Leadership Problems and Solutions, Part II: The Toronto Blue Jays

The Toronto Blue Jays organization is certainly a wicked problem to which there is no clear solution. The problem has many symptoms: inconsistent performance, poor performance under pressure, and high rates of injury. Rumours suggest that some workout habits that leave a lot to be desired. On-field results appear to have impacted the balance sheet and the team suffers from low attendance and a budget where revenues hardly approach expenses.

This all stemmed of a leadership failure, endemic throughout the entire chain of command. Perhaps the best case scenario for the team was a .500 season, but the Blue Jays squandered an early lead and finished well below that mark. The expected win-loss statistic predicted an even better record (84-78). The unsatisfactory outcome was due to a flawed process.

Rogers Communication, the distant ownership, provided insufficient financial support. Paul Beeston, the interim president, was hampered by his recent arrival. J.P. Ricciardi, the arrogant General Manager, misallocated resources with little return and announced decisions through the media. He publically shopped the team’s best player, putting Roy Halladay in an impossible situation.
Dissent within the coaching staff seeped into the clubhouse. The team’s highest paid player did not contribute at a level to suit his salary and clean-up position in the batting order. Rumours suggest that his workout habits and mental training routine leave a lot to be desired. At the end of the season, certain individuals chose to pour gasoline on the fire and Ricciardi was dismissed.

What next?

The status quo is not a feasible option. Halladay would likely demand a trade although he has the dignity and professionalism to keep his opinion behind closed doors. The Blue Jays would be required to sign a corner outfielder or third baseman to provide more power, retain key everyday players such as Marco Scutaro and Rod Barajas, and strengthen the bullpen. The team would hope for the best from their many injured pitchers. Whether it’s a coach or a teammate, a trainer or a psychologist, someone would have to get through to Vernon Wells.
Starting from scratch would consume too many resources, in terms of time and money. Should the team trade Halladay for draft picks, buy out Vernon Wells, and let all of their free agents leave, it would take at least five years to become competitive. Blowing it all up would cost about a million dollars in salary for buy outs. Toronto fans have already become restless and such an action would stretch their patience beyond its limit.

There are plenty of alternatives in between those two extremes. The problem would continue to simmer and might boil over irrespective of any action plan but change is required. Changes made to the organization are as important as how new G.M. Alex Anthopoulos revamps the roster.
The owners and team president must provide clear direction. Beeston must state “This is who we are. This is what we hope to accomplish. Here is what we are willing to spend.” He needs to set standards for how team members should act and how they must support each other.

Anthopolous should model the club’s new standards. The front office must spend judiciously in the short-term and make long-term commitments. If it is possible to extend Halladay, it should be done. The pitcher would likely want to see other personnel moves, which is reasonable because the team has a marginal talent level that cannot compete in the American League East Division for an entire season. The team’s scouting staff has not been accurately assessing players and their weakness must be addressed. The Blue Jays experience too many injuries; there is a problem with their training techniques.
Perhaps most importantly, the coaching staff needs to work together. If there is a rift, it should be repaired because any dissention will spread to the team. Brad Arnsberg, the pitching coach, seems to be an expert in his field and should be retained. It is unacceptable for coaches to poison the locker room where they coach.
I think that Cito Gaston and all the coaches from the two World Series should re-evaluate their coaching styles. As the Coaches Association of Canada said, coach is a balance between looking inwards and looking forwards.
Perhaps coaches could play the percentages more, search for areas where the team can improve their technical skills, or hire a younger assistant coach to better relate with players. It has been reported that Cito Gaston has difficulty communicating with younger players. While it is true to today’s Blue Jays are not veteran professionals such as Dave Stewart and Paul Molitor, there have been positive results from Halladay’s elite example. It is not an impossible dream.
Gaston should touch base with players on a daily basis to ensure they remain motivated. Although rookies such as Travis Snider will make errors, they will learn when they play alongside veterans and become regular Major Leaguers. Aaron Hill and Adam Lind experienced breakthrough seasons but Gaston should work with them to determine their new goals and how they can raise their games to the next level. Somehow, he must turn Wells into an asset; no team would acquire the twenty-three million dollar player on waivers now.

Better players will make a difference but better leadership is a necessity.

Leadership Problems and Solutions, Part I: Integrity and Leadership

Integrity is integral to a play: every player, coach, and staff member must say was that mean, do what they said they would, and acknowledge what they have done. Trust is a cornerstone of all team standards, the foundation of great success.

It is not a matter of morality. (Nevertheless, all teams should not only follow what defines ethical behavior in their respective societies but go above and beyond in order to set the example.) Integrity is not synonymous with judging between right and wrong (Christensen, Fall 2009, p. 16). Camus a dit que «l’honnêté n’a pas besoin de règles» (Camus, 2004, p. 96). Integrity doesn’t need rules, only consistency.

Participation on a team is a promise to multiple individuals:

Players Promise…

• to teammates: “I will be there for you when you need me. I will follow the standards that we agreed to. I will always be honest with you.”
• to coaches: “I will always be open with you. I will do what I say I will.”
• to themselves: “I will keep my words. I will self-evaluate myself sincerely after each performance. I will be at peace with myself.”

Coaches Promise…

• to players: “I will be clear and direct with you. I will set my expectations at the beginning of the year and be true to them. All decisions will be transparent.”
• to all team members: “I will treat everyone fairly and consistently. I will hold everyone accountable to what they say.”
• to recruits: “I will not guarantee anything beyond a fair opportunity and make no enticements.”
• to the community: “When a member of the team that I am coaching says something, you can rely on it.”
• to themselves: “I will keep to the timelines to which I agreed. I will not ask anyone to do anything that I would not feel comfortable doing myself. I will self-evaluate myself continually and sincerely.”

John Wooden placed integrity near the top of his Pyramid of Success. Coach Wooden would say: “Make your ‘yes’ mean yes and your ‘no’ mean no.” Even the bench players on his team, who may have been frustrated by their lack of court time respected his principles. Andy Hill was one such player and he feels that this clarity allowed the U.C.L.A. teams to function better because everyone understood their role and importance to the team (Hill & Wooden, 2001, pp. 88-90).

Integrity is not an outdated idea. Mike Krzyzewski feels that it leads to positive results on the court and positive feelings away from it. To him, it is bad to let others down but it is even worse to let oneself down. Coach Krzyzewski believes that anyone can recover from a bad game or a mistake but that it takes much longer to recover from a lapse of integrity (Krzyzewski, 2006, pp. 97-8).

The 2008 Redeem Team won an Olympic Gold Medal, in good part because they made a commitment to their country and each other. Players and coaches created a set of standards and every team member held each other accountable (Krzyzewski, 2009, pp. 67-84).

“The Celtic Way” defined the National Basketball Association in the 1960s as Boston won eleven out of thirteen championships and modeled the way on and off the court. Despite his influence, “The Celtic Way” did not mean that Red Auerbach managed the team like a tyrant or that he was not open to suggestions from the players. Auerbach was committed to winning and he believed that the best way to achieve this goal was to treat everyone consistently, irrespective of their race or previous role on the team.

The coach would say: “I never believed in handling players. You handle animals. I treated my players like people. I respected their intelligence. I was straight with them and they were straight with me. I didn’t lie to them and they didn’t lie to me. There was no double standard” (Whalen, 2005, p. 20).

Bill Russell, who followed him as coach of the team took integrity to an extreme. Russell would say that “a man without integrity, belief or self-respect is not a man. And a man who won’t express his convictions has no convictions” (Whalen, 2005, p. 52).

If a team member senses that any relationship is dishonest, it may lead to lower satisfaction or even reduced performance from peak performers. If a person is dishonest with themselves or others, they can suffer stress along with impaired performance. There is a risk that the dishonest behavior - or the subsequent sentiments of guilt or depression - will contaminate other team members, especially those in the social network of the player or coach who has been dishonest (Messick & Tenbrunsel, 1996, p. 55).

Designing simple team standards of integrity at the beginning of the season and enforcing accountability throughout the season is one of the best methods for a coach to avoid this guilt among team members.

The final step is convincing all team members of the importance of integrity. The coach could simply recruit like-minded personnel but that may dilute the talent level and impede creativity. So at some point, the coach must solicit buy-in from all stake holders.

As a rationalist and believer in Occam’s Razor, I prefer a simple intellectual approach.  Integrity is important to team success but it is even more important to one’s character. Even a single lapse can cause lasting damage. Adolescents have high social needs so some players may be susceptible to peer pressure. Others may be open to an appeal to emotion or have high needs for a trusting and safe environment. This is when the coach must lead.

Maintaining integrity consistently is one of the most difficult tasks that a human can undertake. But it is essential for success in sport, or any other team endeavour.

Works Cited:

Camus, A. (2004). L'homme absurde. In A. Camus, Le mythe de Sisyphe (pp. 94-126). Paris: Éditions Gallimard.
Christensen, K. (Fall 2009). Integrity: Without It, Nothing Works. Rotman , 16-20.
Hill, A., & Wooden, J. (2001). Be Quick - But Don't Hurry. New York City: Simon and Schuster.
Krzyzewski, M. (2006). Beyond Basketball. New York City: Hachette Group U.S.A.
Krzyzewski, M. (2009). The Gold Standard. New York City: Hachette Book Group.
Messick, D. M., & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (1996). Codes of Conduct. New York City: Russell Sage Foundation.
Whalen, T. J. (2005). Dynasty's End: Bill Russell and the 1968-69 World Champion Boston Celtics. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Skills We Should Teach More, Part II: The Mental Side of Passing

The ballhandler sees a teammate down court and throws a chest pass to his outside shoulder. The defender, having read the point guard’s eyes, closes the gap and times his jump to steal the ball. The opponent goes the other way and scores, finishing an and-1. A bad pass led to two points, a team foul, and a baseline inbounds.

During N.F.L. Kickoff Weekend, commentators prattled endlessly about the need for quarterbacks to estimate the distance between the defender and the receiver. One speculated that newly unretired Brett Favre would incorrectly evaluate the strength of his aging throwing arm and force a pass into a dangerous, not understanding that the risk of such a play had risen as his skills have fallen as his career advanced.

The same principles are present in basketball: correct spatial visualization, accurate risk-reward analysis, and the execution of correct passing techniques under pressure.

• Is there a defender in the way? Call the player’s name or make eye contact. Tell the teammate to pivot and seal or cut and come to the ball. Ask the receiver to give a target. Make an entry pass to change the passing angle or reverse the ball and attack the other side.
• Is there a defender nearby? Pivot, ball-fake, or head-fake to keep the opponent off-balance. Put some mustard on the pass so that it can’t be intercepted. Assess whether the offensive capabilities of the receiver on that spot of the floor balance the risk of a dangerous pass.
• Is there a defender pressuring the ball? Stay calm. Pivot around the defence and step into the pass. Choose the right pass for the right situation. Keep the dribble alive until you can run another play. Hold it as a last resort and wait for an opportunity to hand it off.

Coaches should devote more time to these skills. During scrimmages, they should stop the run when somebody obviously ballhawks and teach the team how this can be avoided. Players should learn all of the options available in a given predicament. The little things, like ball-fakes (along with moving the head and especially the eyes), half-a-second hesitation dribbles to read the defence, and pivoting belong in practices.

It is a fallacy to teach players that any pass to a teammate is an equally valid option. Coaches should be frank and pragmatic about the strengths and weaknesses of each team member so everyone knows the best option and what type of pass is appropriate.

It’s a more difficult task to teach players how to improvise and make good choices. Dehydration and fatigue reduce decision-making skills. The Israeli army incorporates math exercises at the end of training, effective teachers drill students under the pressure of time; coaches should do likewise and simulate pressure with game-like situations.

Why Are You Trying Out for the High School Team?

Not to criticize daily physical activity, nor playing for fun, nor a lifetime of good health. Not to demean those who shoot hoops in the school yard or play pick-up with friends, nor those who swim run, or play another sport to keep fit. Seeking instead to address those wishing to tryout for the next level (high school, Ontario Basketball, AAU, university or college) and excel. Anyone considering that step should ask themselves one question:

Why am I doing this? Anyone can see the fans at the game more clearly than the name on the jersey.  Anyone can play for individual glory. Anyone can take unlimited shots. Anyone can quit when it starts to hurt. But nobody should play at the next level if they can’t play:

• For the Name on the Front of the Jersey: To make four years in high school mean something more. To represent your teammates and your peers with pride. To play team defence. To create memories. To participate in something greater than oneself.
• For Teammates: To make friends for life. To be the first to pick a teammate up off the floor. To make a pass as the clock winds down because it was the right thing to do. To achieve something together that was impossible individually. To help defensively. To take charges. To set screens. To be positive.  To encourage.
• For Improvement: To set goals and accomplish them. To improve. To encounter obstacles and overcome them. To avenge earlier defeats in the playoffs. To practice hard daily. To acquire skills, both physical and mental, and use them on and off the court. To train.
• For Self-Actualization: To be the best. To think. To anticipate the next play. To focus. To stay calm under pressure. To challenge the opponent’s best player. To stop the ball. To be tough. To fight through screens. To rebound. To hit the floor.  To compete.

It is a privilege to play for any team. Canadians like Jermaine Anderson love to play for their country. Sometimes the twelfth man is the staunchest teammate. Players have dreamt for years about being on the court when it matters. Even those on the bench are essential to making any good team better.

It matters whenever any team plays, any collection of players selected because of their skill, strength, speed, and - most significantly - their soul. That team and those players are important. Anyone can be one-dimensional but elite teams and elite players are those who develop all aspects of the game.

Even if this is not the year that you are playing varsity or it is not the month when the season officially begins, it can still be the day to start training. The day to set personal standards. What will you accept from yourself? Everyday, student-athletes can make a difference. Anyone who can’t meet that challenge doesn’t belong on an elite team.
 
Michael Jordan was inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame yesterday and chose David Thompson to introduce him. He didn’t chose Dean Smith, Scottie Pippen, Magic Johnson, or Phil Jackson but a player who inspired him when he was younger. Jordan saw Thompson succeed in college and as a professional but he also saw him fail. It was the manner than Thompson overcame his drug addiction and knee injuries that inspired Jordan to become so determined.

This entire entry may seem clichéd but the crux of the message is this: elite players separate themselves from the masses not because of athletic gifts or a single event but by the choices and habits they display on a daily basis.

What I Hope to Learn this Summer, Part III

The new Roger Federer - the one who makes mistakes, occasionally fails, and realizes his limitations - is much more interesting than the old one. Last year’s Wimbledon between Federer and Nadal featured superior tennis but this year’s match between Federer and Andy Roddick was equally as tense.

To complete the French Open-Wimbledon double, Federer needed to honestly re-evaluate his game in order to improve it. At Roland Garros, his improved ability to slide on the baseline was paired with a new drop shot; at the All England Club he was forced to serve impeccably and persevere as his best shots were foiled.

Federer defeated Roddick because he knows how to overcome adversity and change. On the bright side, Roddick is finally a threat to win Grand Slams again because he has evolved his game to become more versatile. Increased mental and physical fitness also helps his cause.

The development of Federer and Roddick over recent months signifies that no athlete should ever stop improving. When the opportunity to increase their level of physical skill passes, an athlete can work on the mental side of the game.

Self-actualization demands continuous learning and I endeavour to learn more from other sports over the summer. There are many excellent resources and it is simply a matter of locating them, reflecting, and adapting them to the appropriate sport.

Managing My Life by Alex Ferguson another example of a thoughtful and persistent triumph. The Manchester United manager experienced a mixed bag of success and failure as a player and rose through the coaching ranks steadily. He was almost sacked as manager at Old Traffold a couple of times but persisted and attained the level of elite achievement where he resides currently.

