We lost our second game, but improved markedly from Game 1 to Game 2. I imagine most of the improvement was reduced nerves and an appreciation for the difference between junior high school basketball and high school basketball. (more…)
Posts Tagged ‘spacing’
Coaching Frosh Basketball – Week 3
Sunday, December 11th, 2011Teaching the Overlooked Skills
Thursday, September 16th, 2010An ESPN ScortsCenter’s top play last night was this goal by FC Bayern’s Thomas Mueller’s goal:
Watch the goal again. Everyone notices the skill of the shot. It is an amazing strike with an incredible degree of difficulty.
However, the goal is only possible because of what Mueller does before beginning his strike while the ball is loose in the box. Rather than run wildly toward the ball or stand and watch, when the ball deflects toward the edge of the box, he quickly backs up into space and prepares his body. When his teammate heads down the ball in his direction, his feet are set and he has space to strike the ball.
While the strike is exceptional, players often practice this skill, just as basketball players practice different shots. However, few people practice moving into the right area to be a bigger threat. In basketball, most movement instructions starts and stops with the movement of specific plays. Therefore, players only learn this type of movement through experience, if they learn it at all.
On the other hand, at the end of the third game of the WNBA Finals, Angel McCoughtry missed a three-pointer. One of the Miller twins rebounded the ball. After she rebounded the ball, the other Miller twin back-pedaled to the three-point line; she received the pass as she moved backward, never set her feet and missed, ending the series. When you need a three-pointer to tie, why stand inside the three-point line? If she had recognized that her sister was close to the rebound a split-second earlier, much like Mueller starting to move before his teammate received the ball, maybe her feet are set when she receives the pass and she makes the shot.
This skill – this awareness – is common to elite players. If our goal is to develop better, more aware players, we need to find ways to cue players so that they move subtly into more dangerous positions, regardless of the play.
By Brian McCormick
Author, Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League
Right-Brain Thinking Against Zones
Monday, February 8th, 2010This article originally appeared in Hard2Guard Player Development Newsletter 4.5.
Zones stymie many teams and players. Generally, teams and players who attack man2man defenses stand around and play passively against zone defenses. There is no real reason to explain the passivity. Zones require a different strategy than man2man, but good defenses combine man-defense and zone defense on each possession.
I thrived against zones because I was a good shooter. However, more than spot-up shooting ability, I found holes in the zone. I visualized the open space or how I could create open space for myself or a teammate. Now, when I play pick-up games, I am frustrated that players rarely see the game or the developing play as I do.
My team struggles with zones because we do not visualize how a cut, pass or pass fake will move the defense. Playing against a zone requires some basic tactical skill and understanding. We use three general skills: dribble and replace; flare screen and skip pass; and a long diagonal cut followed by a short cut into the space. More importantly, I focus on understanding the defense to create a 2v1 somewhere on the court.
As a player, if I know the defenders’ zones, and I can move one away from his area, I know that there is an open area if a teammate fills that space. When all five offensive players have the same understanding, zones are easier to play against.
If we have the ball in the corner with a player in the short corner, the ball handler dribbles toward the wing. Usually, the defender stays with the ball, meaning the baseline defender in the 2-3 zone is now on the wing. The girl in the short corner fills the corner. On the pass back to the corner, we have an open shot or an open lane – we forced the baseline defender to defend two players in one zone.
If the player penetrates baseline, the middle player in the zone has to rotate to stop the ball. We flash a cutter from the high post on a dive to the rim. Again, we have forced one defender to defend two people. If he stops the ball, a short pass to the cutter should result in a lay-up. If he does not stop the ball, the ball handler has a shot.
The key is understanding the spatial relationships. I have a very analytical team – nearly every player excels in mathematics. We are very left-brained. Consequently, we struggle to visualize space. We lack a creative element. The least mathematically inclined – the two players who lean most heavily toward kinesthetic learners – see space and attack the gaps better than the others.
My players crave more structure, as they are used to plays that occur in a specific sequential order: Pass A leads to Cut B which leads to Pass C which leads to Shot D.
