Examining Traditional Coaching Truths

January 30th, 2010

Even if you do not coach volleyball, I recommend John Kessel’s blog, as it is as good as anything that you will find on the Internet for coaches. In December, he posted an article titled, “No More Drills, Feedback or Technical Training.” Now, to some, this might eliminate the need for a coach, as those are three primary tools of coaches. However, he makes some great points in regards to all three.

Lately…I have come to the drill development chapter and asked those listening…to simply stop saying the word drill, and start saying the word game, for any exercise they have opted to teach their athletes.

I use this strategy with my players. Rather than do a passing drill, we play an advantage passing game like 6v5 with one player as an all-time offensive player and two teams of five. We play to 100 completed passes. Of course, recently I had to explain the purpose of the game because players were starting to play the game rather than develop skills to transfer to the real game. As Kessel writes:

The best way to do this is to simply listen to your kids, and stop doing drills and start doing games. There is a mind shift you will have to make when you step in front of your athletes and say “OK this is a game with a focus on ‘insert skill/skill combo here’ and the scoring is….”

Nearly my entire practice is games. We play ball handling games (tag), passing games, small-sided full court games to practice defensive and offensive transition, small-sided half-court games to practice ball and player movement and 5v5 scrimmages.

The goal, of course, is not to eliminate improvement or deliberate practice, but to make it more meaningful and game-like. After all, we practice to improve game performance, not for the sake of practicing. Again, as Kessel writes:

Deliberate practice is important. Many of you then should continue to do drills, and not make the change – but you still must make them more gamelike, with more scoring and competitive cauldron tracking, and follow the principles of motor learning….so keep saying drills if you want, just do them better so the kids have success in competition.

As for feedback, Kessel stresses proactive rather than reactive coaching. You see this a lot in games, where coaches try to teach and correct things after they happened in the game, rather than during practice or prior to their occurrence. As Kessel writes:

Coaches spend way too much time talking about what cannot be controlled at all – a past skill performance – and nowhere near enough time focusing on the only thing that athlete can control – the point being played right now. This change I am asking in your teaching to take place, is working to guide your players to focus on what is ahead, mentally and physically.

Dead-balls are a great time to coach during the game. Rather than call over a player and discuss or critique the previous play, prepare the player for the next play. For instance, if a player made a bad pass that led to a turnover and a foul on the lay-up attempt, rather than focus on the past mistake, prepare her for the next possession. What does she need to do next?

Kessel explains this in terms of practice, too:

Why can you, the coach, walk out and get the tip, from your spot sitting on the team bench, yet your players who are much closer right there on the court, cannot save the ball? You are seeing the opponent’s actions BEFORE contact, better than your players can is why. You are reading the CONTEXT of the developing play…your expertise starts to shout “SHE IS TIPPING THE BALL” well before the contact…Yet kids, trained by just “tipping drills” with a coach standing on a box, never get the incredibly important prelim information in real time – they just see a coach tipping over and over…So we must get better at teaching the game between contacts, teaching them why you KNEW that was coming, and teaching them to look wider, through the net, and see the flow of the game. Then give them feedforward when appropriate, so they can learn from you experience and make it their own.

This is so important. Issue 4.5 of the Hard2Guard Player Development Newsletter discusses spatial orientation, analytical thinking and zone offenses. I see spaces in opponent’s zones. I also see players on my team preparing to make a pass and know that we are about to commit a turnover and I cannot change the play in the moment. However, in the next practice, we will discuss why I knew that their was going to be a turnover. I need to teach my players to see and exploit the openings that I see. This is a process, and one that will not be completed this season. It takes time to teach players to see and think the game, but if the coach never puts them in these situation, this learning gets delayed longer and longer.