In his mind, one of the integral components of his philosophy is his tendency to deconstruct every failure and learn what could be done better. Another tenant is the belief that no player, manager, or club should be satisfied with less than their best. Ferguson’s coaching career is forty years of learning from masters, treating others how he would want to be treated (sometimes a professional, sometimes a person), and continually moving forwards. He is a role model for all sorts of coaches and managers. Even his offensive strategy for soccer, based on rhythm and ball possession, contains elements that could influence a basketball coach.

Ferguson’s work the most eloquent book about sport that I have read. It shatters the stereotype that jocks must be dumb and challenges other athletes and coaches to do better. There is never any reason not to communicate in a dignified and respectful fashion.

I am also scheduled to read Scotty Bowman: A Life in Hockey, Inner Skiing by W. Timothy Gallwey and Robert Kriegel, and Football Scouting Methods by Steve Belichick because they emphasize sound coaching, mental training, and game preparation respectively. In the month of August, when I work on Task 4: Nutrition and other units at the National Coaching Institute, I hope to base my work on a theme such as “What Basketball Can Learn from Other Sports.”

Beat the Opponent, Not the Fans

It’s hard to say that John Tortorella cost the Rangers their season - up to and including Game 4 of the first round he seemed to be the spark that ignited their late season run – but he made several errors during the last three games of the series. It was still up to the Capitals to claim the thin sliver of opportunity that they had been presented, which they did.

Early in the series, Tortorella seemed to focus on the officials and Sean Avery instead of New York’s outstanding play and Washington’s insecure goaltending situation. Whilst attempting to inspire his team late in Game 5, he pulled Henrik Lundqvist and it seemed to take the goalie another four periods to regain his form. Lastly, he lost his composure and chose to shine the spotlight on himself when he threw a water bottle into the stands and lunged at a spectator with a hockey stick. Consequently, he was not present to lead the team during the Game 7 (actually Game 6 which was held at Madison Square Gardens) because he was suspended.

Tortorella will always be a coach with negative characteristics that correspond to his positive traits. This year, his fiery personality proved to be a stark contrast to the cool and calculated demeanor of previous coach Tom Renney, inspiring the Blueshirts. Objectively, the encouragement of Bruce Boudreau better motivated the Caps, who won the final three games of the series and moved on to the next round.

16? Not Like That

In 2008-09, both the Toronto Raptors and the Montreal Canadiens experienced disappointment. Both teams began their seasons with high hopes, both fired head coaches during the campaign, and neither achieved playoff success. In addition to those superficial parallels, there are several significant similarities between the two. Each organization believed that they were a step away from championship contention when they actually had a much longer path to travel.

General Managers Bob Gainey and Bryan Colangelo both traded key players (goalie and point guard respectively) for younger and cheaper replacements. The new starters were not able to perform at the same level as their predecessors and the teams suffered. Gainey and Colanagelo felt that they had enough depth at those positions but they were wrong in their analysis.

Instead of acquiring top-shelf talent, the G.M.s settled for bit players (Alex Tanguay instead of Mats Sundin or Vincent Lecavalier; Will Solomon and Roko Ukic instead of an elite wing player). Neither sought the leadership that would improve the defensive intensity of each team.

After Sunday’s Game 1 win over the Utah, Los Angeles coach Phil Jackson wrote on the dressing room whiteboard: “15? Not Like That.” Jackson was referring to performance that was required to win fifteen more games and claim the Association title. A talented team - comprised of veteran players and respected leaders - knows enough to raise their games to the next level. Firstly, Gainey and Colangelo were carried away by previous success and didn’t create that type of team; secondly, their teams didn’t raise their games during the year.

The Green Bay Packers

Instant Replay by Jerry Kramer and Run to Daylight by Vince Lombardi helped popularize the sport novel - a famous author partnering with an athlete or coach to bring fans into the locker room - whereas Vince by Michael O’Brien is a regular biography that benefited from popularity of those other works. Lombardi’s report of a week during the regular season is the most succinct and provides the best coaching advise and Kramer’s account presents the viewpoint of a thoughtful player throughout a championship season. On the other hand, O’Brien’s cursory biography does not introduce any new information or anecdotes that are not available elsewhere. Three ideas stand out after reading these three books about the Packers’ dynasty in the 1960s.

Building Relationships: Vince Lomardi is much more sympathetic than his grizzled and hardened public image would suggest. After Paul Hornung was placed on waivers and claimed by the expansion New Orleans Saints, Lombardi showed immense regret, balancing his desire to make the right move for the team by exposing the aging running back with his feelings for the man. The coach led the toughest training camp in the N.F.L. but also insisted upon daily team building activities, some as basic as singing during team dinners.

Flexibility: One of Lombardi’s favourite expressions was “Run to Daylight,” signifying that the backs and receivers did not run set routes but took advantage of the opportunities presented by the defence. “Run to Daylight” could also serve as one of the integral tenet’s of basketball’s motion offence.

Perspective: Jerry Kramer, the Hall of Fame guard, spoke about how the team peaked for critical games and took minor setbacks in stride. Although the season was not divided into macrocycles, peak and taper periods were included. The team members shared a very balanced outlook and common goals. The veteran team employed chemistry, communication, intelligence, and teamwork to defeat younger, more athletic, and bolder teams.

Why Not?

One can record a maximum break in snooker in less than five and a half minutes. So why not make 147 every time? Since the balls are always arranged identically, how did the first player in this clip botch the break so badly, without potting any balls, so that Ronnie O’Sullivan was able to easily run the table, averaging one shot every nine seconds?

Why does a curler slip pushing off the hack at the Brier and therefore compromise their release? How does a collegiate wrestler lose their first match against an unranked opponent when expected to win the national championship?

The key characteristic is the formation of good habits. Whether the situation occurs during the General Preparation phase or a Peak during the Main Season, an athlete’s mentality should be the same.

The Carleton Ravens never overwhelm a team with skill. Winners of six of the past seven Canadian National Championships, it seems logical that they would have a much higher talent level than their opposition but they rarely win in a rout and often put forth poor shooting performances. However, the Ravens’ defence is always consistent and carries them through tough games.

It is evident throughout the game - from warm-up to post-game, during all of the huddles - that they don’t find the circumstances out of the ordinary. Even after they won a tough National Semi-Final against Western on a buzzer beating shot, stars Aaron Doornekamp and Stu Turnbull still took the time to clean up their bench area, showing respect and responsibility.

Coaches should continuously promote Intensity and Quality in practice in order to simulate games. Athletes must always display this work ethic during workouts (individual or team). Coaches should instruct effective emotional and attentional control in addition to sport-specific physical performance factors. Athletes should spend time finding their Ideal Performance State before all competitions, from the N.C.A.A. Tournament to Intramural Playoff Games.

Coaches could call timeout and tell athletes to “calm down” but both groups have responsibility. Mike Krzyzewski, in his cursory work Beyond Basketball, talks of the importance of visualization for himself as a youth growing up in Chicago and for players at Duke. Some of the advice in that particular book may be incredibly obvious to anybody with a quantum of common sense but the anecdotes may inspire fans with higher aspirations.

For example, Krzyzewski relates how diligent Michael Jordan was regarding his individual workouts during the preparation for the 1992 Olympics. Although Jordan was the best player in the world, he was still respectful and allowed the college coach to work him out at game-like Intensity and Quality. Even the best must invest time to maintain their physical and mental levels so that they do not slip or stumble during a critical moment.

Fate Helps Those Who Help Themselves

Smokey the Bear persistently preached that “only you can prevent forest fires.” He understood that he could preach until he was blue in the fur about fire safety but he could only succeed if everyone did their part. A coach can make speeches, review game tape, prepare scouting reports, or employ coaching gimmicks but the team can only succeed if every player on the court contributes.

After a Toronto High School Senior Boys Basketball championship game, a West Hill player was heard to remark that the game was “easy.” One teammate concurred but another remarked that “wait, we lost.” Some athletes can’t separate process from outcome or recognize the differences between each definition of success. It is another issue entirely when team can’t figure out that both the process and the outcome are wrong and does not make adjustments.

Maybe the other team isn’t intense or applying pressure but let that be their problem. Beth Mende Conny once said that “if you can’t take control of your life, don’t complain when others do.” Or don’t sit there in the locker room afterwards wondering what happened.

Like work ethic, fear is an emotion that athletes can only conquer themselves. Jim Valvano remarked that “there are 86,400 seconds in a day. It’s up to you to decide what to do with them.” Well, there are 1,920 seconds in a high school game and it’s up to you to perform and leave it on the court without regrets.

Paradigm Shifts

Recently I read War as They Knew It: Woody Hayes, Bo Schembechler, and America in a Time of Unrest and Coach: The Life of Paul “Bear” Bryant. The books chronicled three iconic college football coaches during a time when their profession and the world around them were evolving at breakneck speed. The first book is about the Hundred Yard War and how the coaches reacted to each other and unrest on their respective campuses; the second book focuses on Bear Bryant’s life, especially his time in Tuscaloosa.

Thomas Kuhn, in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions talks about how a paradigm - a set of rules and structures - can limit those who make use of it. When scientists encounter information outside their paradigm, they are likely to modify it to suit their needs or ignore it outright.

Hayes, Schembechler, and Bryant coached for many seasons and developed their own philosophies and paradigms regarding coaching. Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, players changed along with football strategy. Hayes continued to manage his team with an iron fist while emphasizing defence and the running game, but Schembechler and Bryant kept an open mind an adapted themselves to the new situation. Both the Michigan and Alabama loosened team discipline and made use of new offensive strategies to remain relevant.

All three of the coaches made mistakes earlier in their careers by overtraining their teams prior to critical bowl games - which they lost as a result of fatigue - but Schembecher and Bryant were more perceptive and less likely to repeat their mistakes like Hayes did over the years. At the end of War As They Knew It (and his career), the Ohio State coach was left wondering what was wrong with his campus and his country but his counterparts at Michigan and Alabama were more likely to look inwards and change themselves to keep pace.

All three coaches intimidated their assistant coaches over the years and used their stature as a way to bully younger staff members. Bear Bryant had the right idea about making up his staff, saying: “A lot of coaches are guilty of surrounding themselves with the same old same old. But I never hire a coach unless he knows something about the game that I don’t.” Towards the end of his career, Bryant would delegate a great deal to staff members, partially because of his failing health but also because he trusted his assistants immensely. Hayes may have let his standards slide during his last few years in Columbus but Bryant never did. Throughout his tenure, coaches and players alike dreaded the ominous clanking of the head coach’s tower, meaning that he was coming down from his observation post to give someone a tongue lashing.

"This Is Russia”

Dave King wrote King of Russia during the 2004-05 season when he coached Metallurg Magnitogorsk of the Russian Super League. The diary contrasts the professional hockey systems in Russia and North America and records observations about daily life in Russia. In post-Communist Russia, the country is modernizing from Moscow outwards but it is not quite there. Despite all best intentions, transportation and distributions quandaries occasionally arise and corruption remains a problem. King encounters some bizarre situations where it is best not to ask questions because “this is Russia.” Unfortunately, King is also able to chronicle how the Russian economy is distilling into two classes: the very rich and the destitute (a problem occurring in other cities and countries, including Toronto).

King often admires the work ethic of players at all levels of the club program (echoing Gladwell’s 10,000 horus theory) and the Russian/Soviet ability to mesh different sport tactics and training methods together in order to better their teams (Lloyd Percival’s The Hockey Handbook receives a shout-out). Russian players work on physical conditioning (especially quadriceps muscles) from a very young age and skill is developed over thousands of repetitions. An hour practice might be divided into only three drills. Despite this work ethic, King finds that the team finally hits its stride after Russians with N.H.L. experience model the way and lead by example on the ice.

Questions abound at first about how the Canadian will survive in the Super League but King successfully introduces North American ideas such as power-plays and penalty killing systems and line match-ups. Even in the K-League there is not a single answer to every problem.

My Bad

Taking responsibility and finding ways to improve team performance is entirely different from taking responsibility and repeatedly making the same mistake. Saying that it is your bad doesn’t make it better. We’ve all been coaching for years and know it’s your bad. Furthermore, anyone who has been playing the sport for more than twenty minutes should know it’s your bad.

The phrase has become cursory and trite like cocktail party conversation; on some teams, it is as incessant as a broken record. Coaches don’t say that it is their bad when the bench is uncomfortable.

David Frost: President Nixon, do you regret the invasion of Cambodia which may have triggered the militarization of the Khmer Rouge?

Richard Nixon: My bad.

Self-evaluation is an important part of mental training and the first step to serious improvement. But self-evaluation without follow-up is nothing. Serious people take steps to improve every day.

Coaches should help players realize that there is a problem, show them how to identify ways to correct it, and plan practices with quality repetition at high intensity. There are limits to what coaching can accomplish (extrinsic motivation). Players should buy into the process (intrinsic motivation), instead of putting another coat of primer on a cracked foundation by saying that it’s their bad. Of course it is and it is also their bad that they aren’t taking initiative to get better.

Superbowl XLIII

Most people would say that Superbowl XLIII was an exciting game and largely well-played. Is that true?

How do casual fans evaluate success? Kurt Warner likely performed better than Ben Roethlisberger (112.3 to 92.3 passer ratings) and Larry Fitzgerald likely outplayed Santonio Holmes. Yet the Steelers’ performances will linger in the memories of the masses because they succeeded under pressure and created defining moments. A more arbitrary P.E.R. might have shown that the Cardinals played more consistently. If Arizona assesses their season properly and plugs the right holes, they have many building blocks for future success.

Why do teams play conservatively under pressure? It took the Cardinals three quarters to figure out that they should try a hurry-up offence. Hadn’t they learned that preparation can beat talent (the Patriots made adjustments and shut down the Greatest Show on Turf for fifty minutes during Superbowl XXXVI until the Rams overwhelmed them with volume and almost came back)? Why did the Steelers back-off and play a prevent defence? Normally they introduce multiple defensive adjustments as the game wears on. Coaches may have been affected by the pressure and let their players down.

Pressure can rush decisions and cause mentally weak players to fold. I’ve always felt that emphasizing Intensity and Quality in practice leads to excellent performance under pressure during games.

Extraordinary Events

What is the overall effect of an extraordinary event on a single team? The death of Alexei Cherepanov during a game triggered an eight-game slide for Avangard Omsk in the K. The Superbowl champion New York Giants lost four of their last five games after receiver Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg. Teams can collapse when a key player is suspended or experiences a breakdown on the court.

Yet other teams rally together when they experience a critical injury. What is the difference between a positive and a negative outcome in the face of adversity? A lot of a team’s success under difficult circumstances is determined by how the team was put together in the first place.

“Hard Work”: Coaches should clearly define the team goals at the beginning of the season and secure player buy-in. If a player can confidently answer the question “why am I here?” and “what is this all for?”, they are more likely to persevere during the tough times. Team progress will improve before, during, and after adversity.

“Family”: There will be different relationships among different team members and coaches should ensure that they remain positive. Evaluating the team chemistry - how teammates communicate and support each other - can help a coach spot problems ahead of time. Questions to ask are “where could we communicate better?” or “how we help each other succeed more?” It may be necessary to intervene or make time for a team building activity before small conflicts escalate. Athletic success (or success in any field) is strongly linked to how an athlete interacts with their environment.

Pushing each other and pulling together are attributes of a successful team. A team may still experience a shock in the face of a surprise but the players are better able to continue when everyone is on the same page. Creating the support mechanism before they are needed results in better results and less stress for all involved.

Information, Uncertainty, Game Theory, and Quality

Tryouts are a case of adverse selection because coaches rarely have the opportunity to see a player’s complete skill set. It’s certainly a matter of imperfection information and coaches must develop signals that reliably reflect the ability of perspective team members.