I want them to see space and attack gaps. My approach costs us in some games, but junior varsity is a developmental level and I want them to learn to adapt to different situations. I want them to see the openings in the zone without having to run a play for them to see the openings.
I see the openings and gaps from the sideline; however, rather than design play after play to exploit these gaps, my goal is to get these left-brain thinkers to move beyond their comfort zones and use their creativity and some right-brain thinking to visualize the play developing.
Our biggest problem, ironically, is a poor understanding of angles and relationships between teammates and defenders. For instance, we run an on-ball screen against the zone; our primary purpose is to create a 2v1 in the high post or on one side. However, often the screener is open rolling to the basket if we pass before she reaches the middle defender. Tonight, rather than rolling across the front of the defender, we rolled down the lane-line, which allowed the middle defender to steal a pass. We do not understand the angle that we need as a passer and a cutter. We see open space, but we do not account for the defenders. If there is a line between the two nearest defenders, the pass receiver needs to get to the ball side of the line; by rolling down the lane-line, our player moved behind this line, and the middle defender had a better angle to the pass than our player. If she rolled across the face of the defender, it would be like playing against a man defense when the defense switches.
A similar mistake is in the corner. On a quick reversal, we caught the baseline defender running at the wing with a player in the corner. If the wing drew the defender and passed to the corner, the corner player would have an open lane to the basket. Instead, our player in the corner would take off on backdoor cuts, moving behind the defender closing out to the wing and eliminating any passing angle.
These mistakes are a combination of problems. First, we need more confidence with the ball, especially under pressure. We work on no-dribble passing drills every day to work on pivoting and passing to moving targets while under pressure. Second, we need a greater tactical understanding of where the open spot is and how to get the ball to that player. We need to understand how to exploit open space.
This is a challenge because we are unaccustomed to this process. Against man defense, we excel – we know exactly where to go and how to react. Zone defenses provide more grey areas. At this level, the ball handler generally has an A or B decision against man: (A) use the screen and go to the basket or (B) if they switch, pass to the roller. Zones complicate decision-making. Coaches cannot teach in absolutes, which is why many struggle to coach against zone defenses. Players have to be able to think and find space.
As coaches, we need to prepare players to play against zones. I start with transition, as any transition situation uses the same principles as a zone, offensively and defensively. In 3v2 and 4v3 situations, it is easier to see the openings, the space and the angles. Now as the season nears a conclusion, I want the players to see and feel the space and angles in 5v5 play just as they do in a 3v2 break. However, this takes patience and practice to develop.
By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League
Thinking Out Loud: Two Thoughts about Youth Basketball
Saturday, October 24th, 2009I played in an old junior high school gym this week. It is easy to forget how small those courts are. The major change from youth basketball to the NBA is the length and width of the court. Most of the rules and other measurements (basket height, free throw line) remain the same, but the court gets bigger.
From a physical perspective, this seems logical. As players grow, they need more space, and they have a greater ability to run up and down a longer court.
However, from a skills and learning perspective, young players need the bigger court. Younger and beginner players need more space to make their moves and more time and space to feel open for a shot. Older, more experienced players require less time and space to make a move or attempt a shot.
While the size and athleticism of adult players compensates for the bigger court, I think we ignore the needs of young or inexperienced players. When we played on the junior high school court, we played 4v4 because of the lack of space. Why do we make young players – players who need more space and time than adults – play 5v5 in the same area?
Second, I was thinking about a modern day, basketball version of the chick-and-egg argument:
Do young players travel all the time because officials do not call it or do officials not call traveling because the players travel so often?
It is hard to know which came first: the terrible footwork or the blind eye turned toward the terrible footwork.
Coaches and parents yell at the officials for not making the call, but if they make all the calls, the coaches and parents tell the officials to let the children play. Therefore, officials grow more and more lenient with their interpretation of a traveling violation, and consequently, coaches spend less time focused on footwork.
If officials whistled every traveling violation in a game, regardless of the coaches’ and parents’ outcries, would coaches spend more time focused on footwork in practice? Would coaches reward the players with good footwork with playing time ahead of those players who frequently travel and currently get away with it?
By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League