This goes along with Kessel’s comments about technical training:

In impact this is “seen” even in the webinars, when I ask for the feedforward you would give a player spiking a ball down by their ear, not reaching at all. Clearly bad technique.  The coaches provide these most common feedback comments – “Reach;” “Extend:” “Get on top of the ball:” “Keep your elbow up;” and the negative coaches say “Don’t drop your elbow!” They first forget to check for understanding by asking the player to show them the skill without the ball. If they did, my bet is the athlete would show good technique, reaching high, for they understand the technique. The problem is they are not at the right place and time, and simply will not fully extend and hit the ball off their elbow to show the reach you are expecting. The answer is not more technique, it is to come up with ways to guide them to be in the right place and time – in this case earlier and/or faster, which, by making that timing adjustment, will result in the ball being at a higher point in time for contact.

Basically, he says that the player knows the proper way to hit the ball just like most experienced players understand and can demonstrate the proper shooting technique. Missed shots for experienced players are not caused by lack of knowledge about the proper shooting technique, but by poor timing or shot selection: the player stops and never gets balanced or he is late to find his target or he shoots flat-footed because he isn’t ready to shoot on the catch.

Similarly, many players excel in 1v1 moves when going through drills without defense, but when they have to read the defense and make the correct move, suddenly their handle is not as tight and they are less effective. Rather than spending more time engaged in ball handling drills, they need more practice against defenders in the different situations that they face during a game.

Kessel outlines and evolved approach to coaching which focuses on preparing players for game situations and teaching skills based on the players’ true needs and weaknesses, not the easy instructions. By being more judicious and precise with corrections and feedback and centering practice drills in the game, we can develop more well-rounded and skilled players with a greater awareness on the court.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

The Road Map for Youth Basketball Coaches

January 29th, 2010

Mike McKay, the Coaching Director for Basketball Canada, has a post based on Traffic; Why We Drive The Way We Do by Tom Vanderbilt. He writes:

How does this relate to basketball? We need to have the same universal integration of our playing rules and concepts…When a coach goes out side of the accepted boundaries for a particular age group he/she should be warned and if the behavior persists he/she will be penalized. When coaches start to restrict players skill development by placing players in set positions at a young age, the coaches should be educated. If they still do not change should they still be able to coach? When coaches start playing full court trapping defenses with mini basketball players that coach should be informed that it is not acceptable.When a coach starts running multiple set plays at the mini level that coach should be warned. These are examples of concepts that do not follow the rules of the road. If an idea comes along that helps the system it should be implemented throughout the entire system. Coaches need to understand that they are working to produce players who can drive (play) anywhere in the world, not just drive (play) in their own municipality.

Sure, a great press wins championships in the young age groups, but is that the goal? I know a program that has one of the top u-9 and u-10 teams because of the vaunted “Diamond press.” At this age group, girls cannot throw over top of the press, so they can gamble with five players in the back court trapping. It works.

These players practice lay-ups and the press. That’s it. By 12 or 13, everyone else has caught up physically, and the press no longer dominates. The programs who develop skilled players succeed, while the top players from this program spend even more time training with personal coaches to do the skill work they fail to develop with their team.

I’m not for over-complicating the system with nine-year-olds, but I do believe that a player should learn more than a press in a year of year-round basketball.

As MacKay advocates, league directors need to direct their coaches more actively and provide guidelines as to what is and is not an acceptable strategy for games and practice. I am less concerned about whether or not a team presses in a game, and more concerned with what that means about how they spend their time during practice.

With young (mini-basketball) players, we need to have simple goals and give the players tasks that they can master, rather than spend our precious practice time trying to out-strategize our opponent with set plays, multiple defenses and presses. Before players can execute basketball strategy, they need to develop the basic fundamentals of the game. A mini-basketball coach is tasked with developing some of these fundamentals and, more importantly, fostering an environment that inspires players to practice on their own and to continue playing because they enjoy the game.

Phil Jackson and Servant Leadership in Coaching

December 26th, 2009

In The Way of Adventure, Jeff Salz writes about his adventure travels throughout the world and the lessons that he learned and conveys to companies through his public speaking engagements. In one chapter, he talks about Servant Leadership and growing invisible as a leader:

Leaders of successful expeditions gradually stop taking the lead and start sharing both responsibility and credit. Having given their best effort and having faith in the overall process, they gradually melt into the group so that a newcomer might not spot the leader right away.