Sometimes teams make a draft pick because of “unlimited potential” or a “high ceiling”. This logic becomes absurd if it causes players who have been seen in greater detail (therefore exposing all of their skills and flaws) to be overlooked. In 2005 and 2006, Chris Paul and Brandon Roy were seen as the collegiate players most ready for the Association yet they were picked behind others who have not performed as well since entering the league. Some N.H.L. teams wish to draft the enigmatic Victor Hedman instead of the over-exposed John Tavares. Such instances show that qualities such as athleticism, one-on-one skill, and the success of previous players sharing characteristics are inappropriate signals of success in the Association.

George A. Akerlof wrote “The Market for Lemons” in 1970. The paper predicted that in cases of asymmetrical information (when the seller knows more about the product than the buyer), the threat of buying a lemon will discourage most buyers from paying a high price for a used car. Sellers with good used cars will not enter the market because they will never receive the true value of their car and the market will consequently collapse. Currently, tryouts are a situation where the seller (player) knows more about the product than the buyer but the market (tryouts) has not collapsed. The onus falls on coaches to hold tryouts and select players based on sound principals.

Conducting tryouts based on performances in scrimmages could also lead to biased signals. If games are an extension of self and young players are developing their personality for the first time, an individual game such as basketball could lead to greater selfishness or poor decisions. The coaching staff should understand how and why these young players are making their choices. Constructing the evaluation so that it excludes the temptation to show-off and control the pass will identify the players who are most skilled and best suited to join the team and avoid “basketball lemons”.

Identifying player combinations with good chemistry, observing how prospects interact with each other on and off the court, demonstrating a new skill and watching how it is performed, or organizing tightly controlled part method drills provide better information than an open scrimmage. Coaches must recognize the make-up of their players and use game theory to predict their reactions. Alternatively, they could gage the players’ reactions and spend more time analyzing exactly what it means. Coaching skill lies in creating situation that create quality and force it to rise to the top. Obviously, standards should remain clear, fair, and consistent.

Another Way to Die

A door left open: Bo Schembechler said “prepare, prepare, prepare.” John Wooden said that “failing to prepare is preparing to fail.” You can’t get upset on the court or in life when you are let down by something you should have foreseen and prepared for.

A woman walking by: In every life, short-term pleasure can’t overcome long-term pain. Treat the source, not the symptoms. Correct the player’s attitude so that they buy-in and become willing to correct their technique.

A man on your side: Another inch of your life sacrificed for your brother. If it impedes productivity, deal with it immediately; otherwise avoid getting caught up in the paperwork. Coaches should remember that they need to get paid too. The team can only go so far. In the hospital, there is plenty of paperwork so you won’t miss it.

A look in the eye: Essentially, John Wooden’s “Pyramid of Success” is nothing but a set of very high standards. If you compromise your own standards, looking at yourself in the mirror every morning becomes the most unbearable part of each day.

A phone on the table: Finding passion on your own is immensely difficult. Not everyone is interested in pushing the boundaries of quality. Finding coaches and players who share the same philosophy is critical.

Someone that you think that you can trust: Undeserved self-satisfaction is the timeless rival of self-actualization. If you are doing something interesting, challenging yourself, why bother? There are so many tiers in sport. Anyone can win a game at some level but not everyone can reach their potential.

Another way to die: Toiling through routine, repeating the same mistakes, wondering why we’re here; we’ve all been in one situation or another. When a person ceases to better themselves, they stagnate and die. Even little steps, made each class, prep period, practice, and game in the hopes of making a substantive change over an entire term or season can forestall a slow and ignominious death.

Basketball Relativism

Seeking to avoid the tendency to move players around like Stratego pieces but still recognizing that the basketball season is like a game of Labyrinth. Balancing the motivation of a group of student-athletes towards meaningful goals while encouraging them when they falter. Generating elite performance from the team on the court and inspiring personal improvement away from it.

Coaching becomes much more challenging than diagramming a sideout play down two with two seconds left on the clock.

As a moderate Platonist, I try to avoid moral relativism. I think that there are standards of success, of good performance, that shouldn’t be shunned. But then what is success? John Wooden defines it as “the peace of minds that comes from the self-satisfaction of knowing you did your best to be the best you are capable of becoming.” Rick Pitino says that “success is a choice.” Certainly their records convey empower their words with a degree of credibility. I definitely think that every team member should be constantly striving to improve themselves, including the coach.

For a coach to provide extrinsic motivation that is as powerful as a player’s own intrinsic motivation, the player must share the coach’s ideals to a point. If a coach holds one concept of success close to his heart and the player another, conflict erupts. A common error is assuming that one’s personal views are the only reasonable view and that they are very common; therefore, anyone who takes an opposing viewpoint is wrong and expressing an absurd viewpoint.

So when a player confronts a coach (metaphorically, not physically), the coach should evaluate the viewpoint that led to the conflict. Players are people, after all. To live a personally satisfying life, the coach should never sacrifice his personal values but to experience a collectively satisfying season, the coach should be willing to change.

Beyond wins and losses, success could mean instilling individual pride in group accomplishments, promoting attendance and punctuality, inspiring student-athletes to do better in class. With younger students, even small steps should be encouraged and although it is a struggle for coaches, they should congratulate the progress, slow as it may be.

“It is not the purpose of war to annihilate those who provoke it, but to cause them to mend their ways.”
- Polybius

Player Development, Part I

Today, Ettore Messina held a clinic at the University of Toronto regarding the development of the young post player. I thought that it was a very insightful presentation and included some technical elements which are not usually covered in North American coaching literature.

First of all, Messina spoke of developing trust with players. I agree with his point that players will respect you once you prove that you can help them improve. To me, it’s highly logical and creates relationships based on respect, not the one-sided interactions that have become prevalent in schools and teams in North America. As I am focusing on my personal connections this season, I will try to keep this intuitive point in mind.

Coaches must give athletes opportunities to succeed, in order to build confidence and build relationships between coaches and players and between teammates. When an athlete succeeds at a simple task, they feel confident about trying something more difficult. When players see that coaches are helping them, they buy into the system. When a guard sees that a post is helping them defensively, they will trust them by passing them the pass at the other end.

Messina also discussed the instruction of specific skills to make things easier for players. Skills should be challenging at first but not impossible. During the Summer Olympics, Mark Tewksbury stated that Canada should have specific skill benchmarks for athletes at all levels (for example, how well should a fifteen year old swimmer be able to perform the dolphin kick) and Messina’s coaching philosophy supports Tewksbury’s claim. Both athletes and coaches are responsible for making consistent progress and keeping standards realistically high.

Relationships and Individuals

Coaching is often described as relationship building, bridging people together. When two random squads play the team with superior talent, the players most physically and mentally ready to play, will win. Sometimes, the talent comes pre-packaged, hence the importance of recruiting and motivation in short-term scenarios.

When a coach possesses the luxury of time, what attributes become necessary? Does relationship-building remain paramount? When is it necessary to know the game and develop talent? Where do high standards fit in? A sophisticated project requires a sophisticated approach.

The Canadian National Soccer Team faces turmoil because certain key players were dismissed for reasons not germane to the pursuit of the World Cup. The players felt that they deserved a personal call from the Head Coach informing them of recent personnel moves; the coach felt that they shouldn’t have spoken out. Consequently, Canada will miss another World Cup and faces a dilatory qualification schedule remaining.

In a program, I think that it is important to develop talent. Players and coaches must improve continuously throughout the year. Student-athletes should take their responsibilities seriously and undertake the challenge of self-actualization; coaches should assign specific tasks to keep things simple and keep the team focused. Everyone should devise high standards and hold themselves to them, pushing each other to get better at game intensity.

It is not solely the teacher or the coaches job to make the class interesting or the practice fun. School or basketball shouldn’t be all work but individuals needs to find their own motivation. If it isn’t inside, it’s hard for someone to jam it in from the outside. Interest and fun can come from success, improvement, and Maslow’s self-satisfaction from being the best you can be.

If a coach can engender this sort of motivation, they can overcome a lack of relationship-building skill. An expert high performance coach can serve these players well, but they must want to be served. It is a relationship founded on respect.

Ifs and Buts

If he were alive, Red would be proud: a Boston Celtics squad that sacrificed individual glory for team success and when faced with adversity knew no other recourse that to turn up the defensive intensity won the Association title. And they smoked the Los Angeles Lakers to do so.

Certainly the team had talent - a modern triad to match Russell, Cousy, and Havlicek - but they came closer to the Auerbach intangibles than any other recent champion. These Celtics didn’t necessarily run the court but Pierce and Garnett dominated the screen and roll at both ends of the court. Boston didn’t control the paint by force but their teamwork shrank the court and controlled the glass, five peers working together. Their offence didn’t score consistently in the hundreds but they made key outside shots and constantly moved the ball.

If he weren’t such an avid Zen follower, Phil would be frustrated: towards the Lakers team that he coaches for their lack of toughness and also towards himself because he didn’t make adjustments down the stretch. Jackson shouldn’t be upset in a destructive way but motivated to make positive, proactive changes.

It’s not a time for the L.A. organization to overreact and panic but players must improve their performance under pressure. The return of Andrew Bynum will increase defense and rebounding but the team must add a veteran defensive small forward and depth inside. Pau Gasol can still play the Pinch Post to attack Tom Thibodeau’s defence but the Triangle Offence needs to evolve, adding new sets like Slice Passes, Backdoors, and Screen and Roll Counters and emphasizing principles like more motion away from the ball and better team ball movement.

If both teams repeat their successes, they should meet again in the Finals next year. But, like 1985, the outcome should be the opposite of the previous season.

"Alone"

In the fourth season premiere, House - without his usual team - faces a philosophical dilemma. Normally, the doctor believes that people lie but symptoms speak truthfully. Throughout the episode, the patient’s reactions contradict the information on her chart and her health deteriorates. Cuddy becomes so infuriated by House’s actions that she commands him to find a new team and orders other hospital staff to “stop enabling him” with conversation.

The solution is simple: an allergy goes undetected because family members have misidentified the victims of a building collapse, resulting in swapped charts. The delay was not necessarily caused by the missing team. Although more opinions would have put more ideas on the table, House’s management style habitually dismissed suggestions that contradicted his strong beliefs. The problem lasted the full hour of television time because House refused to step back and take a wider perspective.

All of Greg House’s recommendations were based on the premise that the philosophy which had served him well countless times previously was appropriate in this case. However, it was a subjective framework; although they conflicted with the chart, the symptoms presenting at that time were objective. House’s decisions were complicated as he wrestled with his philosophy. Diagnoses like the allergy were suggested by objective events but ruled out for subjective reasons. It’s great to develop a philosophy in coaching or any other field but nobody can rely solely on their beliefs. Someone who takes such pride in his objectivity like House should have earlier realized how his subjectivity was colouring his choices and adjusted his methods to suit the case.

Performance under Pressure, Part IV

A C.I.S. observer suggested that the premature defeat of the Carleton Ravens at the Final 8 Tournament was partially due to the absence of tight games on the Ravens’ schedule. I disagree, specifically and generally speaking.

Although Carleton did not execute well during the last possessions of both regulation and overtime, inexperience did not lead to this poor performance. The team was comprised of largely juniors and seniors who had played close games together throughout the previous seasons. During their run of five consecutive championships, the Ravens had defeated Brandon, U.P.E.I., Guelph, St. F.X., and Ottawa by five points or less. Forty percent of the starting line-up belonged to the Canadian National Team Roster, including Aaron Doornekamp who was named National Player of the Year. In 2007, the Ravens won the title with a poor seed and in 2008 without Doornekamp on the court.

The team knew what to do, having played more than enough basketball at the high school, university, and club levels (to say nothing of the pick-up and practice courts). Like the shooter seeing the defender cheating on the curl who flares or the point guard perceiving the hedge who rejects the screen, the Ravens should have recognized what was happening. Since the final shot was taken by a player who was shooting 4 for 23 instead of a teammate playing better at the time, perhaps it was the coaches whose recognition was out of practice.

Any coach cannot and should not rely on the breaks of the game to temper a team. Practices should account for the majority of competitive situations faced by players. Every drill should be a competition against a benchmark, previous personal best, or another squad. The clock is mounted in the gym for a reason. There will be times when the Blues must overcome adversity and beat the buzzer or when the Whites will run their opponents off the court. The majority of these drills, games, and scrimmages will be close enough and all players - not just the starters - will learn how to handle pressure.

Carleton was fortunate that intrinsic motivation enhanced a number of these situations during their practices; the Ravens are tremendously proud and uncompromising. However any coach can create a similar training, practice, and game environment with extrinsic motivation.

Bemoaning the trip back from Lennoxville and blaming the fact that teams only play at Bishop’s once per year is short-sighted and ignores choices and habits. Teams play thirty games per season, a small percentage of the total time players and coaches are together. Which is ourselves, n’est-ce pas?

Carpe Diem

Brock University’s C.I.S. Men’s Basketball National Title victory on Sunday - following Acadia’s 82-80 double-overtime defeat of five-time defending champions Carleton in the semi-finals - proved again how anything is possible, in sport and life. Any Canadian team would have won out and claimed the W.P. McGee trophy. In fact, the dark jerseys won seventy percent of games played at the Final 8 Tournament.

The odds finally caught up to the Ravens. At once they faced an intransigent opponent, shot poorly, saw calls go against them, and did not recover every lucky bounce. A team can often overcome one or two critical obstacles but beating a great team while playing poorly is usually unfeasible.

Association media pundits would describe Carleton’s match-up with Acadia as a classic “trap game”, a surprisingly tough challenge to face before the main goal. The Axemen’s natural motivations to win the game were supplemented with a desire to avenge a blowout loss from the 2007 tournament. Even with the most physically talented and mentally tough team, playing at home, the Ravens fell short.

Other squads, those who can’t say that they executed every single aspect of the season to the best of their abilities have no recourse to blame but themselves. A number of teams beat the shocking champion during the regular season but none when it counted. Anyone could have won this past year but to attribute the result to fate is a mistake.

Like the N.C.A.A. Tournament, some teams lamented their exclusion from the Final 8 (some more on the Monday afterwards than before). Some teams learnt the hard way how national rankings are meaningless when not supported by wins at the end of the season. But also like the N.C.A.A. Tournament, no team with a legitimate claim to winning the entire bracket was excluded

Coaches, players, administrators, and supporters should look inward and evaluate whether they succeeded in terms of recruiting, skill development, team defence, rebounding, moving without the ball, perimeter shooting, attacking the basket, and strategies and tactics. Winning at the highest level demands severe commitment and there is always room for improvement (certainly balance is important in life but this blog entry is about self-actualization and personal development). Coaches should be at Humber College’s Lakeshore Campus for the U15 and U17 tryouts this weekend, followed by O.B.A. championships and summer leagues.

2008’s remorse and regret should fuel off-season training and in-season motivation throughout the next year. Carleton will certainly be driven to reclaim what they perceive to be their crown. Shouldn’t all teams share this mindset?

I'm Not There

Six actors, portraying six diverse phases of Bob Dylan’s life. Under aliases, a half-dozen stories intertwine smoothly, roughly, and sometimes indescribably. Certainly, the creativity of the protagonist(s) and the director remain the film’s defining quality. Themes such as conformity, change, and challenges also abound, as illustrated by forums like a Macarthyism-style hearing, a 1960s documentary, and a fictional epilogue for Billy the Kid, if he survived Sherriff Garrett’s bullets.

Spectators draw their own unique conclusions, branches of the same tree. Everything is nothing without the people who define it. Je est un autre. Jane Jacobs argues that every city, neighbourhood, street, and building is different and blanket solutions do more harm than good. My Starbucks cup observes that everyone reacts differently to rules and conventions. Recently, I’ve found that my motivation and goals differ more than ever before from one day to another.

Elementary, of course. Coaches who don’t recognize individuality and address a million intricate problems with a million specialized solutions fail faster than guards with no handle. Whether running the screen and roll or coping with daily life, adapting to change creatively - whilst remaining true to one’s self - is imperative.

