is what you make of it. You can sleep walk through four years of college and graduate as ignorant as when you enrolled. You can skip college altogether and start a billion-dollar company. My greatest learning experience in college was coaching and managing a Special Olympics program. My "school work" taught me very little about anything.

All these talking heads that get their 15 seconds of fame talking about Jennings and Tyler and the ruination of the United States miss the point: if they are worried about the educational system, fix it for those it is failing. The system did not fail Jennings and Tyler. They may not have great grades - I don't know - but they sound articulate in their interviews - more so than NBA TV"s Gary Payton - have guaranteed contracts, dreams, goals, contacts, resources, etc. Who cares about their grades?

People miss the entire point of education. Education is not about GPA's or the name on the diploma. It's what you learn. You don't need school or college to educate yourself, and in many ways, living in a foreign country as a teenager is probably the best educational experience that a person can have.

I don't know if Jennings or Tyler is making the best possible decision. That's an individual decision. But, I do not believe that these "experts" should categorically disapprove of their decisions without any personal knowledge of the individuals or their decision-making process.