Posts Tagged ‘decision-making’

Raising our Level of Coaching

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010

I finally received the long-awaited Rain: A Workbook for Players who Really Want to Score Points by Lindell Singleton. For such a small book, there are so many important and interesting points that I did not know where to start. However, since this is a site for coaches and their development, I focused on a chapter (passage) titled “Learning vs. Unlearning (A Paradigm Shift).”

First, Singleton defines bad basketball:

  1. Poor decision-making
  2. Poor (or absent) footwork
  3. L.O.E. – Lack of Effort

He starts the chapter about women’s college basketball, but these rules apply to all basketball. He also adds three universal truths:

  • Players want to be trained
  • Parents want their kids to be trained
  • Coaches crave kids who can play

Again, these are fairly common sense, and most would agree without hesitation. Therefore, if players, parents and coaches want these things, and there are an abundance of resources, why is there such bad basketball?

From a coaching perspective, how can a coach eliminate the three features of bad basketball? How does a coach teach decision-making? Many coaches and the media believe that decision-making is an innate skill – either you make good decisions with or without the ball or you don’t. How do you teach footwork? More to the point, what is footwork as it relates to basketball? Finally, how does a coach ensure that his players play with full effort?

Singleton points out that most basketball is taught “in a linear progression – with clean, Aristotelian logic.” However, he says, “basketball is a game dripping with paradoxes (which firmly collides with Aristotelian logic). I adopted a more GESTALT method of teaching.”

I have made a similar, though less articulate point: most coaches teach in black and white, while basketball is played in multiple shades of grade. If there is always a black or white solution to a situation, what if it does not work?

For instance, take a simple 2v1 fast break. Most players attack as if there is one solution: pass to your teammate. The only question is when to pass, and some seem to have a singular solution: at the free throw line. However, what if the defender defends the pass? There are times when a player should finish and times when the player should pass. There is no black and white solution.

Teach the black and white solutions makes teaching and accountability easier. However, does it improve performance? I spent the season trying to empower my players to make decisions. I wanted them to see the game in shades of grey. There was rarely a right or wrong solution. However, if the decision turned into a turnover or missed shot, then we evaluated it – was it poor execution or a poor decision?

When coaches teach based strictly on outcomes, we miss the difference. If I attack 2v1, shoot the lay-up and miss, and the coach criticizes the play, I am more likely to pass next time. However, what if shooting was the right decision? What if I chose the wrong shot (lay-up rather than a two-foot lay-up)? What if I simply missed a shot that I should make? My reaction should not cause me to pass next time, just because I missed the lay-up. Instead, given the same circumstances, I should shoot again. However, often that is not how things are taught. If A happened (missed shot), it is because of B (should have passed). This is a rigid way of thinking, and teaching, and ineffective for a game like basketball.

If we agree that players and parents want coaching, and coaches want players who can play, where is the breakdown? Why is there a lack of effort?

Somewhere, there is a disconnect between coach and player. Maybe the player wants to learn something, and the coach focuses on something else. Maybe the player is comfortable with one approach, but the coach has a different approach. Maybe the coach teaches to one learning style, but the player has a different learning style.

There are numerous possibilities. However, from a coaching perspective, the coach must step back and see his responsibility in the breakdown. What can he do differently? What type of teaching do the players need? Where is the discord? Do the players understand the objectives? Do I focus too much on the details and not enough on the big picture? Do I focus too much on the big picture and not enough on the details? Do I focus too much on winning or results and not enough on the process? Do the players feel like practice translates to games or is practice just busywork?

How can I as a coach ensure that the players maintain their desire to be trained rather than crushing this desire? While maintaining their desire, how can I emphasize good decision-making, proper footwork and effort?

Please add your comments in the Forum.

By Brian McCormick
Author, Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development and Developing Basketball Intelligence
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League

Join the forum discussion on this post - (2) Posts

Why Are Set Plays Dangerous for Young Players?

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

I attended a university lecture on decision-making and the presenter showed a version of this video (There are many versions of this online). Please watch this video before reading the article below.

Why do people miss the moonwalking bear? When people focus on one task – counting the passes made by the white team – they attempt to ignore all irrelevant stimuli. To some people, noticing the moonwalking bear could be seen as a weakness, as it illustrates an inability to stay focused on a task. However, what happens if you focus so intently on your task that you miss something as obvious as a moonwalking bear?

Young, inexperienced players must deal with new and different stimuli when playing basketball. They have not mastered the basic basketball skills of passing, catching, shooting and dribbling, and now they must execute these skills under defensive pressure. Then, coaches teach set plays for players in an effort to make the game easier or to create a good shot for the best shooter.

The problem is that as players try to run the play, they miss the moonwalking bear. I watched a high school AAU game at a recruiting evaluation tournament a couple summers ago. The team had a player who had peaked the interest of Big 12, WCC and Big West coaches in attendance, so the team was not devoid of talent. The team ran the same play every time down the court. After several possessions, the defense caught on to to the play. The play started with a down screen and a wing entry pass. By the fourth possession, two defenders were running with the cutter coming off the down screen and nobody guarded the screener. The team threw the pass to the wing anyway, which resulted in several steals before the coach called timeout.