A Rotten Tomatoes critic suggested that I’m Not There is director Todd Haynes attempt to be Jean-Luc Godard. You can’t be what you are not. The film is hardly Dylan le fou but it could have used better editing. Half an hour removed and dozens of cuts reduced would have condensed the film’s greatness. Despite Cate Blanchett’s amazing, defiant, stubborn, failing, self-destructive, passionate, humourous, conventional, and counter-culture performance, the film tries to do to much at once, underachieves, and remains merely good.

People Who Play Sport

When asked about Bill Belichick’s coaching success, analyst Chris Schultz said that New England’s coach understood the difference between football players and people who play football. When asked about Sam Cassell’s potential as a coach, Sam Mitchell said that Los Angeles’ point guard must learn what to do when players don’t see what he sees.

Major-General Isaac Brock was appreciated for the charisma he employed while commanding British forces in Upper Canada. Colonel Roger Sheaffe was equally disliked for his aloofness and occasionally cruel management style. The critical trait was to treating the 49th Regiment of Foot as a group of people, not mindless soldiers.

Criticism of the Phoenix-Miami trade ignores that the Suns are people who play basketball. What if the Marion-Stoudamire rift was destroying team chemistry? Or what about Phoenix’s increased confidence playing with Shaq? Opponent reluctance to attack the basket? And Shaq’s drive to prove doubters wrong? All personal factors that cannot be easily measured.

Shawn Marion’s steals on the wing and finishes on the break can be measured, as can the disappearance of easy baskets in the playoffs. Boards mean more than strips because of the opportunities they provide. Teams can win games with 85 points in the postseason if they allow only 80. Halfcourt sets must generate high-percentage shots. All areas where Shaq succeeds and Marion does not.

Shawn Marion brought multiple positives to the Suns but the positive reaction of the people involved in the trade is a prominent reason why it might push the team to new heights. Nevertheless, Steve Kerr should sign the best wing defender in the C.B.A. in case Phoenix must stop Kobe Bryant in the second round.

Tom Coughlin changed his philosophy after New York started the N.F.L. season with two losses. Self-assurance and poise defined the Giants’ championship run. Execution improved on both sides of the ball, not because of fear of discipline but due to increased focus and reduced stress.

In the Superbowl, New England proved fallible after all. Tom Brady - the person, not the image - was pressured throughout the game and made mistakes. The Patriots faced tremendous adversity; New York’s awareness of this fact supplemented the confidence that the Giant’s gained from their Week 17 experience against the Pats.

People are not perfect and it is consequently extremely difficult for teams to do likewise. Had Belichick followed Schultz’s characterization more closely, he would have done more to eliminate outside influcences on the Patriots and coached more actively. New England seemed to need more external motivation to energize the older and tired team whose intrinsic motivation had faded after eighteen consecutive wins.

Players from the intramural to the professional levels are always affected by emotions which are as difficult to master as elite sport. Accepting that players are fallible individuals is an essential criterion for successful coaches.

Nurturing Nature

Last week, during a Cleveland win over San Antonio, Mike Brown and Gregg Popovich left three timeouts each on the table. Confident in the ability of veteran players to execute quality possessions, the coaches allowed the play to flow back and forth. The Spurs lost 90-88 but Manu Ginobli released a steady, open, and transition jumper from the foul line as time expired.

After a 6-5 shootout win over Pittsburgh, Bruce Boudreau commented that one of the first moves that he became Washington coach was to make the Capitals a four-line team. Rather than over-emphasize match-ups - dumping the puck to initiate line changes, losing puck possession while focusing on the other team - Boudreau felt that all eighteen skaters should know how to play against everyone and understand that the coaches believe in their abilities

Subtle coaching strategies may pay dividends when motivating apprehensive players like Andrea Bargnani, who according to Sam Mitchell is still learning his position and probably according to Leo Rautins needs to learn that he can succeed in the Association. After scouting, drafting, or recruiting nature, the trick is to nurture a Caron Butler, not destroy a Kwame Brown.

According to the Harvard Business Review, the two most important managerial behaviours are enabling people to move forward in their work and treating them decently as human beings. The latter was evidenced by the coincidence of ‘progress events’ with ‘interpersonal events’ whereas the former was driven by multiple factors. Good managers provide direct help and adequate resources and time, react to success and failures with a learning orientation, and set clear team goals.

Maybe Tom Coughlin’s sideline tirade towards New York kicker Lawrence Tynes was not an example of a learning orientation. But it didn’t bother him, unlike Michael Jordan’s legendary tirades towards Kwame Brown in Wizards practices, because of Tynes’ personal constitution and Coughlin’s awareness of this. The Toronto Raptors’ coaches should set clear goals and follow-up while players and peers monitor his mental attitude and provide personal support.

Coach People, Not Players

Joe Gibbs retired for a second time Tuesday, six weeks after an ignorant timeout decision costing a November game in Buffalo brought critics out of the woodwork only to be silenced by Washington’s determined four-game winning streak to make the playoffs. Gibbs will be remembered for controlling the line of scrimmage with brutal line play, amassing yards and points with innovative offensive sets, and making the most of each player’s talents. The most recent stint with the Redskins proved that Gibbs could connect with a new generation of players, despite conventional wisdom purporting that such team building was irrelevant in today’s era of the salary cap and free agency.

When the Reskins needed to come together and raise their game to the next level, to salvage the season, to overcome the death of Sean Taylor, Joe Gibbs convinced the team to play tenacious defence, execute offensively with great precision, and focus every play. Unfortunately, they could not raise their game an additional level in the playoffs but a team without a real starting quarterback succeeded a fair amount.

The Detroit Pistons play tenacious defence. The San Antonio Spurs execute offensively with great precision. Kevin Garnett, Chauncey Billups, and Tim Duncan focus every play. The Toronto Raptors do not. Toronto beat Philadephia handily but excellent teams do more than kick other teams while they are down (they don’t have letdowns either); they play hard, play smart, and play together consistently. It’s best when the fire comes from within but coaches can provide the spark at critical times.

Finally, Sam Mitchell decided to use Anthony Parker more. (The Raptors should also post him in New York tomorrow.) Jose Calderon’s penetration and judicious passing created an efficient offensive system. (I’d like to see the team try a high rub with him and Bosh against the Knicks.) But the rebounding and defence was still lacking. (Eddy Curry will eat Andrea Bargnani if he doesn’t watch himself.) Most of the team still neglected to attack the basket. (I wish Mitchell told the players to drive, draw fouls, and finish - or take a seat.)

Calmness in the face of adversity is a commendable attribute but astute analysis accompanied by appropriate action is even better. Letting the team bend and stretch the offensive and defensive systems works if you are Phil Jackson running the Triangle Offence but it can lead to a lot of bad shots in the wrong situation.

Until points in the paint and shooting percentage improve, I’d like to see the team presented with a number of quality options and be forced to stick to them (Delfino the penetrator should come off the bench, not Delfino the three point shooter). Outside shots should follow kick outs (Kapono could have a bigger role, if he earns it in practice). The team just needs to get after it on the glass (I don’t know why Humphries resolve has not yet rubbed off on some of the other forwards, besides Bosh.)

Consistency, needed to reach the next level in the Association, must be found somewhere and a laissez-faire attitude won’t do it this season.

Patience is a Virtue (Most of the Time)

The Globe and Mail reports that Sam Mitchell has been keeping an even keel lately, amid the Raptors’ uneven performances. Somebody once told me - as I was raising my voice in a team huddle - that you can only feel embarrassed if you choose to feel that way. The observation was astute and memorable but all seasons reach a point when the coach needs to rise above modeling the way and make things better, as soon as possible.

Intensity has its time and place. Players’ inner motivation is far more effective than any external forces exerted by the coach. But when the inner flame is extinguished, it is the coach’s role to get the fire started again.

As regulation ended against the Spurs in Game 7 of their 2006 series, Dirk Nowitzki couldn’t be denied. It was a different story a year later in the first round versus the Warriors: Golden State was out to prove themselves and could not be denied. Perhaps Avery Johnson could have lit a fire under Dallas and rediscovered that lost desire. Likewise, Sam Mitchell could light a fire under Toronto and inspire the team to attack the basket, D-up, or crash the boards harder.

Creativity and ingenuity would immediately benefit the Raptors’ stagnant offence. (It’s stagnant because of the lack of scoring caused by the lack of movement: the ball, players, and players with the ball remain far too stationary.) But the team’s main flaws could be remedied regardless.

Mitchell could cut somebody’s burn; Delfino, Moon, and Kapono could compete in practice for fewer small forward minutes. Mitchell could make Bargnani’s role contigent on rebounding; it’s not fair for the coach to be forced to choose between skilled players and Kris Humphries in order to get minutes. Mitchell could redistribute touches on the offensive end; give Anthony Parker more opportunities to read the defence, like in that set when Bosh screens away for AP and the secondary option is an iso for Bosh.

Maybe it’s necessary for the coach to scream at the used car salesman until he attacks the rack. Everything must go, including that overused fade away jumper. Once, last season, Bosh got the ball in the high post, turned, and crammed it on Zach Randolph. It was spectacular -- a rare explosion of energy and determination resulting in two points and a win.

It’s time for Sam Mitchell to generate a similar explosion. It’s not necessary to wear the lines of the Air Canada Centre practice court to do so but it is imperative to act proactively. It’s nice to radiate an “all is well” aura when all is well. Last season, the ship seemed to right itself on its own, leading to a franchise-best record. But consistent winning requires consistent change and improvement. Right now, the Raptors need an infusion of energy to push them past this obstacle and towards the playoffs.

Reaching the Next Level

The Raptors failed another key test Sunday (the Miami Heat and Golden State Warriors have established that the Dallas Mavericks are not yet a true test). Boston won a putrid game, the 90-77 score unsuccessful in describing the ineffectiveness of Toronto’s play.

Boston is good, but not great. Three superstars anchor a solid rotation and the team has demonstrated the ability to play well without any one of the featured players. The Celtics played under control and relied on solid fundamentals.

Paul Pierce backed defenders down, using his elbow and shot-fakes to clear space for his jumper. Kevin Garnett scored inside and with a 10-12” jumpshot. Complementary players Eddie House and Tony Allen only took outside shots after the ball was kicked out of a double-team. Rajon Rondo used speed to exploit the snowed-in help defence. Nobody forced anything; the best players took the most shots.

In contrast, the Raptors did whatever they pleased, irrespective what would help the team win. Their offence was a Gong Show, players shooting everywhere. The team seemed to believe that the paint was guarded with an electrified fence. On-court leadership was sorely lacking; it’s appropriate for Chris Bosh to address the team in the locker room but he must first model the way.

Boston doubled the high ballscreen but Raptor dribblers couldn’t decisively move the ball to the screener. The Celtics’ second post would rotate to help so if the roll was covered, a second inside player was open (followed by a strong-side shooter when the perimeter defender helped). Toronto took too long to move the ball through that priority list, often moving the ball to the shooter too early.

In the second half, Jason Kapono/Carlos Delfino and Chris Bosh worked a nice downscreen/post seal set. However, it was abandoned too quickly. Also Bosh seemed to rely excessively on his 18” jumper. Kendrick Perkins can only do so much and should be attacked. If not by Bosh, then by Rasho Nesterovic, who received too few touches. What was most shocking was how slow Toronto’s coaching staff adjusted, if at all. Boston kept it simple and the Raptors did nothing to force them to chance.

Toronto could have dialed up the defence, perhaps even pressuring judiciously. Trapping Rondo might have kept him off-balance and affected his ability to distribute the ball. They could have run more, maybe throwing the ball at the rim for Jamario Moon. Since the Celtics were not allowing José Calderon to penetrate, the Raptors could have freed the point guard for a side screen with the Circle Play or something similar. Sam Mitchell has previously praised the team’s ability to make the “Hockey Assist”, the extra pass that leads to an open shot but the Raptors settled for bad outside shots on Sunday.

It was an unprofessional game all-around. The Raptors didn’t score a hundred points and the fans were denied pizza; the Big Ticket could have picked up the tab and bought pie out of respect for those who had to sit through that game.

Take Initiative

Sam Mitchell and the Toronto Raptors let the Phoenix Suns take a 139-123 victory last night. Earlier in the day, Mitchell boasted in the Fan 590’s morning show that the team had three ways to stop Steve Nash and the Suns.

None of them worked.

Help Defence

José Calderon - and later Anthony Parker - guarded Nash relatively well. But the double-team to stop dribble penetration was disastrous, leaving deadly shooters like Leandro Barbosa open to make three pointers all night. Phoenix is tough to defend because every player possesses unique weapons. Perhaps Grant Hill is the best starter to leave open since he shoots triples so rarely but surely someone could have defended Barbosa after he dropped twenty-two in the first half.

Screen and Roll Defence

The Raptors switched screens - creating openings upon which the Suns immediately capitalized, such as when Amare Stoudamire threw down an alley-oop dunk on T.J. Ford. Other times the team rotated well, three players switching and forcing a bad shot; exaples of the persistent defence that could have won the game if it were more consistent.

Substitution Pattern

Jamario Moon played the first three quarters, then sat for a few minutes, playing a few more minutes before the benches were finally cleared. To me, that’s an illogical rotation. If a player receives that many minutes to start the game, they should be good enough to play the fourth quarter. Moon changed several shots and totally owned Shawn Marion on a block but his thirty-nine minutes were perplexing.

I believe in planning substitutions ahead of time: taking advantage of the fact that daily practices provide a larger sample size than one quarter, keeping track of good combinations and team chemistry, and avoiding incidents were a player might be forgotten.

Lastly, Kris Humphries played fourteen minutes when he should have been riding the pine. Humphries is not skilled enough to compete with Phoenix for an entire game (he did go off for a couple of possessions after his technical foul) and was responsible for many ill-timed switches.

Three Strategies to Consider for the Next Time

The Raptors should have attacked their opponents. They did not generate enough offensive pressure to affect what Phoenix did at the other end. The one successful element that Toronto possessed that the Suns (sans Kurt Thomas) could not handle was Rasho Nesterovic inside. After a strong first half, they ignored the Slovenian and his ornate post offence, attempting to play a second rate version of the PHX game.

Carlos Delfino and Jason Kapono missed countless shots too. Had Toronto played a screen and roll game with Calderon and Nesterovic, they would have generated countless pull-up Js, post-moves, and open threes for Anthony Parker.

From the opening tip, basketball teams have to come out and take the victory. Accentuating strengths, playing physically, and showing confidence combine for victories, now and in April, May, and June. The Raptors played passively, allowing the Suns to control everything. How many times do you shoot 55%, score 123 points, and lose?

Never (if you play great transition D).

K.I.S.S.

Basketball is often overanalyzed, needlessly complicated searching for an elixir of life that will transform hardwood into championships. A slew of factors affect performance and their identification is paramount.

Changing tactics hastily, without justification, courts disaster. The play might flounder - despite its suitability for that particular moment - because players are not executing correctly. Use timeouts to seek room for improvement before obfuscating the issue with new sets. Don’t jump to conclusions and adopt a zone merely to feel better about doing something. Ensure the shift is required because there is no worse sensation than losing due to gratuitous coaching.

Basic cuts (like the Backdoor, Shuffle, and Hawk) are the most common because they are the most effective. Don’t forsake a fundamental option because it didn’t succeed once or twice. The cut may have been open but the ballhandler missed it, wasn’t skilled enough to get the ball there, or felt there was a higher percentage target elsewhere.

Good players read defences but imagining opponents or making decisions based on limited information doesn’t make one any smarter. Good players should rely on their skills first and foremost. If the game is still in doubt, basketball I.Q. may come into play but don’t make the sport harder than it needs to me.

Good coaches should apply their judgment most of all. Keep their toolbox fully stocked but only open it sparingly. Likewise, there’s no need to say anything just to fill the air. Positive body language is infinitely more valuable than idle instructions. Bad decisions bring a leader back to the back; discretion remains the better part of valour.