People often criticize Phil Jackson, saying that Kobe Bryant is really the coach of the Lakers and Jackson does not really do anything. Before Rick Adelman was let go in Sacramento, people said the same things: Adelman did not stalk the sidelines and bark orders all game, so people believed that he was not coaching.

Coaches like Adelman and Jackson trust the process. They teach and prepare players during practice and trust the process during games. They empower their players and allow players to play through mistakes.

Lao-tzu, the Chinese philosopher-sage of the sixth century B.C., described a leader who is acclaimed by the public as being not so good. A good leader is one who people hardly know exists. According to Lao-tzu, under the guidance of a great leader, when the job is done, people say only, “We did this ourselves.”

Sounds like Jackson, Adelman, Jerry Sloan and some others.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League

Coaching is just Running Plays, Right?

November 6th, 2009

On socalhoops.com, I saw this post from a Southern California coaching association:

SCIBCA Fall Coaches Symposium
9:45-10:00am Presentation from Officials Association on New Rules
10:00-10:15am CIF Power Point explaining Playoff Divisional Structure
10:20-10:45am Break Out Session #1: Man Offense, Set Plays, Out of Bounds
10:50-11:15am Break Out Session #2: Zone Offense, Set Plays, Out of Bounds
11:20-11:45am Break Out Session #3: Press, Press Break, Special Situations
11:45-12:30pm Coaches’ Social & Lunch

This reminds me of an old post by John Harmatuk, a high school coach in Houston. Coach Tuk said that he told another coach that he did not run any set plays. The other coach turned to Coach Tuk and asked, “What do you do in practice if you’re not practicing your plays?”

Coaching Style or System of Play

November 3rd, 2009

coachLast week, while in Vancouver, British Columbia, the conversation turned to a very successful small college coach and his system of play. This coach employs the “Grinnell system” and is convinced that players love to play in the system. Many coaches believe the same thing about the Dribble-Drive-Motion: players today only like to dunk and shoot threes so they love the system.

I disagree. I see something else at work. I believe that players love to play. I think we view the success of certain coaches with a certain system and equate their success with their system of play. However, I think their success has more to do with their coaching style.

Generally-speaking, a coach who employs the Grinnell-system or the D-D-M is more tolerant of mistakes. He gives players more freedom to play. Many of these teams use more players, which keeps reserve players engaged. Their practices are more active because they spend less time reviewing 5v0 offensive sets and more time focused on dribbling, passing and shooting.

I think that the players respond to these things, not the particular system. I think that a coach could run any system that he wants and if he was tolerant of mistakes, gave players freedom, engaged the entire roster and ran active practices, the players would respond with the same intensity and effort.

Players do not have a favorite system of play. Players want to play, they want to improve, they want to feel like an important part of the team, they want to enjoy the experience, they want fresh challenges and as they get older, they want an opporunity to win or play in post-season tournaments.

Players respond to coaches who show them respect, teach them something new, empower them on the court and care about them off the court.

Learning from your Coaches (Bad or Good)

October 26th, 2009

If you play long enough, you will play for good coaches and bad coaches. When you move into coaching, you often reflect on the good and bad coaches. Many coaches coach much like their mentor or favorite coach. However, is it possible to learn more from your bad experiences than your good experiences?

Stanford University professor Bob Sutton linked to an interview with Yahoo’s CEO Carol Bartz who argues that you learn more from your bad managers than your good managers.

Bartz says:

I also think people should understand that they will learn more from a bad manager than a good manager…When you have a good manager things go so well that you don’t even know why it’s going well because it just feels fine.

When you have a bad manager you have to look at what’s irritating you and say: “Would I do that? Would I make those choices? Would I talk to me that way? How would I do this?”