Why did the guard fail to see the screener who was open? There are probably several explanations, but this video explains one: she was trying so hard to run the play (count the white team’s passes) that she did not see the open player (moonwalking bear). The play was designed to go to one area of the court (wing entry), and she devoted all her attention to protecting the ball and making that pass.  She focused more on running the play than trying to score.

Set plays or continuity offenses have a role in offensive basketball. However, the objective is always to create a good shot and score, not just to run the play. I hear coach after coach screaming at players to run the play, and then the player completely ignores an open lane, shot or teammate.

Before teaching plays, we need to teach young and inexperienced players our general goals. At my first practice this season, I asked the players for the best possible possession. They threw out some answers, but none gave me my number one answer: a possession that ends with a made basket with a defensive foul that puts us on the free throw where we score a third point. To me, that is the best possible possession because we get three points, our opponent gets a foul and we can set our defense. This type of thinking may be over the heads of eight-year-olds, but if that does not make sense to them, what is the objective of the set play?

After discussing the best possible possession, we discussed the worst: a steal or long rebound that leads directly to a fast break lay-up for our opponent. Not only do we not score, but our offensive possession leads straight to their basket.

Then, we went through other scenarios that fit between the best and worst. We prioritized shots. A wide open, catch-and-shoot three-pointer: great shot. An off-the-dribble, fade away 17-footer: terrible shot.

After we had the general idea of the types of shots that we wanted to take, we instituted a basic set: a four-out offense predicated on a high on-ball screen: think the Orlando Magic (without Dwight Howard or nearly as many shooters).

More often than not, while we started in the basic four-out set, we rarely ran the play. In fact, after a fellow coach had watched us play four times, she had no idea that our offense was designed for a high pick-and-roll as she had only seen us run it once or twice in four games. Instead, players took advantage of lanes to the basket or passed to cutters cutting to the basket.

Occasionally this freelancing led to bad offensive possessions or one player got in another’s way because she cut too early or stood in one spot too long, but generally the freedom to make plays within one set worked very well. We rarely missed the moonwalking bear under the basket, and the varsity coach was amazed at the points that we scored, as we well out-scored the varsity.

This isn’t to say that the Orlando offense is the perfect offense or that you should only shoot three-pointers. Instead, the point is that we cannot teach in a way that makes our players miss the moonwalking bear. Players need to be aware on the court and play the game, rather than run the play. The objective is to score. The best process is to take good shots – often, this means running a play or a continuity offense. However, the offense is only as good as the players, and when players focus more on the play than on scoring, mistakes are bound to happen because their awareness of the court decreases and bad decisions follow.

To enhance the decision-making of your players, create awareness of possible options rather than limiting the focus to one entry into a set play.

By Brian McCormick
Author of Cross Over: The Model of Youth Basketball Development, Developing Basketball Intelligence and several other books for coaches.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (2) Posts

Two Ways to View Basketball: Clocks and Clouds

Monday, April 19th, 2010

In the May 2010 Wired, Jonah Lehrer writes about problems with MRIs in an article titled “Lost in the Details.” At the end of the article, he quotes Karl Popper, a philosopher of science who divided the world into clocks and clouds.

“Clocks are neat, orderly systems that can be solved through reduction; clouds are an epistemic mess, ‘highly irregular, disorderly, and more or less unpredictable.’”

Some basketball coaches choose to view basketball as a clock, while others see basketball as a cloud. The way that you view basketball determines the systems that you run and your method of teaching.

I see basketball as a cloud, as I see a lot of ambiguity. I feel my job is to prepare players as best as possible and then trust them to make the best play or best decision in the heat of the moment. Coaches who see basketball as a clock try to control the decision-making through set plays and set rotations, attempting to create order out of a chaotic game.

When I coach, I ask a lot of questions, and I often answer questions with “It depends.” Sometimes this can be seen as a negative. However, I do not want players to be too caught up in making the “perfect decision.” I don’t want players thinking on the court; I want them to rely on their instincts to make the best play possible.

When a player asks if he should stop the ball in transition or protect the basket, it depends. Who is handling the ball? Where is your help on defense? Who is the other offensive player? Is the ball handler attacking with his strong hand? Is he under control?

There is not a black-and-white answer in my opinion. In some cases, the player should stop the ball; in others, he should protect the basket. As a coach, it is impossible to cover every single instance. Therefore, I want to practice different situations, go over different ways to look at the situations and then trust the players to make the best decision in their opinion at that time.

If the decision looks like the wrong decision to me, it becomes a teaching point at the next practice. I try not to criticize; instead, I want to know what the player was thinking. Why did he choose A over B? Maybe he saw something or felt something that I missed. Maybe his decision was the best decision when looking at it based on what he saw. For instance, maybe he did not see that he had a second defender back close enough to contest the pass – is that the original defender’s fault for not seeing his teammate or is it the trailing defender’s fault for not talking and helping the first defender?

Because there are so many situations that are possible in a game, I do not believe that a coach can treat it as a clock and expect precision. It makes it easier to teach some skills and decision-making in certain situations, but the ease of instruction often breaks down in a live situation because the decisions depend so heavily on the particular situation.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League