Education of a Coach (not me)

David Halberstam’s Education of a Coach explores the path that Bill Belichick took to reach his position as head coach of the New England Patriots, winners of three Superbowl titles. Influenced by his father, long-time Navy coach Steve Belichick, Bill began breaking down film at a young age -- though he never played football professionally or at a major college, he continued to study the game diligently under coaches such as Ted Marchibroda, Ray Perkins, and Bill Parcells.

An unsuccessful stint coaching the Cleveland Browns interrupted and delayed a meticulously planned rise to the top of his field. Coaching suggestions evidently appear throughout the book - Halberstam chronicles Belichick’s work ethic, the roles technology and innovation have played in the coach’s success, and the personal toll that coaches pay for their careers - but it is in the Cleveland failure where the most salient lessons emerge.

Belichick arrived in town with a detailed plan and a record of achievements as an assistant coach but during his stay with the Browns he was repeatedly thwarted by a meddling Art Moddell. After dealing with Moddell himself, Paul Brown insisted that the other members of the Cincinnati Bengals’ ownership group schedule appointments to meet with him, in order to assert his independence as a coach.

Owners, general managers, athletic directors, and university presidents have all disrupted the best laid plans of coaches over the years, a control that is often present throughout sport. For his second stint as a head coach, it was imperative to Belichick that he seek out an ideal situation, like the one that he found in New England with supportive owner Bob Kraft. Managers who insist that the spotlight focus on themselves or their deeds and believe that they know it all will succeed. Throughout the years, football has remained a team sport and team sports - by name - require that various talents amongst different people blend together to create a respectful, winning, environment.

The initial failure reveals the value of adaptability and the ability to adapt at the at the right time. Quarterback Bernie Kosar was ill-suited to the offensive systems Belichick wished to install and the coach suffered through the poor match for many years. Kosar should have been cut earlier or the system altered from the beginning.

A coach should identify his/her core principles and stick by them. Everything else should be modified according to the situation. Once rules are established, any bending or breaking undermines the coach’s authority. Truly great players, like Lawrence Taylor or Tom Brady, are so rare that Belichick has only encountered two on all the teams he has coached. Devising special rules for every other athlete is simply not worth the cost.

Lastly, Belichick’s career proves that those who receive a second chance can become successful, even after the most spectacular failures. However, whether they are athletes, coaches, or regular people must learn from their mistakes and cannot dare repeat them.

After his dismissal in Cleveland, Belichick waited five year for the ideal head coaching post to become open, even coaching the New York Jets for a day before resigning to take the Patriots job. Once he was hired in Foxboro, he knew it was his last kick at the heat coaching can. Fortunately, Belichick was confident in his abilities, staying true to himself, learning from past mistakes, and ultimately creating a football dynasty.

So What Do You Think You Know?

Two ideas that I have been recently mulling over:

Spin: A three-point shot, released with backspin, is tipped by a defender who is closing out desperately, hands up. The ball, deflected from its intended path, heads towards the short corner. Is the clockwise vector - applied to the bottom of the ball - strong enough to overcome the shooter’s finger flick? Does the ball have any rotation? If so, is it material enough to influence the ball’s trajectory (beyond the linear forces pushing the ball towards and away from the basket)?

If nothing else, the block should augment the ball’s forward bounce when it hits the court, according to specular reflection. Or perhaps a 4,700 sq. ft. piece of hardwood is too small to seriously consider the impact of physics.

Timeouts: The season’s hottest trend is to call timeout just before the opponent attempts a late-game field goal. Scarcely moments before the ball is to be snapped, the coach signals timeout to the side judge, who blows his whistle but cannot stop the play so the kick must be attempted again. Mike Shanahan and Lane Kiffin succeeded; the second kicks were missed and blocked respectively. Dick Jauron failed; the do-over was good and Buffalo lost the game.

How much physical recovery is necessary after the strenuous exertion of a long field goal attempt? Should the offence call a timeout (if they have one) to ensure that the kicker is rested? What about the mental aspect? Does the outcome of the first attempt or perceived feelings of fatigue alter the kicker’s confidence, positively or negatively? Does the defence gain additional insight concerning the offensive line’s blocking schemes?

Or is the late timeout an idle gesture, an ineffective tactical maneuver executed in order to keep up appearances, avoid accusations of coaching like Marty Schottenheimer? Since results count, Shanahan and Kiffin are judged to be right, because if they had done nothing, they would have lost. To me, it’s dubious that these coaches are pulling the strings and altering percentages. What if the first kick went wide right and the place kicker was able to correct his mistake on the second try?

Food for thought. x2.

The Special One

José Mourinho quit his position as manager of the Chelsea Football Club last week. Or Roman Abramovich fired him. The parting of ways was described as mutual but I tend to doubt that. Whether Abramovich actively sacked Mourinho or gradually created an unsuitable working environment, the owner meant to dismiss the manager. Irrespective of the reason why, I was fairly certain that “the Special One” was finished with the club after a listless 1-1 draw at home to Rosenborg in the Champions League.

From afar, it appears that Abramovich erred, becoming involved with Chelsea personnel and tactical decisions one time too many. Whilst the owner - or any president, general manager, or athletic director - is entitled to some degree of control over their club, the coach or manager is entitled to do their job and apply their expertise. Administrators build organizations, coaches build teams. Jerry Krause did not win six titles for the Chicago Bulls, a team comprised of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, and many others, coached by Phil Jackson, did.

Captain Jean-Luc Picard was a model of leadership, commanding an outstanding crew, yet whenever Starfleet indiscreetly interfered with the operations of the Enterpise, the result was much consternation, near insurrection, and abandonment of the Prime Directive. An owner who acquires a player who doesn’t fit the system and demands that he get burn might elicit similar emotion reactions within the manager.

Like the National Football League, the window for success in soccer is brief. Although Mourinho had won two Premiership titles at Chelsea and held a 4-1-3 record against rival Manchester United. However, he had fallen short on the grandest stage, the Champions League, and Abramovich had lost faith in him.

I don’t think that Chelsea’s window of opportunity had closed but changing managers will be disruptive. First of all, Mourinho’s replacement Avram Grant was practically hired in July. Since Grant took over, the team has already lost to United and F.A. Cup and Champions League chances could be further sabotaged if he does not stabilize the situation promptly.

Teams that succeed over the long-term usually feature stable leadership and a consistent philosophy. Alex Ferguson at United, Jerry Sloan and the Utah Jazz, Bill Cowher and the Pittsburgh Steelers are all examples of master coaches who have won, developed excellent players, and instilled a strong philosophy. Athletes who buy into these philosophies become intrinsically motivated; they aren’t fired up because of the intensity of a particular coach but because they believe in themselves, their teammates, and the team.

José Mourinho was a similar master coach, winning the Champions League Cup (the hardest trophy in the world to capture) at F.C. Porto and respected by both players and peers. He - and countless other coaches - should have been given the opportunity to succeed. When those higher up the organizational ladder think they know best, the team’s fortunes become collateral damage to the inherent conflct. Contrast the low-key, professional approach that Joe Torre applied with the New York Yankees in the late 1990s to the team today when George Steinbrenner pressures the front office to acquire (and latter dispose of) player after player.

Let coaches coach and let players play. Micro-management will chagrin those affected to no end.

Crashing the Borders

Harvey Araton, sports columnist at The New York Times argues a two-fold thesis in his latest basketball work, Crashing the Borders: How Basketball Won the World and Lost Its Soul at Home. On one hand, basketball has reached incredible heights of popularity world-wide, becoming second to soccer as international players take up the sport and professional leagues thrive across the glove. Meanwhile, basketball in the United States is deeply troubled.

Television ratings barely reach a third of the highs recorded by Michael Jordan in 1998 and less than a half of what “Magic” Johnson attained in 1980. Fundamental skills are lagging and poor performances abound in international competition. Most importantly, the game is wreaking social havoc across the country: taking advantage of poor communities, ignoring the education of student-athletes in order to promote the “Next One”, and casting aside skill development in favour of winning games.

As outlined by David Halberstam (and countless others), Michael Jordan was one in a million. Jordan ushered in a new age, pairing sport with media to sell products and earn unimaginable sums of money. Most people, including players, see only the riches. “Magic” Johnson has said repeatedly that what separated Jordan from his peers was his mastery of the fundamentals and intense competitive spirit, attributes lacked by many young American players. However, European teams practice six hours daily, a work ethic fuelled by the players’ desire that permits all team members - from guards to posts – to develop exceptional skills, especially shooting, ballhandling, and footwork.

In many ways, basketball is exemplifying trends that can be found throughout modern pop culture. Poor players are exploited and cast aside in a manner similar to what happened to Britney Spears at the 2007 M.T.V. Video Music Awards.

College isn’t for everyone and there are definite questions regarding whether student-athletes receive and education and learn critical life skills while playing collegiate basketball. Certainly, many don’t graduate. Araton quotes observers, like Spike Lee, who argue that the system is racist. To some degree, that is an easy answer which is also inflammatory. The system is definitely elitist, a description that I feel better explains a number of the book’s examples.

As summarized in Breaks of the Game and Playing of Keeps, a sense of entitlement has evolved among players who want the benefits of success without the requisite work. When the U.S. National Team falls short at the 2004 Olympics, excuses pervade the subsequent press conferences. Few take responsibility for their short-comings, blaming bad F.I.B.A. officiating instead of bad outside shooting.

This sentiment has fostered a lack of respect for the opponent, demonstrated by taunting behaviour at the 1994 World Championships or complete dismissal of George Karl’s scouting report of Argentina in 2002, arrogance that may have contributed to a very ignominious loss.

Araton hopes that the November 2004 brawl at the Palace of Aubrun Hills between the Indiana Pacers, Detroit Pistons, and fans is rock bottom, a nadir that inspires everyone begin improving themselves and the sport. There are a number of highlights in the Association today, showcasing the joys of the game and its ability to bring people together.

The Detroit Pistons - built by Joe Dumars as a true team of complementary players - defeating the Los Angeles Lakers in the 2004 Finals, team defense overcoming a collection of individual stars. The San Antonio Spurs paying tribute to Red Holzman by excelling at both ends of the court, adept at all manners of play. The Phoenix Suns, led by the enthusiasm and creativity of Steve Nash, winning with great skill and also having fun.

Practice Makes Perfect

Discussing a number of basketball topics at the corner of Yonge and Eglinton and in the Athletic Centre Fieldhouse led me to reflect about why coaches do certain things the way that they do.

For example, apparently the former coach at the University of Tennesse didn’t care for behind the back passes. Throw one on his watch and you were done for the rest of the practice. I disagree because although the behind the back passes are a low-percentage play on average, there are specific situations when it is the highest-percentage option.

If two defenders go to the ballhandler after a side screen and the screener rolls to the baseline, the best pass is one thrown behind the back. This bounce pass requires tremendous arm strength and precise technique. Players need to be taught how it should be executed and how it is not for everyone.

“There are three reasons we make mistakes: don’t know, don’t care, or not able (ignorance, apathy, ability).”
- Mike Davis

Coaches that avoid “flashy” plays are not teaching players necessary skills. Bob Cousy believed strongly in this point; he threw “fancy” passes on the fastbreak because he was skilled enough and knew it was the best play for that particular play. Furthermore, if players are forced to sit out after making a bounce pass in Knoxville, they are missing out on anything else taught during the remainder of the practice.

I think that it’s important to incorporate advanced skills into everyday practices. From a short-term perspective, these skills are a change of pace and break up the monotony of a long-season of practices. Considering the big picture: these teaching sessions allow players to better understand their limits and the strengths and weaknesses of their teammates. Even if it’s a fact as simple as “don’t throw this particular player a tough pass in transition” it’s information that players must know.

Teaching players to read on the court is easier said than done. Cousy’s thought process on the break included decisions like (i) where are my teammates? (ii) can I make this pass? (iii) can my teammate catch this pass? (iv) what pass leads to the best scoring chance?, all made and executed in less than a second. Repetition is required to build that type of quick recognition.

“Truth is knowing that your character is shaped by your everyday choices.”
- Vince Lombardi

Learning how to handle pressure is a critical skill for young basketball players. Relative to the high intensity level of intercollegiate competition, there is not much pressure in high school sport for the supremely talented prospect. Sometimes, it’s necessary to learn the hard way, by trial and error in practice.

I think that coaches must instruct players in this decision-making. It’s crisis management in a microcosm, the development of intrinsic motivation one step at a time, and self-actualization in the face of adversity. Coaches should use the game of basketball to build positive habits.

“We don’t receive wisdom; we must discover it for ourselves after a journey no one can take from us or for us.”
- Marcel Proust

Note: It’s true that some players are stubborn about their abilities and won’t listen despite repeated “lessons”. Others don’t realize that while the Association overflows with creativity and inspiration for everyone who follows the game, professional basketball is for entertainment purposes only and any skill should only be executed with due care in the proper context. Sometimes you have to put your foot down for the sake of the team. I dislike conflicts that get to this point and fundamentally believe that there is by and large a better way to get that message across.

Rising to the Occasion

Criticisms abound regarding Bob Delaney’s pass on the contact between LeBron James and Bruce Bowen during Cleveland’s last three-pointer Wednesday. Whilst Bowen’s physical defence straddles a fine line between fair and foul and his persistence on the perimeter is certainly a challenge that his opponent must overcome, the play in question was not particularly relevant to the outcome of Game 3.

• The Cavaliers’ poor execution throughout the encounter, including the three and a half minute scoreless stretch between 5:28 and 1:54 of the fourth quarter, is mostly responsible for their loss. The Spurs provided countless chances but the home team was neither calm nor composed enough to take advantage.
• James could have redeemed his teammates down the stretch but missed a number of shots (“It’s a make or miss league,” said Jeff Van Gundy). The game’s penultimate shot was unlikely to succeed irrespective of any contact. Beyond the arc, James shot 31.1% during the year, including 31.8% at home and 27.9% in the playoffs. Cleveland had converted 3/18 three point shots to that point, buzzer beaters tend to fail three quarters of the time, and - thanks to the end-out Mike Brown diagramed which called for an outside shot off the dribble - James had a lot of momentum going to his left. All things considered, James had less than a fifteen percent chance to make that shot before the intentional attempt to foul.

The previous play, when James passed out of a double-team to Anderson Varejao, who missed a lay-up, was the Cavaliers’ last chance to win the game. James could have attacked the trap, drawn a foul, or received a return pass from Varejao and taken a mid-range step-back jumpshot. Teams must seize opportunities when they occur, a task that Cleveland was not ready to achieve.

Ball Movement

Movement makes basketball players and teams succeed: move yourself, move the ball, and help teammates do likewise. As a result of this movement, the ball will get inside with quality shots and possessions abounding.

Phil Jackson and Tex Winter believe that the Triangle Offence is not effective without penetration. Obviously neither are screen and roll plays, motion sets, nor zone offences which is why San Antonio blew Utah away in the fourth quarter of Game 4 Monday night.

Jackson believes in a 60-40 split between possessions devoted to guards and posts. According to the Lakers’ coach, offences are more productive when bigs take sixty percent of the shots in the first half and littles take sixty percent in the second half. Depending on the pace of each squad, this equates to a difference of 9.0 to 10.2 possessions each half between the two groups.

Ideally, the Spurs and the Jazz will respectively establish Tim Duncan and Carlos Boozer early in tonight’s game before relying and Manu Ginobli and Deron Williams down the stretch. Teams should practice post moves, lay-ups against contact, and one dribble pull-up jumpshots in order to establish a rhythm of high percentage scoring plays for posts. When defences become extended as the game progresses, players should be prepared to find quicker ways to score.