Sutton highlights the point about noticing:

The implication is that when things are going great, you don’t engage in very deep cognition about them, because little is happening to give you pause or upset you. In fact, this point is consistent with research on cognition and emotion suggesting that people in good moods do not engage in as much mindfulness,deep thought, or self-doubt as people in bad moods.

When you play for a good coach, therefore, you do not notice the reasons why you like playing for the coach. Everything seems good. Therefore, you try and copy the coach, but oftentimes you fail to copy the parts that made the good coach a good coach.

For instance, I played for my father for years and consider him a great coach. However, technically-speaking, I run practices almost completely opposite of his practices. We never scrimmaged, we ran the Flex and we had a very structured press break. I use games to teach almost every skill, prefer motion offenses and do not use a press break.

I think he was a great coach because he created an environment free of fear, and all the players knew that he cared about them as more than just players. I do not remember exactly how he accomplished this – I cannot remember if he spoke to each player personally during each practice or if he took the players who played less to the side and gave them goals to earn playing time.

On the other hand, I have used experiences that I did not like as a player and as an assistant coach to shape my coaching philosophies. I paid attention to the things that I disliked and tried to change them as a coach.

A couple years ago, I read an article about John Gagliardi, a football coach at St. John’s University in Minnesota:

Who wouldn’t want to show up for practice, when Gagliardi has basically eliminated all the things football players traditionally don’t like about it? There is no calisthenics or lap running, and no drills designed to build agility or quickness. There isn’t even any tackling — instead, the Johnnies line up 11 on 11 and play touch football for 90 minutes, the way most of them have since they were little kids tossing around footballs in their backyards. And if you happen to mess up, don’t sweat it — Gagliardi isn’t likely to get up in your grill.

“You don’t chew ‘em out, you don’t get on their tail all the time,” he tells me. “I think what drives most people away from things is not the physical abuse, but the mental abuse.”

Of course, by traditional football standards, Gagliardi’s approach to motivation is pure heresy. But looked at another way, it makes perfect sense, because he has essentially created a football program powered not by his own threats or intimidation or screaming, but by the players’ natural passion for football.

It makes a lot of sense. Learn from the things/coaches that you do not like and do not repeat the mistakes.

By Brian McCormick
Founder, 180 Shooter

Soviet Coach Education

October 22nd, 2009

By and large, amateurs coach amateur athletes in the United States. However, in other countries, a youth coach is a profession, and just like with other professions, coaches study to become coaches.

From Dr. Michael Yessis’ Secrets of Soviet Sports Fitness & Training:

The development of coaches in the Soviet Union is a scientific, well-planned undertaking. Unlike the U.S., where colleges turn out physical education teachers – some of whom become coaches without any additional spcialized training – the U.S.S.R. has developed programs designed specifically to tranform young men and women into skilled athletic instructors. Space in these programs is limited, and competition for admittance is keen. All applicants must be serious athletes themselves, and they are required to take rigorous four-day entrance exams in subjects ranging from physics and chemistryto biology and mathematics. Those who make the grade then undergo four to five years of a tough, scientifically oriented curriculum in one of the country’s physical culture institutes, which culminates with academic examinations that last for days.

The men and women who move successfully through this rigorous program become high-level coaches; those who don’t become teachers…coaching is viewed as a career that requires special training and education. Every five years, the coaches return to the physical culture institutes for a semester to receive refresher courses.

Coaching Youth Basketball in the 21st Century

October 20th, 2009

John Kessell of USA Volleyball wrote a compelling article about coaches and their self-improvement titled “We Coach the Way We Were Coached.

Well intentioned and even trained coaches enter gyms all over America, and train their athletes the way they were trained.  That the science of sport – of biomechanics and motor learning and other disciplines – have researched and found better, more efficient and more successful ways of training, simply seems not to matter, or this information has not reached down to these levels.

