Youth Basketball Coaching and Player Development - Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things -

Home

The Cross Over Movement Forum

Boardwalk :: Forum List

The Crossover Movement

Coach Education

<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

coachtuk
User

Expert Boarder

Posts: 27

Karma: 2

Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things - 2007/05/12 21:16 That is the quandry. I love uptempo, but why do the grind it out teams always win?

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

coachmccormick
Admin

Admin

Posts: 623

Karma: 0

Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things - 2007/05/12 22:46 Phoenix and the Warriors are still alive. Florida won the NCAA Championship. I think tempo is overrated. How often does the slowest paced team win? It's a matter of execution, both offensively and defensively. System is relevant because it can enhance or inhibit execution. If you try to run with players who make bad decisions, it may hurt execution? But, if the players are fit for an uptempo game, why would slowing it down help execution?

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

David E
User

Expert Boarder

Posts: 31

Karma: 0

Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things - 2007/05/13 18:51 You have probably seen it before, but Ken Pomeroy has some great sortable stats pages for NCAA DI men.

Although I much prefer the uptempo game, you can see that this year's ten fastest-paced teams only included one in the top 100 in his winning percentage category (North Carolina), while the year's ten slowest-paced teams include four of the top 100 (Georgetown, Air Force, Butler, and Miami OH).

Florida's adjusted pace of 66.8 possessions per game ranked them 168th of 336 DI schools, and was right at the NCAA average of 66.9.

Other successful teams besides UNC that played at a brisk pace were Kansas, Memphis, and Maryland.

The final four teams ranked 168th, 218th (Ohio St. 65.4), 266th (UCLA 64.3), and 328th (Georgetown 59.9) in pace of play. Only Georgetown was really far from the norm.

What does this mean? I don't know. Maybe that you should run when you can, but don't go crazy.

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

coachvargas
User

Platinum Boarder

Posts: 72

Karma: 2

Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things - 2007/05/13 23:37 I think it goes back to what Brian said earlier - it's not the tempo that's important, it's how effective you execute your system at whatever pace it suits you to run it.

Of the teams you mention, I saw Georgetown, UNC, Butler, and Air Force all play on multiple occasions this year, and the one thing they all had in common is that they were able to force their tempo on whomever they played. I also thought Oregon did a terrific job this year of forcing their tempo on other teams.

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

pboettke
User

Junior Boarder

Posts: 5

Karma: 0

Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things - 2007/05/22 17:30 Dick DeVenzio's works are a great source of information for coaches and players. [DeVenzio was a point guard at Duke and the founder of Point Guard College and best known for his book Stuff! Good Players Should Know]. Anyway, in his book about his father (who was a successful coach) entitled THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO WIN, he summed up his Dad's advice as follows: (1) move the ball/move yourself; (2) pass the ball only to your teammates, not the kids in the other colored jerseys; (3) take easy shots, (4) never allow your opponents to take an easy shot.

When you think about it, it is a pretty good formula for success.

At the HS program I work in, and on my AAU team I follow the Dean Smith rule of tenancious team defense, unselfish team offense, and superior fundamentals. And we state that first day of practice and from then on. But if you follow DeVenzio's advice you would also be following the basic rules of Dean Smith.

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

coachcraig
User

Fresh Boarder

Posts: 1

Karma: 0

Re:Coaching Philosophy...3 Things - 2007/06/01 16:02 I think that as coaches our primary philosophy begins with an examination of these four things:

1) am I coaching to win?
2) am I coaching to develop?
3) am I coaching for fun?
4) am I coaching with some combination of the three? And to what value do I assign to any particular part of these combinations?

The technical and tactical decisions are all based upon the previous decision. Tactical decisions, while they should mesh with your personal style, must be based upon the talent that you have in your program. The bottom line is that "you cannot make chicken salad out of chicken crap". You need to develop a system of play that will allow your team to be successful and will utilize your personnel. Hope this helps.

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Boardwalk :: Forum List The Crossover Movement Coach Education

Joomlaboard Forum Component 1.1.2 Stable
Two Shoes M-Factory