The benefits of establishing a post presence in the first and second quarter include:

• Posting and re-posting (after a kick out the best look is often right back inside)
• Passing out of double-teams (tall players can pivot and have excellent passing lanes to find open cutters and shooters)
• Screening and rolling (all team members should learn how to read the play and execute the appropriate counter)
• Team building (anyone can learn post moves and gain confidence from scoring early and often)
• Forcing the opponent to adjust (defensive moves may open up the perimeter)

Keep feeding the posts when they succeed but keep moving. Now that the a double-team is demanded inside, there are more opportunities for guards to get their sixty percent: curl shooters, cut backdoor, post big guards, throw skip passes, penetrate and kick, set dribble picks, get to the line, fill the high post (wouldn’t LeBron be an awesome threat in the high post?), hand off the rock, get to the hole…

Phil Jackson - despite what Kobe may say - wasn’t advocating that a coach ignore their wings but by focusing on the posts first, everyone has an equal opportunity for high percentage shots when they really matter. As Gregg Popovich and the Spurs demonstrate nearly every game: movement and feeding the ball inside lead to quality shots, excellent possessions, and wins. If the Jazz figure this out they have a good team too.

The Blind Side

Michael Lewis’ latest novel, The Blind Side, is part-sport, part-economics, part-psychology, and part-sociology. While writing an article about his high school baseball coach that was published as the novella Coach, he re-connected with teammate Sean Tuohy, who was adopting a 6-5, 350 pound offensive lineman who played left guard for the Briarcrest Christian School football team that Tuohy coached. That student-athlete, Michael Oher, became a living example of how sport and money have become intertwined while the rich and poor and black and white have grown apart.

At the beginning of the book, Oher is a marginal student and physical freak living on a friend’s couch, wishing to be the next Michael Jordan. Lewis describes show teachers, tutors, adoptive family members, teammates, and friends help Oher learn about school, sport, and life. It’s an uphill struggle but the moral of the story - for teachers and coaches - is that it is critical to consider the learning styles of each student-athlete to ensure that they are doing their best. Oher is motivated and works hard but he doesn’t reach his potential until others identify his strengths and weaknesses and adapt practices and class.

Ultimately, everyone can make their own choice: LeBron James can choose whether to be aggressive and crown Rasheed Wallace or pass to Donyell Marshall, Michael Oher can live on the streets of Hurt Village or apply himself to get an N.C.A.A. Scholarship. Obstacles appear in the form of an investigation by the House along with academic and social challenges but Oher persists and achieves his goals.

As he did in Moneyball, Lewis describes how the commercialism of sport has created an artificial world separate from regular day-to-day life. Increased demand for throwing and other skills possessed by quarterbacks led to record salaries for the position, which trickled down to the positions that protect the passer. Increased popularity of college football led to greater pressure on coaches to win, an outcome that required more and more recruiting to realize, which is why an African-American high school student with below-average marks received numerous benefits that his peers did not.

Nevertheless, Michael Oher and those who supported him still had a choice: whether or not to work hard to succeed. They did and The Blind Side has a happy ending for this particular case.

On the subject of Phoenix and San Antonio’s Game 5, Specifically

Bruce Bowen Drills Baseline Threes: So do Morris Peterson, Joe Johnson, and Donyell Marshall. Given how awkward Bowen is from the wing or the top of the key, he must shoot very well from corner in order to maintain his 38% overall three point percentage. In fact, the baseline three Bowen attempted in the last minute of Game 5 provided the Spurs with a higher expected point value (1.26) than had any of the other four players on the court attempted a two-point field goal (1.04).

Mike D’Antoni Occasionally Mismanages His Rotation: The Suns largely played six players, in light of the suspensions to Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw. Defensively, Phoenix conceded some open looks or fouled unnecessarily. Offensively, there were some atrocious possessions were Steve Nash dribbled endlessly into the defence while shooters and cutters stood still. At both ends of the court, it seems like fatigue contributed to questionable decisions.

The go-ahead three-pointer succeeded because San Antonio moved the ball away from the defence and Nash could not get to Bowen in time. I propose that if the Suns had played a deeper rotation, using Marcus Banks to spell the guards briefly and Jalen Rose to carry some of the scoring load, they would have had more energy for defence during the Spurs decisive run

The Suns Work Very Hard on Defence but their Execution Is Sometimes Lacking: Phoenix should have doubled the post entry to Tim Duncan and left Tony Parker open outside the arc, as they did. Parker was the best option out of a set of bad choices for the Suns: Manu Ginobli was en fuego, Michael Finley was draining shots from the line of 45º - when he passed on his shot, he was swinging it swiftly to Bowen in the corner - and Duncan and Parker were consistent as usual.

Why did Leandro Barbosa make such a looping turn after the ball left the double-team? The fastest guy on the court could only recover to Parker and box him out in the Russian Spot during the shot. Maybe he could have reached Bowen if he had more energy. How did James Jones, guarding Finley, get awkwardly tangled up in the strong-side with Barbosa? If Raja Bell and Nash had not played 47 and 46 minutes respectively, could they have run and jumped Parker’s penetration better? Could Nash have closed out Bowen effectively with fresher legs?

It will never be known whether the Suns too tired to close out correctly down the stretch or if they were unaware of where the San Antonio threats were positioned during the critical play.

It’s Important to Mentally Prepare for End-Game Situations: D’Antoni should have given more thought to the rotation after the initial double. It was highly probable that Parker would penetrate after receiving the pass. Had Bell plugged the foul line, Nash quickly stepped up to Ginobli, and Barbosa switched to Bowen, I think they could have prevented Parker from getting to the rim, Ginobli and Finley from shooting, and gotten to Bowen in time to change his shot, Barbosa’s physical limitations aside.

Many complicated issues would have arisen. Shawn Marion would have probably bared the onus of stopping Duncan one-on-one in a low shot clock situation. Duncan tough to stop on the block and may have gone to the line. All five Suns would have to box out. All things considered, I think that that scenario yields an expected point value of 1.02, although that figure is more art than science.

Performance under Pressure, Part III

The Association Playoffs have provided a number of interesting moments regarding how decision-making, self-actualization, creativity, and aggressiveness come to the surface on the basketball court and in life.

First of all, ESPN Page 2 is entirely correct to congratulate “the Golden State Warriors for making us watch the N.B.A. again.” The Warriors - led by Baron Davis and playing with a five-second shot clock - provided one of the few surprising moments in an Association that had been mundane and predictable for the past eight or nine years.

As Bill Simmons wrote, at least Golden State took chances. A number of the team’s acquisitions were plagued with injuries or off-court troubles but the players provided excellent skill, speed and athleticism, and experience. Don Nelson’s strategies defied conventional wisdom: the team chose to play with a small line-up at an aggressive tempo and multiple defensive alignments disrupted the opponent’s plans. John Hollinger commented that a key difference between Don Nelson and Sam Mitchell is Nelson’s willingness to trust veteran players and leave stars on the court despite foul trouble if the team needs them.

General Manager Chris Mullin rolled the dice and hit the jackpot with his biggest move: re-hiring Don Nelson. Mullin had assembled a team that could play with energy and tenacity but needed someone to provided that extra bit of aggressiveness and confidence on the court. Despite the proximity to the basketball season, Mullin replaced Coach Mike Montgomery with Don Nelson in late August. Mullin knew it was the right move and felt he had to take initiative, even if the team was disrupted in the short-term.

Gambling is inherently risky -- Golden State could have missed the playoffs, Stephen Jackson could have been incarcerated, Baron Davis could have injured his knee, and Don Nelson could have exploded. But they didn’t. By taking chances, the Warriors took control of their destiny and put the pressure on their opponents.

On the East Coast, the Toronto Raptors illustrated some truths about ball and life. Unlike the Golden State, they did not seize control of their series with New Jersey and there were a number of awful performances under pressure.

I think that the Raptors did not do a good job evaluating and focusing on their strengths. There was an opportunity to attack the Nets inside, with Chris Bosh’s drives from the high-post or the screen and roll game with Bosh and Andrea Bargnani. When Toronto trapped New Jersey’s ballscreens, it pressured the Nets and forced some bad decisions. On the whole, the Raptors made the series too easy for their opponents by not playing with enough aggressiveness and confidence.

This was clearly displayed on Toronto’s last two possessions of the game: a missed fade-away jumpshot and a stolen lob pass. The experienced player will drive to the basket and go to the line in crunch time: this is what Michael Jordan did over six championships and it’s what stars like Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant, and Tim Duncan do today. Chris Bosh’s made a poor decision to shoot a long jumpshot when he could have penetrated into the lane and gone to the line to increase Toronto’s lead.

Chris Bosh possesses a number of very good moves from the high post. His decisions to rely too much on a square-up jumper and the occasional Rocker Step are frustrating to watch because he is choosing to limit his game.

The last possession, which was stolen when Richard Jefferson dropped to collapse on Chris Bosh, was poorly constructed. Apparently, Jose Calderon felt that the pass was “six-inches” short from being successful. Perhaps, but the pass could have also been three or four feet closer to the basket with a different spin.

The play lacked dynamism: from a stationary position it was very difficult for Calderon to complete the lob pass to Bosh. Due to the pressure of the moment, most of the Toronto team was very static, as was customary during tense offensive possessions throughout the series. More dribble penetration and weak-side action would have provided addition distractions for New Jersey’s defence and given Calderon greater options as time wound down.

Individual and Team Honours

“I think back to the people who would drop by my office and say, ‘keep your head up’ when you’re feeling down. Publicly, when I was out and about, I kept my head up, you’re never going to show people that you’re struggling with things on the inside, but when you’re sitting in your office by yourself and you’ve lost three or four in a row and people come by and say kind words, you remember those times.”
- Sam Mitchell

The Toronto Raptors bested the New Jersey Nets 89-83 in Game 2 of a first-round series and Sam Mitchell claimed the Association’s Coach of the Year Award today. The former far supercedes the latter because it is the first playoff win in five seasons but Mitchell’s citation is also meaningful because it is significant of team effort and was earned because Toronto’s coaches and players kept their heads up and succeeded despite adversity, illustrating a number of clichéd verses written over the years.

April is the cruelest month. Two roads diverged in a yellow wood and sorry he could not travel both, Sam Mitchell finds a thrill in bucking fate and riding down the endless odds. Il a mis son manteau de pluie, parce qu’il pleuvait, et il est parti sous la pluie. His is not to make reply, his is not to reason why.

Oh, all the places he’ll go. If he can dream - and not make dreams his master, if he can think - and not make thoughts his aim, if he can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two imposters just the same, his is the Earth and everything that’s in it.

“It is the eye which makes the horizon.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Preparation and attitude are two of the few things that a coach or athlete can control on game day. I’ve found the offensive sets that the Raptors run to be completely anemic occasionally (Tuesday’s win was encouraging because it shows that Toronto can compete with New Jersey and won’t settle completely for a perimeter game if faced with a combination of a zone defence and crucial no-calls) and Mitchell’s brief experience means that he has much to learn about coaching.

H.A. Dorfman comments on the fine line between athletes who are focused on accomplishing goals and those worried by negative self-talk. Greg Maddux’s mantra is to “execute pitches”; Dorfman believes that pitchers should try to “control the strike zone” or “attack the hitter” because those who fret that “they don’t have good stuff” are doomed to be hit hard.

Likewise, Sam Mitchell has been instrumental in helping this younger team come together and reach their potential. Mitchell has modeled how to remain positive and self-evaluate correctly and the team has benefited from his perspective. Coaching in the Association is exceptionally difficult, as Bob Hill demonstrated when he got a pink slip as Mitchell was getting the Red Auerbach Award.

There is room for improvement throughout the organization and it’s possible that the best path through the yellow wood is the one that Sam Mitchell is traveling. Also, props to my 2007 Championship pick, the Phoenix Suns, for not repeating last year’s mistakes and running the Los Angeles Lakers off the court during the first two games of their first-round series.

Three Lessons from Red Holzman

Red Holzman coached the New York Knicks during the 1970s, an era when the team won two Association titles. Knicks players included Walt Frazier, Bill Bradley, Willis Reed, and Earl Monroe - among others - and they were one of the first squads to utilize pressure defence throughout the entire game. The team is also fascinating because a number of very intelligent players executed a motion offence selflessly and because of Willis Reed’s comeback in Game 7 of the 1970 Finals. It seems like everyone on the team wrote books so naturally the coach has written four, of which I read two: Defense! Defense! and Red on Red.

One of the books’ most attractive traits is Holzman’s frank commentary, using real players and teams to describe real systems and situations. The realism enhances the books, which contain many intriguing coaching ideas, such as:

Using Film to Study the Opponents: Holzman was one of the first coaches to review tapes when scouting. Knicks coaches held private film study sessions with individual players and optional team sessions before games, often screening game tape in the locker room as players dressed. This proved to be very influential, as the role of technology in sports has increased exponentially since.

Holzman also made use of a scouting network, similar to what Red Auerbach did with the Celtics, to evaluate players. At the time, many coaches did not devote much time to scouting, a field that has become an entire industry today.

Handling Pressure: Holzman adopted a casual attitude when dealing with officials, the media, and other influences in the Association. “Final is final,” he would say when he explained how he would deal with a tough loss or a bad call. It’s not that he abandoned his team on the court or didn’t reflect upon games afterwards but he had played enough basketball over the years to know not to dwell on one particular moment.

Teaching Players to Think: The Knicks were fortunate to have many smart players, like Bradley, Reed, Jerry Lucas, and Dave DeBusschere who put a great deal of thought into their games. The coaches encouraged this by allowing players to make suggestions that were honestly considered. For example, after Willis Reed suffered a hip injury in Game 5 of the 1970 Finals, Bill Bradley proposed that New York use a 1-3-1 set with him in the pivot (perhaps inspired by Princeton) to draw Wilt Chamberlain away from the basket. The Knicks came back to win that game and the series.

The Knicks also structured their offence to allow for opportunities to read and so that players could use their mental skills in two-man and three-man situations. As a result of the unique collection of basketball I.Q., the seven players from the rotation and the coach of the 1972-73 Association champions have been elected to the Basketball Hall of Fame.

Three Lessons from Joe Lapchick

Lapchick chronicles the life of Hall of Famer Joe Lapchick, who links the barnstorming Original Celtics to the explosion of college basketball in New York City and Madison Square Garden to the New York Knicks and the origins of the Association to the introduction of television to the sport. Despite the fact that Lapchick last coached St. John’s when the teams were known as the Redmen - as opposed to the Red Storm - the book remains relevant to today’s player and coach.

Placing Value in People: Many commented that Joe Lapchick was not the most technically astute coach but coaches such as Bob Knight applauded his skill in handling people and situations. Former players still remember how Lapchick demonstrated confidence in their abilities. His gestures may have been small but the thoughtfulness behind them was encouraging and memorable.

Lapchick was also one of the first coaches to delegate significant duties to the assistant coaches, a strategy now employed throughout college basketball. Assistant coach Lou Carnesecca was allocated responsibilities concerning defence and scouting; later he succeeded Lapchick as Head Coach at St. John’s and a member of the Basketball Hall of Fame.

Character: Lapchick maintained his sense of fairness irrespective of the circumstances. Once, during the infancy of the Association, after home-town officials missed an obvious goaltending violation by the Knicks, he stopped the game and told the scorer to add two points to the opponents’ tally.

He was also a key part of the integration of basketball, likely due to the respect engendered by the rivalry between the Original Celtics and the New York Rens. Lapchick and Ned Irish signed Sweetwater Clifton from the Harlem Globetrotters and persuaded other teams to do likewise.

Development of the Game: Joe Lapchick, Nat Holman, and the rest of the Celtics were integral to the development of the game. As players, they pioneered expert dribbling and quick ball movement. Afterwards, many became coaches and shared their skills and knowledge with others. Lapchick won four National Invitational Tournaments and Holman claimed both the N.I.T. and N.C.A.A. Tournament in the same season at C.C.N.Y..