In one instance, I sent a fellow coach several articles showing that static stretching before practice does not prevent injuries, nor does it warm up an athlete for dynamic performance. The coach, however, insisted that despite the research, his players needed to stretch before practice. Why? Coaches constantly complain about the lack of on-court practice time, yet spend 10-15 minutes stretching despite its irrelevance to injury prevention and performance enhancement.

Has nobody seen the extensive Center for Disease Control study showing that in over 300 stretching programs viewed, none reduced injuries?  Was it that long ago that these players would sit at a desk for hours, practically immobile, and then hear the recess bell ring, and fly out to 15 minutes of all out activity, and come back in with maybe a scraped knee? None of them ran and stretched in advance of their chosen recess activity, they just went straight to playing.

Beyond stretching, many teams use drills that have little relevance to the game or in some cases develop bad habits.

Why spend 10-15 minutes doing stationary ball handling drills? Why spend 10 minutes doing a three-man weave (with players traveling all over the place), but then run a fast break where players do not pass and run behind the pass receiver? Or, teams run a two-man fast break where the rebounder outlets and fills the wing, but in 5v5 action, the rebounder trails on the opposite side of the court as the ball handler.

With limited practice time, these drills should reinforce your system of play, rather than contradict it.

Many coaches love to condition at practice. In some cases, it appears like the only thing that they feel confident doing.

Anson Dorrance, who has won almost 20 NCAA Division One soccer titles, writes in his book Training Soccer Champions – “Conditioning is homework.”  I see coaches creating conditioning stations vs. skill development stations all over the US. Athletes with only 100 hours of practice total until season’s end, yet there they are,  learning to hop hop hop…doing situps, jumping rope, etc. What do these kids need to get better at most of all? Playing volleyball…yet we continue to run and condition them. WHY?

Sure, conditioning is a part of basketball. But, if you run an active practice without wasting time, conditioning comes through the skill development. Even at the high school and college level, I play a lot of 2v2 and 3v3 fullcourt which works on conditioning better than running line drills or, even worse, hitting the track. I have no idea why high school and college programs use the mile or 2-mile test as their fitness test, and youth teams certainly do not need to waste their time with this type of conditioning.

Not to mention the coaches who make players run when they violate some rule of the coach. What are they learning by running? That getting in shape is not good is one thing that comes to mind…Teachers know that mistakes are simply opportunities to teach. Coaches it seems think that mistakes are opportunities to make kids run, not teach.

Nobody gets better without making mistakes. When coaches demand perfect practice, players lack the opportunity to challenge themselves outside their comfort zone because they cannot risk a mistake.

Some coaches played for great coaches in their careers, and they should use what they learned. However, not everything that your coach did was sacrosanct. Every year, we continue to learn more about coaching, learning, performance training and other subjects pertaining to team and individual player development.

Rather than coaching as you were coached, the Youth Basketball Coaching Association was founded to (1) make you think about the way that you coach and (2) provide resources, courses and clinics for coaches looking for the latest information pertaining to coaching youth basketball.

The Positive Response to Mistakes

October 15th, 2009

Originally published in Los Angeles Sports & Fitness

rosenblattIn the 2008 College Baseball World Series, Fresno State University lost Game 1 in the best of three series against Georgia, but bounced back to win the next two games. In game three, Fresno State’s shortstop, freshman Danny Muno, made three errors. The third error came in the eighth inning and gave Georgia life.

After the error, Justin Wilson, Fresno’s starting pitcher, looked at Muno, smiled and good naturedly said, “Come on!” with a little laugh. Muno smiled, a little embarrassed, and hit his glove as if to say, “Let’s go!” In the ninth inning, Muno started a 6-4-3 double play that more or less ended the game.

I watched every inning of the championship series, but that third error, and Wilson’s response, is the scene I remember. In a tense situation, he laughed off his teammate’s mistake and re-focused on the next batter. Muno, for his part, regrouped from his mistakes and moved forward.

santa barbaraLast summer, I worked a basketball camp in Morocco. The camp was at an American School, and the kids were from several different countries. This was not a competitive camp or an evaluation camp. None of the players had college or professional aspirations, and their school only played a handful of games during its season. Some players were good and some were bad, but the campers were mainly there for the experience, not because of their basketball devotion.

