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.”

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.

Outliers

Like Blink and The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell weaves a number of seemingly unrelated pieces of anecdotal evidence to create his latest work Outliers. The fundamental premise of the book is that conventional wisdom about success is flawed: factors publically praised are irrelevant and success or failure can be determined by a few core factors.

Gladwell raises a salient point that many of athletic and academic cut-off dates favour those born early in the year. Basketball Ontario and other organizations have realized this and have implemented strategies to provide more coaching for those born late in the year and recognize reliable indicators of talent not based on age. The author also mentions that nobody reaches a gifted level unless they put in ten thousand hours of practice. Then Gladwell talks about the nebulous nature of opportunity and how many diligent workers never receive a key chance to succeed.

The final half of the book includes a half-baked chapter about how Southerners may have short tempers and self-control may be passed down through the family like speech tendencies. Apparently, communication errors cause most plane crashes and the clarity in the relationship between supervisor and subordinate depends on culture. Lastly, it is argued that Asians perform better at math because of a more logical naming system for their digits and more hours of schooling.

Some of these points seem sensible when explained, even though they may be superficially counterintuitive. The problem with picking evidence in order to create an entertaining, quirky book is that sample size is very small. Gladwell interviews a partner at the firm who is his literary agent; many of the examples are not arbitrarily selected. The first hundred pages are more solid than what follows - which is highly inconsistent - and relevant for coaches and player development. The rest of the book is largely for entertainment only and does not absolutely prove the thesis it set out to establish.

Player Development, Part II

The Toronto Raptors held a career forum last week at the Air Canada Centre. A panel of various employees represented different aspects of the organization: concessions, sponsorships, ticketing, facilities, and other jobs. Whilst the speakers were genuine in their desire to inspire the many high school students in attendance, they largely failed.

The seminar was a complete contrast from the hullabaloo of an Association game, which was a bit of a surprise, like seeing all the McDonald’s employees in line at Harvey’s in Union Station before the game. The Raptors promised an interactive and interesting event and fell quite short.

The speakers droned on (to a degree) about what they do each game day. The ticketing manager bragged about courtside seats that she had secured for a Torontonian at a Lakers game. When I attended the Raptors-Pacers game later that evening, it became apparent that many students had not attended a live game before. Discussing the luxury services offered by the company furthered the disconnect with their audience.

For example, a video documenting a game day at the A.C.C. would have supplemented the verbal explanations nicely. The footage would have permitted the students to visualize what the speakers described. Also, the speakers did not discuss how they obtained their jobs. The mantra “maybe someday you’ll be up here giving the speeches” was often repeated but few details were given about the education, experiences, and choices required for a career in sports.

In his book, Understanding Media, Marshall McLuhan cites the case of a high school principal in a destitute neighbourhood in New York City who gave each student a photo of themselves. The school also installed multiple mirrors in each classroom. Given the ability to see themselves as they learned, the students increased their academic performance.

The students didn’t believe what the teacher was saying about their habits until they saw it themselves. On the court, a coach may tell a player that he is fundamentally unsound, does not contribute to the team, or makes bad decisions but if this contrasts with the player’s self-image, he won’t buy it. A tirade may have the same effect as giving the player a dissertation to read.

If a player is good enough, and experiences some success - however superficial - they will begin to think of themselves as an excellent player. There are enough cheerleaders and hangers-on to reinforce that view. Why confront the truth, which is negative and entails hours of work to change, when one can look on the bright side.

The level of discourse has generally fallen recently; the successful politician is the one who lowers himself and communicates at the level of the voting public. Likewise, a coach must show the player simply and surely how his performance affects the team, for example using video of games or practices. Chris Bosh may not realize his body language and actions with his mouthguard leaving the huddle Monday night are unprofessional but hopefully he would be regretful if shown the behaviour later.

A player on the Varsity team or an alumnus can serve as a role model for how to get things done. Also, teaching a player how to critically watch the game provides examples of great performances. Encouraging players to develop an athlete’s vision can be a critical component of mental training before games and practices.

Coaches can’t simply demonstrate the drill like it is part of a lecture. They must connect with players so that all team members see themselves executing the skill correctly, in the context of a winning team with good chemistry.

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.

Talent Myopia

In 1960, Theodore Levitt published Marketing Myopia, a seminal article for the Harvard Business Review that highlighted how a narrow understanding and a refusal to accept change doomed a number of business empires. Companies ranging from electric street car manufacturers that didn't understand the effect of the automotive industry to dry cleaners who did not cope with the development of new synthetic fabrics were criticized. The same problems also manifest themselves away from the business world, on the basketball court, where players get caught up with their own abilities and misunderstand their role in the sport.