It’s appropriate that Lapchick rests next to five Bobby Knight volumes on my bookcase. Knight was one of many younger coaches and players Lapchick helped and the Texas Tech coach still refers to his mentor as “Mr. Lapchick” to this date. Lapchick would counsel others even if it was against his best interests if his advice would help the person or the game of basketball.

Minimalism

I was coaching a team that won a league title on Sunday and I didn’t do anything. The credit - as usual - belongs to the team and I was fortunate to coach a team where all the players contributed. Aside from getting one of the referee’s attention and touching my shoulders once midway through the first half, I made sure that I stayed out of my team’s way.

Screens permitted ballhandlers to get to the key, traps and pressure forced turnovers, and the team won the rebounding battle. In the previous round, the team had started slowly and needed to make up a thirteen point deficit in the second half. In comparison, maintaining a double-digit lead for most of the game was almost relaxing.

I regret not distributing the playing time more evenly. That was an egregious oversight that I will not have a chance to rectify. I think that everyone played at least eight minutes and nobody more than thirty-two but I relied heavily on the starting five. Personally, knowing that I could have done better puts a damper on the occasion.

When asked why he left his starters in the game during the 1998-99 season, Mike D’Antoni said that he’d “rather be the a------ who won by a lot than the idiot who blew the game.” Fair or not, that accurately describes a reality of coaching. Having erased the opponent’s large lead during the semi-finals, I was sensitive to the chance of a comeback and wanted to win. Consequently, I will be apologizing later this week to a number of players.

Four Lessons from Lute Olson

Reading Lute!, an autobiography by the longstanding coach of the Arizona Wildcats, provided interesting food for thought. First of all, the calm and composed appearance of Lute Olson belies an insatiable enthusiasm for basketball and unwavering loyalty towards those who play on the teams that he coaches. Olson’s fifty-year career links the game’s past to its present, from Pete Newell and John Wooden to Roy Williams and Mike Krzyzewski, from the Pacific Coast to the Mid-West and back.

The book is typical of most sports autobiographies and will not contend for the Pulitzer Prize. Yet the text remains capable of imparting several lessons from Olson’s coaching philosophy. If I were to highlight one critical concept from the entire book, it is that creativity -along with the flexibility to adapt - is an essential coaching attribute.

Thinking Outside the Box: Once, while coaching the U.S. National Team, Olson ordered Mugsy Bogues to guard Drazen Petrovic because he felt the 5-3 guard would disrupt the Croatian’s propensity to dribble immediately after receiving the ball.

Adapting to the Team’s Personnel: Olson has always practiced a fast-break, freelance offence and recruits players with skills suited to that style of play. While remaining trye to the fundamentals, he doesn’t hesitate to adjust some of the details to make the most of the roster, for example introducing a three-guard offence when required, a set that is now common throughout the game.

Helping Players: Both of Olson’s wives have provided guidance to the players he has coached. Recognizing that players and coaches can’t become friends until after graduation, Olson ensured that the players knew that they had a network that supported and cared for them.

Managing the Little Things: Olson analyzes the game tirelessly, looking for any little edge. For example, when Steve Kerr played for the Wildcats, Olson insisted that he catch the ball in a jump-stop in order to accelerate Kerr’s release for occasions when he was guarded by opponents who were taller and quicker.

The Basketball Gods

Tex Winter says that a team must pay tribute to the basketball gods in order to succeed, his metaphor to inspire players to practice solid fundamentals and teamwork. According to the 1958 National Coach of the Year, the team that executes at both ends of floor the best will be rewarded.

Fortunately, I was coaching a team that was able to benefit from this today, directly and indirectly. Directly because poise and control resulted in quality scoring chances and defensive pressure produced turnovers and indirectly because fate assessed the opponent with a bizarre technical foul when a player removed their jersey on the bench.

The team could thank Tex for his figure of speech and his offence. First of all, the players deserve all of the credit for their win, a thirteen point comeback in the final minutes of the game and an overtime win. When they focused their determination by playing hard, playing smart, and playing together, the momentum shifted entirely. Secondly, switching to the old reliable offence - the sideline triangle - created opportunities for selfless passing and dribble penetration, which led to excellent shot selection.

Unlike the last overtime game, I stayed out of the way and allowed the team to play. It was satisfying to see every player contribute and to be involved in a game that told a fascinating story. I kept it simple, emphasized our strengths, and other intervened when specific situations permitted me to give the team and advantage. The basketball gods rewarded everyone’s effort with a result that was a polar opposite of the last time.

This isn’t the first time that Tex or the basketball gods have saved me. Tex’s insightful work is timeless, as illustrated by his travels from Kansas State to Chicago to Los Angeles. The basketball gods are not demanding in terms of quantity (or complexity) but are very particular regarding quality.

The Last Season

I am sorely disappointed with Phil Jackson. Irrespective of the tremendous work he has performed during the current season, he took an enormous step back in the coaching profession due to the publication of his fifth novel: The Last Season.

Jackson’s chronicle of the 2003-04 Los Angeles Lakers season seems to break several confidences. What happens in the huddle, the locker room, the team bus, the plan, training camp, the video room, or an office should stay within the team, despite the dollars a publisher may promise. Apparently, Kobe Bryant and Phil Jackson have a very tenuous relationship; how will detailing the conflicts between them help the two reconcile?

Secondly, several key situations are detailed where Jackson makes a decision in the face of enormous reservations. The cynic hater might say that Jackson sabotaged certain games in order to bruise Bryant’s credibility in the war of public opinion. The novel acts as a more of a tool to get a ten million dollar salary than clear the air or discuss coaching philosophy.

These Lakers are a perfect example of dysfunction, from the top down. However, Jackson does convey several useful pieces of information: the sensitivity needed to relate to fragile egos, subtle refinements to the sideline triangle, and interesting game management ideas. Perhaps most importantly is the strong case he makes for flexibility in a world that is constantly changing.

Having read Jackson’s work from Maverick to More than a Game, I sincerely hope that The Last Season is The Last Novel.

Assertiveness and Coaching

Different coaches have different personalities, which contribute to the diversity of sport. Some display more energy than others, some have a stage presence, and some have a sense of humour about their job. Nevertheless, there is more than one way to coach successfully.

Coaching and control are synonymous in the minds of many individuals inside and outside the profession but that is not an accurate description. Coaches motivate student-athletes to reach their potential as a group. Crafting systems that best suit the team is part of that task, managing every single detail of the team is not. Creating accountability among the players for their actions on the court will bring everyone together.

In practice, coaches should teach the team how to make decisions. If the coach only instructs a set of rules and guidelines - insisting that they game be played "the right way" - they curtail the enthusiasm of the players. In games, players own their decisions and they deserve as much input as possible - if they have earned it. Over the years, Larry Brown has been fired many times compared to Phil Jackson who has only been given the axe once (in Puerto Rico in the 1980s).

A coach is ultimately responsible for the outcome of each game and the entire season so many feel that they need to be "harder on this group on seniors than any group before them," as the coach at Niagara said after qualifying for the N.C.A.A. Tournament. But there are many occasions when a passive personality is very effective.

Recently, I coached a game where I hardly did anything. The players won the game and I didn't screw it up. Not that I would have screwed it up had I been more involved but they basically ran the entire show. I could have intervened if necessary but there was never an urgent need to do anything.

The team used the usual offence and defence to take a seven point lead. Although we lost the lead briefly at times, we controlled the tempo of the game. The players suggested a switch to a match-up zone, which I didn't really agree with, but I value their input. After pressuring the ball well, the other team hit a few shots over the defence so we switched back to person-to-person defence. Players made shots down the stretch to win the game; all I did was make sure the five players on the court were the five that were playing the best together.

I worry at times that I do not display enough emotion on the bench. Coaches should be a mirror image of the character that the team should be showing. Remaining quiet was likely a disservice to the team but the bench was enthusiastic, so that overcame my shortcomings.

Afterwards, I watched a YouTube clip of Don Nelson receiving a technical foul with no time on the clock. Gilbert Arenas had already been sent to the line with a chance to tie the game with two free throws and he made those plus the T, winning the game for the Wizards. Nellie probably went over the edge, but it's a subjective line. His active involvement cost his team the game insteal of inspiring the team to play better defence or whatever. Perhaps the team leaders should have handled the situation themselves.

Phil Jackson tries to take two technicals per season. Other coaches, like Gregg Popovich and Pat Riley get nailed far more often. Some coaches are loath to call timeouts, others bail out the teams they coach constantly. It's a superficial illustration of the different levels of assertiveness that are effective on the sidelines. All things considered, it's mature teams that can handle the ups and downs of the game and work things out together that win.

Overtime Reflection

When faced with a choice between a book about Crime and Punishment and another about screening and rolling, perhaps only the mentally ill would choose the book about ball. Coaches and players can get stuck in the details like they are the lightning sand. Although he could write an essay on the subject, Bill Bradley only needed a sense of where he was to succeed on the court.

Recently I was coaching during crunch time of a game and I made things too difficult for the team. Basketball should be simple. In the final minute of overtime, I wanted to use a timeout and fouls to go two-for-one. In retrospect, I should have called timeout and diagrammed a three point play and told the players to play defence.

I was counting on too many variables to work out in my team's favour. Had I relied on less, it would have been easier for the team to succeed.

Although I have an entire bookcase full of basketball coaching books, it still doesn't read a screen and roll any better than the Chris Bosh and T.J. Ford bobbleheads on the coffee table.

The Wages of Wins

Reading The Wages of Wins by David J. Berri, Martin B. Schmidt, and Stacey L. Brook raised interesting questions regarding assessment and evaluation. Factions contributing to victories and the rational behind coaching decisions were studied among other issues. Statistics are more prolific than ever before but whether the numbers are correctly applied remains to be determined.

Scoring and wins

Fortunately, the authors scrutinized the Association extensively, finding that scoring is highly correlated to winning. Therefore coaches should play the five players who contribute to the highest scoring rate (who also limit the opponent's scoring rate).

A player can affect points per possession by scoring more points and maintaining possession of the ball. Shooting efficiency, rebounding, steals, and turnovers are key variables. To keep the issue simple, I will deal with offensive factors and assume that the same issues are relevant on defence, but in reverse. A good defensive team should force the opponent to take tough shots, rebound the ball, and steal the ball when possible.

Apparently, rebounding (maintain possession with an offensive rebound and ending an opponent's possession with a defensive rip) is better correlated to winning that actually putting the ball in the basked. Likewise, when calculate individual Win-Shares, preventing turnovers or causing opponents to turn the ball over permits a player to compensate for below average scoring ability.

Decisions

When awarding minutes and contracts, the authors found that coaches and general managers tend to view basketball as five 1-on-1 games instead of one 5-on-5 game and attribute too much weight to scoring. I thought that Berri, Schmidt, and Brook ignored the elements of leadership and chemistry. When variables become intangible, analysis becomes incredibly complicated.

Lingering questions that are not addressed by The Wages of Wins:

1. What about the player who inspires teammates to work harder?
2. Points lead to Win-Shares but who gets the Win-Share when a ball screen leads to a basket?
3. Are there elements that permit a team to become greater than the sum of its parts?

I've studied this issue somewhat and found that it is possible to isolate successful combinations of players. The impact of leadership and player chemistry on a game that is played 5-on-5 in its finest form but can be isolated but film review, software like Dartfish, and comprehensive statistics are imperative.

Assists

Surprisingly, the assist statistic is largely negligible and not correlated to winning. I think it is still a positive occurrence because an assist or a pass that leads to an assist is unlikely to result in a turnover and will probably move the ball into a location from where a higher percentage shot can be taken.

Scoring "runs"

The authors dismiss the idea of momentum but a team that shortens oppoentn possessions by rebounding well, maintains control of the ball, and takes a good shots is likely to curtain runs by the opponent while simultaneous being predisposed to making runs of their own.

Irrespective of offensive skill the numbers and empirical evidence reveal that a team cannot give an opponent too many easy first (bad shots and turnovers that feed the fast break) and second (offensive rebounds) chances. "One and done", "the ball is 24K gold", "we're fighting an uphill battle", and other coaching aphorisms are entirely apropos when a team is losing control of the ball and the game.

The increased role of numbers and details guys

" Guys are sharing the ball and it looks good."
- Mike D'Antoni

On the Phoenix Suns coaching staff, Mike D'Antoni often makes decisions by "feel" whereas Marc Iavaroni provides more tangible analysis and facts. Like the heroes of The Princess Bride combined the cunning of Westley, the strength of Fezzik, and the speed of Inigo Montoya, a multitude of perspectives are present on successful teams.

Performance under Pressure, Part I

During Superbowl XLI, Rex Grossman performed poorly, throwing two interceptions and barely moving Chicago's offence. According to the media, Grossman was one of the worst Superbowl quarterbacks ever - and possibly one of the worst to play that position in the history of the league.

How bad was he?

Breaking down the reasons for Grossman's inauspicious performance generates a generic list: physical skill, knowledge of the game, composure under pressure, etc.. Like other major sporting events, performance under pressure on demand trumps all. During his career at Florida, Grossman demonstrated excellent physical tools at an elite collegiate program. He must still possess those qualities; otherwise Brian Griese would have been taking snaps for the Bears.

Early in the regular season, Grossman's agent attests to his tremendous confidence. Watching his body language in the Superbowl, it was obvious something had changed. Grossman had a QB Rating over 100 in September but only 73.2 in the postseason. Throughout the game, he made a number of decisions that were less than astute.

Why?

Ultimately, Rex Grossman is responsible for his performance. Obviously, he was an average or below average quarterback who strung together a series of poor games at the end of the season.

What can coaches do to prevent players from breaking down?

The media is so pervasive at the professional level it is uncertain whether any efforts could have constructed a positive environment for Rex Grossman but this is step one.

My friend Sherwyn Benn remarked that the strength of Carleton's four consecutive National Championships is that the teams play the same at the beginning of the game as they do in the conclusion. Experience in close games is critical because it enables players to realize that it is only sport and the worst case scenario is never that bad. Decisions and actions become habits and routines.

Use accurate measures of evaluations. Eventually, Grossman matched the public perception of his abilities. Statistics such as win-shares, value over replacement, and other numbers give players an accurate picture of their skills that they can live up to on the playing field.

Watching the Association on ESPN

"How can you give up a wide open three followed by an offensive rebound on the other side of the court?"
- Bill Walton, during the Spurs-Rockets game on 24 January 2007

Team defence is getting worse and worse in the Association and beyond. Conversely it seems like the screen and roll play is getting better and better.

Inbounding under their basket with few seconds remaining on the shot clock, the Spurs set a double screen for Ginobli on the foul line. Ginobli curled the screen, received a pass, and made the lay-up.

Earlier in the evening, Marion set a ballscreen for Nash in the corner. While the two defenders converged on the ballhandler, the Matrix rolled to the hoop, received a pass, and made the lay-up.

Both times, one could ask: "where's the help?" Even if the screener's defenders are caught up, help-side positioning and communication should prevent the easy basket. These principles could have enabled the Rockets to box-out Elson properly and earn praise from Bill Walton instead of scorn.

"Excellence is doing a common thing uncommonly well."
- Booker T. Washington

Inevitably - irrespective of the quality of the defence - it is execution of the little things that contributes of the success of the offence. Phoenix keeps it real, leading the league in transition baskets, slipping the screen, and pull-up jumpers. Coaches can lose their teams (and often themselves) when basketball becomes too complicated.

Many teams just suck at one end of the court. Emphasizing the basics leads to improvement. Rob Smart at Queen's has been doing a good job in this regard. The Golden Gaels' offence is a series of downscreens run for forty minutes. San Antonio ran something similar for Ginobli and Bowen. The teams execute, talk, and read, taking the opportunities the defence provides.