When we played games, I worked with the 12-14-year-olds. Invariably, at least one player would show his displeasure with a teammate, either through body language or verbally. When we reached the play-offs, a couple of the not very good players tried to fake injuries so they could sit out and help their team by not playing. Even at a camp where almost all the players attended the same school and hung out socially, players could not help but react to mistakes in the heat of competition.

After watching these children in a totally uncompetitive environment act in this manner, Wilson’s and Muno’s composure in a tension-filled championship game seemed even more remarkable.

The campers acted normally for their age. Unfortunately, children mimic the actions of their coaches and parents, who react negatively to mistakes, even with young players. We get caught up in the action and the competition and show our frustration. We forget that the players are young, and that mistakes are normal.

When other players, parents or coaches criticize mistakes and/or enact some form of punishment – run a lap if you miss a free throw or a ground ball – kids fear mistakes.

During one Little League season when I was 10 or 11-years-old, my throws were off. I played second base and threw away the ball on a couple easy grounders even though our first baseman was over six-feet tall. I started to position myself out of position intentionally to eliminate an easy chance and relieve myself of the pressure. If I made a diving stop on a ball hit up the middle, but was unable to make a perfect throw, it was okay because nobody expected a perfect throw after a great stop. I intentionally made the game harder to save the embarrassment of making a mistake on an easy play. I feared the criticism from the other players or my coach, so I found a way to eliminate the pressure.

When kids fear mistakes, they do not develop. Mistakes are a part of the development process. However, when a coach, parent or player reacts to the mistake, the player avoids situations where he might make a mistake. By avoiding the situations, he also avoids the opportunity to improve.

In Little League, I never wanted to make an out. I discovered that most pitchers lacked good control, so I took a lot of pitches. I led the league in walks and on-base percentage and was known for having a great eye at the plate and not swinging at bad pitches. But, I also rarely swung at good pitches. I handicapped my development by concentrating solely on the easiest way to get on base and never really developed as a hitter. While I developed a great glove (since I intentionally played out of position, I learned to make the tough plays), I never developed as a hitter.

Why would children voluntarily fake an injury to avoid playing or intentionally play out of position to avoid the easy play? Because somewhere during their playing career they had an unpleasant experience and that experience resonates.

In Zen Golf, Dr. Joseph Parent writes:

“Emotional experiences register more strongly in memory than ordinary experiences. They get a special ‘tag’ because of the emotional charge associated with them. We’re hardwired that way, a survival mechanism inherited from prehistoric times.”

When I think about my Little League career, I remember one at-bat. In 7th grade, my team won our league and played in the Tournament of Champions. We went undefeated and reached the championship game, where the other team had to beat us twice. I struck out to end the first game. Luckily, we won the second game and the TOC. I know I hit over .350 that season, but I do not remember a single hit.

As Dr. Parent writes:

“When we make a four-foot putt, there may be some relief but not usually a lot of emotion. However, when we miss a four-foot putt, there is often a reaction of frustration or anger. That emotional reaction imprints more strongly in our memory.”

To help young athletes improve and enjoy their athletic experience more, we need to improve our body language as coaches and parents when a mistake is made, and also monitor the body language and expressions of teammates. Coaches need to embrace mistakes as learning experiences, not opportunities for criticism, and parents and coaches need to focus more on the positive plays, rather than the negative ones.

If a young player remembers the positive plays more than the negative ones, he enjoys the experience more and develops his skills more thoroughly, as he is less afraid to make a mistake and more willing to make the attempt, whether it is shooting the basketball or hitting a baseball.

The best reaction is to laugh off the mistake and prepare for the next play, just like Fresno State’s Wilson and Muno. If they can manage this reaction in the eighth inning of a National Championship game, everyone should be able to remain more positive during a youth game or recreational match.

By Brian McCormick
Creator, 180 Shooter