Self-Deceiving Cycle: There is a certain groupthink among today’s ballers, ideas and opinions taken as given, facts ignored, despite all common sense. They follow the hoop culture vicariously via NBA.com but don’t follow the example of their role models. They watch an And1 mix tape and assume that they have the all the skills they need. E.O. Wilson once said that “Blind faith, no matter how passionately expressed, will not suffice. Science for its part will test relentlessly every assumption about the human condition.”

The Cycle develops as players forget how their heroes made the Association, ignoring examples like Steve Nash shooting free throws in the rain on Vancouver Island and disregarding the countless others who wanted to be him but failed in a blaze of glory. From where they are now, focusing only on their narrow range of skills and not the entire game, it might serve them well to read the signposts.

Production Pressure: It can’t be denied that young players are pressured by countless others. There’s pressure to keep the baskets coming at the Bantam level, rather than shoot correctly (irrespective of the outcome). There’s pressure to win by any means necessary rather than do it the right way (you don’t get paid for winning club games). There’s pressure to talk about Brandon Roy’s three-point buzzer beater against Houston, rather than the player who allowed him to get open (Travis Outlaw set the screen). There’s pressure achieve the coach’s definition of success, rather than John Wooden’s (As Coach Wooden would say, you can’t shoot if you can’t move and get open). Coaches should pressure players to improve, not just perform.

Population Myth: Some excellent student-athletes have always been recruited because they standout at their level. There are countless youth teams but very few professional leagues, and very few professional leagues that pay well. It’s hard to make a living playing ball. Agents serve dozens of clients and most of them are not Scott Boras.

Sooner or later, the number of buyers will shrink and the number of sellers will remain the same. Coaches will not only assess players on their physical abilities but their mental and social abilities as well. Some players will reach a certain point based on talent alone but others will be held back. Some players will less talent will surpass them because they play the game well.

Student-athletes must accept that they are basketball players, not ball handlers or scorers and learn the about the entire game: accept advice, rebound, set screens, give help, take leadership, move the ball, pass and cut, etc… Even Trajan Langdon is getting paid to play basketball these days.

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

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.

Best Seat in the House

Spike Lee’s “basketball memoir”, Best Seat in the House, provides a unique perspective on the sport and frank commentary. Despite his film background, Lee is tremendously knowledgeable about basketball and how it is intertwined with New York City’s culture.

He has attended hundreds of games, from Game 7 of the 1970 Finals when Willis Reed emerged from the locker room to deflate and defeat the Lakers to Game 7 of the 1994 Eastern Finals when the Knicks returned to the Finals for the first time in twenty years, and he describes the city’s euphoric reaction to these moments. Thousands of citizens, young and old, play ball - few succeeded in the Association while most few short - and they (wrongly) indentify themselves with the sport.

Lee comments on the role that psychology played in Michael Jordan’s career. Jordan always had an edge over his opponents, gained by repeatedly owning them on the court while befriending them off of it, and he would not hesitate to take advantage. To him, winning was paramount. Jeff Van Gundy called Jordan a “con-man” (and the Knicks were subsequently lit up [repeatedly]) but Lee admired this tactic, despite what Chicago did to the Knicks over the years.

Lee also discusses how General Managers do not pay enough attention to a free agent’s environment while tripping over each other in order to sign the latest superstar. Salaries are spiralling out of control but nobody asks “why is that guy so good?” or “who made that team so great?” in enough detail. Consequently, players like Larry Brown (1996 Dallas Cowboys) and Troy Glaus (2002 Anaheim Angels) sign huge deals and never duplicate their performance because the players who protected them are no longer around.

Legends were interviewed and said that modern players possess a sense of entitlement. George Gervin claimed that they wouldn’t take anyone’s advice, from college and professional coaches to former players, and few reached their potential. Others, like Bill Bradley, commented that overall skill and team play have disappeared as players become more one-dimensional. Michael Jordan never stopped listening to Dean Smith and Phil Jackson and continued to improve. The Association may have become bigger and better over the past twenty years but the level of play has not followed suit.

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.