Three Lessons from Jack Donohue

Recently, I read Dream Big Dreams: The Jack Donohue Story by Mike Hickey, a thoroughly entertaining biography that is required reading for Canadian Basketball coaches. Both Andy Higgins - who knew Coach Donohue personally - and I found the book to be very insightful and had difficulty putting it down. I've listed three lessons any coach can take from Jack Donohue's life and coaching career.

Helping Players: Jack Donohue helped the Canadian Senior Men's National Team, the College of the Holy Cross, and Power Memorial players, among others, lessons about teamwork, responsibility, sacrifice, and enjoying life, that they remember to this day. He exemplified the potential of the coach to shape the lives of young people. Although the players may have questioned Donohue at the time, they now appreciated how much he helped them improve themselves.

Players must understand their role on the team, receive an opportunity to do what they do best, and know that that someone on the team cares for them (source: Author Unknown). In the coming months I will try to follow Coach Donohue's lead and stress these aspects of my coaching philosophy.

Donohue never abandoned a friend when they were down, including acquaintances who were incarcerated, Al McGuire during his illness, and Steve Konchalski when he was fighting Basketball Canada (successfully) over his wrongful termination. He maintained his relationship with players and coaches from New York City like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Jack Curran, and Lou Carnesecca for the rest of his life.

Technical Fouls: While coaching Power Memorial as an opponent was shooting foul shots, Donohue strode onto the court and took the ball from the player's hands. He refused to give it back until the official listened to his concerns. (I once had to call timeout to speak to an official about a technical foul that he assessed to a U.T.S. player for using profanity; perhaps I should have been more forthright.) When the U.S.S.R. was taking Canada to the woodshed, Donohue entered the court, assumed a defensive stance, and began guarding the Soviet ballhandler.

After the "T", Donohue exclaimed that "someone on this team has to play defence." Like my colleague Kash stated this afternoon: "different players are motivated in different ways and a coach must know what buttons to push." Caring for players means standing up for them during games.

Supporting Other Coaches: Donohue was known and appreciated for the help that he provided to other coaches and the Coaches of Canada organization. Many coaches in Canada are part of the Donohue family tree (Ken and Kathy Shields, Steve Konchalski and Doc Ryan, Jay Triano, Olga Hrycak, Leo Rautins, and Chris Critelli). Coaches must not only mentor players but others in their profession, a responsibility Donohue never shirked.

Once, Donohue and a friend were volunteering at a local high school practice when the school's Athletic Director walked into the gym and asked them to identify themselves. Donohue introduced himself as the former coach of Canada's Senior Men's National Team. The A.D. asked them to leave because they didn't have the "proper qualifications" to coach at that school. I know another Athletic Director who forbade a former Canadian Olympic coach from making an appearance at his school but illuminating the error of his ways will inspire neither a critical self-evaluation nor spur the school to improve their methods.

The Responsibility of the Coach

Evidently, it is the players play hard, play smart, and play together; the coach merely plays the role of the enabler and the modeler. If contributions were not made on the court when they were needed, contributions off the court were irrelevant. Players wear headbands and win games, coaches can only ban the former and observe the latter.

According to Bear Bryant, “After a victory the players deserve the credit; after a loss the coach deserves the blame.” Is Bryant’s dissection of the blame appropriate? If players merit praise for their physical and mental performance than they should receive criticism when warranted in a loss.

Except the opposite nature of victory and defeat create the possibility of dual judgment. Players seized the day and won the game. Winners performed up to their standards of quality under pressure. Losers didn’t perform. But why?

Usually because of a failure in the role of the coach. Did the coach model the way? Inspire a team vision? Challenge conventions? Enable and motivate others? Read enough Kouzes and Posner? The losing coach probably did not do enough or didn’t do it the right way for that group of players.

Fortunately, there is hope for the defeated coach. I’ve found that coaching is largely an exercise in self-actualization so everything that happens is a piece of information that can be used to climb higher so long as that information is thoroughly and accurately studied.

Self-evaluating after a loss I noted that the two major times that I intervened in the flow of the game resulted in positive outcomes for the team. There were no Isiah Thomas moments so I should be satisfied with my self-actualization, right?

In reality, my superficial analysis did no favours to either the team or me. The players deserve credit for working hard, overcoming adversity, and becoming closer together. For an early season game at this level, it was a sincere success. Reflecting critically, I realize that I deserve blame for countless acts that all contributed slightly to the defeat.

Thankfully, basketball wasn’t banned yesterday so there’s hope. Even if I can only fix one screen and roll sequence or speak slightly more concisely before the next game, it’s still a step forward and only one of many along a longer path.

Irrespective of my self-improvement, the players must still play the games. Becoming a better coach will provide the team with many more tools to do their job, win, and earn the credit they deserve.

Endings and Beginnings

Watching the bookends of two practices this week, I thought about work ethic and attention to detail. The middles may have been the most intense and focused practices one could imagine but since I didn’t see them I can’t write about them.

I thought about how one starts and finishes something is a tremendous barometer of how they will complete the whole. Consistency shouldn’t take days off. Execution counts and there’s a reason that coaches harp on it. I don’t think it bodes well when bigs eschew running in their lanes, littles neglect to read their defenders, and many stand around too much, perhaps looking for a place to happen.

When is it time to take things seriously? When the regular season begins? During the playoffs? Or earlier than everyone else, during off-season workouts? In my mind - at least for exceptional teams - the sooner, the better. Working hard matters; little things make a big difference. Play hard, play smart, play together; from the first practice of the year to the last game in the playoffs.

Three Lessons for Sam Mitchell

The Toronto Raptors are a frustrating team to watch. After overcoming a double-digit deficit to claw within a single point of near the end of the third quarter, the bottom fell out. Missing dunks, conceding open threes, taking early shots, not getting back in transition, leaving posts wide open -- offence and defence were both disastrous.

The Suns torched the Raptors with the high rub. They’d slip the screen or roll directly to the basket and get dunks and lay-ups, using a cute baseline back-screen to occupy the help defenders.

Lesson #1 for Sam Mitchell: If 5-10 Andre Barrett plays thirty minutes, switching the big on little screen is not an option. My friend thought they should have run and jumped the dribbler using the high screen. Personally, hedging the screen and rotating the other post on to the screener probably would have sufficed.

The Raptors played awful D; no matter what rotation was attempted with that effort, they would have failed. They scored more than twenty eight points in all four quarters and still lost. The Suns shot58% from the field, including 56% from beyond the arc. Boris Diaw, who almost triple-doubled, was guarded by a point most of the game.

Sometimes the Raptors tried to trap the ball. But they were playing at half-speed. When I double-team, I want players to trap aggressively and sprint to recover. These dudes were jogging. Furthermore, a 5-10 player is not going to trap a 6-8 player in the Association. The defenders were late, the trap was beaten, the ball got moved and someone cashed and open three.

The Suns took the lead with a three point shot about eight seconds into the game and never looked back.

Lesson #2: Don’t play at Phoenix’s tempo. The Raptors were guilty of not using enough clock to slow down the game and make Phoenix work on defence.

Morris Peterson and Mike James scored thirty eight and thirty six points respectively. Any decent guard can score twenty five against Phoenix. They play defence like a bunch of turnstiles and allowed too much penetration and too many good looks. They’ll get killed in the playoffs if they do that against a team with forwards. Peterson and James received no help from the forwards.

Lesson #3: Attack Phoenix inside (to be fair the Raptors had no forwards who could ball - Villanueva played poorly). Use posts to play inside-outside. Penetrate and kick to force the Suns to foul. Beat up Marion and Diaw so they have less to give on the offensive end. Although Mike James was feeling the step-back three pointer, other Toronto guards took shots that were low percentage.

Some severely boneheaded plays were made tonight. The Suns are committed to their philosophy and stick to it. The Raptors showed up late to the game, fought hard to get back into it, then mentally checked out for the fourth quarter.

Coach Sam Mitchell said: “They just move the ball and they don’t miss shots.” Really? Perhaps Toronto should game plan for this next time?

T.D.C.A.A. Final Miscues

I watched the T.D.C.A.A. Senior Boys Championship game this week. The passing was terrible. Father Henry Carr beat Mother Teresa 63-51. Players knocked balls down with one hand, threw the ball out of bounds and passed into traffic.

Setting effective screens, good footwork on offence and defence, and accurate passing critical skills at the high school level. Henry Carr is probably the best team in Ontario but if they turn the ball over that frequently at the provincial championships, they could be upset by anyone. Good high/low post play is better than lackadaisical five out play. Pass. Cut. Replace.

Too Much Burn

So Chris Bosh made the Eastern All-Star team as a reserve. He deserves it. Position scarcity, attitude, and talent make him one of the most fifteen valuable players in the Association. He's not a true post but he goes down there occasionally and exemplifies good post play. Once his shot becomes a little better and he learns to set screens, look out.

So why does Sam Mitchell want to kill him? He should not play fifty minutes in a game. The Raptors lost to the Spurs 125-118 in overtime because Michael Finlay blew up and their two best players played 94.3% of the game. The Raptors aren't a deep team but they aren't that shallow either. James and Bosh should average about forty minutes. Spreading out the shots and minutes will develop the third option the team sorely needs.

Little Things, Part II

My friend told me that his Tae-Kwan-Do class was asked to perform some basic kicks. Despite their black belts, the class had trouble executing white belt maneuvers. The class was given a month to improve their fundamentals.

Irrespective of the level of play, the fundamentals remain the same. All coaches should pay attention to these details and devote time to the basics. Elite basketball players still need the time to develop skills like footwork, passing, or shot-faking. This concept is not a sport-specific lesson in any way.

Whether you are running the Princeton offence or trying to combine the playbooks of the Phoenix Suns and the Los Angeles Lakers into a few offensive sets, you need to maintain possession of the ball, put it in the basket, and stop the other team from doing the same.

Why Do We Coach?

Paul J. Meyer once said: “You never work for someone else. The truth is someone is paying you to work for yourself.”

Someone recently suggested that coaching for the purposes of self-actualisation was possibly selfish. In the end, don’t all humans choose their actions in order to satisfy a need (physiological, safety, belonging, esteem, and self-actualisation)? Even those employed in an altruistic occupation do so because helping others meets their belonging, esteem, or self-actualisation needs.

The suggestion was made with a somewhat negative connotation. I couldn’t disagree more. People are free to act as they wish and no one can tell someone else how to make the most of themselves. Conventional wisdom is very popular and a revelation that all action is incentive based (economics is merely a model to understand life) can be hard to accept.

Why do we coach? Obviously, we love the game and the people - players, coaches, referees, and fans - who play it. But don’t coach to indulge ourselves; there are many ways to satisfy our basketball jones without affecting the lives of young people. We chose to assume positions of influence in the lives of student-athletes because we wanted to give back and make a difference.

Basketball (or any sport) is the vehicle, personal best sand self-actualization are the destinations. Since we coach because we want to help players become the people they aspire to, how do we make the biggest difference?

Choice Theory

A recent Choice Theory workshop that I attended was very productive. During a very valuable ninety minutes, the group discussed the negative consequences of criticism. Players and coaches shared how they had been affected by criticism. Coaches, family members, athletic directors, and others hurt people with thoughtless - and sometimes abusive - comments.

First of all, there is never any place for personal criticism. In sport, although it is necessary to provide feedback, comments should focus on specific behaviours, not a person's character. Secondly, correction must be supplemented with encouragement to build the confidence of individual athletes and the entire team.

Unhappy people evaluate others, happy people self-evaluate. Greg Norman once said: “If you’re serious about improving your play, be brutally honest with yourself.”

Notre Dame Football and a Coach

Previously, I used to enjoy cheering for Notre Dame football. The Fighting Irish conveyed a sense of prestige when they took the field. I truly respected Tyrone Willingham and the work that he was doing. When Willingham was dumped at the same time as Notre Dame clung to a pretence of integrity, it was an affront to sensibility.

I understand that most “big-time” sports are for entertainment purposes only, especially the Association. Most teams and athletes follow the Al Davis mantra “just win baby,” and I’m cool with that. What bothered me was that Notre Dame said it was never about on-field performance when it obviously was all about winning. Since that day, I ceased all of my emotional involvement with that team.

Attending a Notre Dame home game in during Tyrone Willingham's initial eight game winning streak was a very enjoyable experience. Watching the Pitt-ND game on Saturday, it seems like the Fighting Irish have an exciting team that it would be fun to cheer for. Nevertheless, I have a 2002 “Return to Glory” shirt but it is staying in the box in the basement with the rest of my Notre Dame apparel.

Harry Potter and Leadership

Harry Potter becomes a Quiddich coach in The Half-Blood Prince and does a decent job. I found his tryouts somewhat uninspiring; he should have brought a practice plan. Choosing his keeper based on five penalty shots - an extremely unreliable sample size - was asking for trouble, but it worked out in the end.

Before the first match, I thought Harry was setting up Weasley to be Rafael Palmeiro. However, tricking his keeper into thinking he had taken performance enhancing drugs was quite the ruse. A lot of sport is mental as opposed to physical; sensing that Ron was prone to negative self-talk, Harry employed his mental training skills to help that particular student-athlete play to the best of his abilities and deliver the win for his team.

The Gifts of the Triangle

I’ve been reading a lot of my Tex Winter books lately. The Triple Post Offense - also known as the ubiquitous “Triangle” - never stops giving. It is not an offense that can be run in every situation but it provides some good teaching points to break down freelance and early offense principles into easy to learn pieces. Most interestingly, if one were to employ elements of the Triple Post set, they could hide a lack of size in the post and create a wide variety of scoring chances with an undersized line-up.

New Coke

I finished a coaching journal in four months. Usually, the journals take a little longer to fill out. It seems like I really have a lot of ideas at the moment. All dressed up and nowhere to go, so to speak.

You can fall into a bit of a trap when you’re constrained to a wholly theoretical framework. I have confidence in these ideas, but I would like to see them on the court. Reality checks can be swift and harsh. For all I know, what I’ve been creating the last three months is the basketball equivalent of New Coke. Basketball isn’t a chess match between coaches; players have to go out and execute. What they execute plays a relatively small role in the outcome compared to how they execute it.

I made a presentation at the National Coaching Institute regarding positive changes I have made to my coaching style. The presentation was well-received and I appreciated everyone’s feedback. Making these changes - and knowing there are more changes I can’t wait to make when I coach again - has really reinvigorated my enthusiasm for coaching. Yet here I am.

Go Figure

Phil's back in LA. Go figure. As Red Auerbach said, “Never take anything for granted in basketball or any other sport. Anything you think can’t possibly happen not only can happen but probably will happen.”

After writing The Last Season, I’m mildly surprised that Jackson accepted with the Lakers job. How can Jackson regain his integrity after airing a season’s worth of dirty laundry in print? Like the book, taking a $10M/year (or whatever) deal from the Lakers amounts to a cash grab.

I have similar feelings about Larry Brown and the Cleveland Cavaliers job. It seems like Brown could be doing more to keep his eye on the ball and help the Pistons.

In the end, it is by your actions that you shall be known. Larry Brown has a reputation that precedes him. As Adrian Wojnarowski wrote on ESPN.com, “No pupil has ever come closer to Dean Smith's genius on the floor, and gone further from his character off it.”

Larry Brown and Phil Jackson are not the only ones who demonstrate less than exemplary behaviour. You have to watch out yourself, especially in the coaching profession. I wish I was smart enough to handle all the political games that are part the profession these days but I’m also glad that I steer clear of them.

In The Maltese Falcon, Kaspar Gutman toasts Philip Marlowe: “Here’s to plain speaking and clear understanding.” There’s merit in that phrase. The short-term hit you take if you stand up for yourself can be aggravating, demeaning, unpleasant, or all of the above, but you are much better in the long-term if you remain true to your principles.

It’s perhaps a tad clichéd for a basketball coach to read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance due to the Phil Jackson connection. The book was recommended twice to me by someone I respect highly so I’m giving it a read. As mentioned in Hoop Dreams, Jackson gave that book to John Paxson to read one season.