The Game

Put in uniform at six or seven, by the time a boy reaches the NHL, he is a veteran of close to 1,000 games-30-minute games, later 32-, then 45, finally 60-minute games, played more than : twice a week, more than seventy times a year between late September and late March. It is more games from a younger age, over a longer season than ever before. But it is less hockey than ever before. For, every time a twelve-year-old boy plays a 30-minute game, sharing the ice with teammates, he plays only about ten minutes. And ten minutes a game, anticipated and prepared for all day, traveled to and from, dressed and undressed for, means ten minutes of hockey a day, more than two days a week, more than seventy days a hockey season. And every day that a twelve-year-old plays only ten minutes, he doesn’t play two hours on a backyard rink, or longer on school or playground rinks during weekends and holidays.

It all has to do with the way we look at free time. Constantly preoccupied with time and keeping ourselves busy (we have come to answer the ritual question “How are you?” with what we apparently equate with good health, “Busy”), we treat non-school, non-sleeping or non-eating time, unbudgeted free time, with suspicion and no little fear. For, while it may offer opportunity to learn and do new things, we worry that the time we once spent reading, kicking a ball, or mindlessly coddling a puck might be used destructively, in front of TV, or “getting into trouble” in endless ways. So we organize free time, scheduling it into lessons - ballet, piano, French - into organizations, teams, and clubs, fragmenting it into impossible-to-be-boring segments, creating in ourselves a mental metabolism geared to moving on, making free time distinctly unfree.

It is in free time that the special player develops, not in the competitive expedience of games, in hour-long practices once a week, in mechanical devotion to packaged, processed, coaching manual, hockey-school skills. For while skills are necessary, setting out as they do the limits of anything, more is needed to transform those skills into something special. Mostly it is time unencumbered, unhurried, time of a different quality, more time, time to find wrong answers to find a few that are right; time to find your own right answers; time for skills to be practiced to set higher limits, to settle and assimilate and become fully and completely yours, to organize and combine with other skills comfortably and easily in some uniquely personal way, then to be set loose, trusted, to find new instinctive directions to take, to create.

But without such time a player is like a student cramming for exams. His skills are like answers memorized by his body, specific, limited to what is expected, random and separate, with no overviews to organize and bring them together. And for those times when more is demanded, when new unexpected circumstances come up, when answers are asked for things you’ve never learned, when you must intuit and piece together what you already know to find new answers, memorizing isn’t enough. It’s the difference between knowledge and understanding, between a super-achiever and a wise old man. And it’s the difference between a modern suburban player and a player like Lafleur.

For a special player has spent time with his game. On backyard rinks, in local arenas, in time alone and with others, time without short-cuts, he has seen many things, he has done many things, he has experienced the game. He understands it. There is scope and culture in his game. He is not a born player. What he has is not a gift, random and otherworldly, and unearned. There is surely something in his genetic make-up that allows him to be great, but just as surely there are others like him who fall short. He is, instead, a natural.

“Muscle memory” is a phrase physiologists sometimes use. It means that for many movements we make, our muscles move with no message from the brain telling them to move, that stored in the muscles is a learned capacity to move a certain way, and, given stimulus from the spinal cord, they move that way. We see a note on a sheet of music, our fingers move; no thought, no direction, and because one step of the transaction is eliminated - the information-message loop through the brain - we move faster as well.

When first learning a game, a player thinks through every step of what he’s doing, needing to direct his body the way he wants it to go. With practice, with repetition, movements get memorized, speeding up, growing surer, gradually becoming part of the muscle’s memory. The great player, having seen and done more things, more different and personal things, has in his muscles the memory of more notes, more combinations and patterns of notes, played in more different ways. Faced with a situation, his body responds. Faced with something more, something new, it finds an answer he didn’t know was there. He invents the game.

- Ken Dryden, The Game

North American athletes play far too often, which is the reason why other countries have closed the gap in international competition, whether on the ice or the hardwood. European basketball clubs practice twice daily, improving individual moves and shooting skills. Hockey clubs emphasize quickness and passing in extensive development programmes. Plus fitness.

United States and Canadian sports organizations devote excessive time to playing and traveling. As Dryden alluded, muscle memory falls by the wayside when seated in a car or on the bench. Why should a high school player go from league game to club tournament - barely playing - when he could practice on his own and receive one-on-one attention? Skilled coaches do their best work in small groups.

La joie de vivre, ou la joie de jouer, est trés importante. Ken Dryden mentioned this in 1980 and it has proven itself to be true repeatedly: in the 1988, 1998, 2004, and 2006 Olympics for starters, as Europeans and South Americans have entered the Association, as skilled post play is replaced by mere size and athleticism.

Fundamentals remain paramount. An athlete cannot succeed without outstanding performance factors and exceptional skills. A student-athlete cannot land a scholarship without grades. A country may have won in the past but they must continually improve the entire sport system to win in the future. After all, John Wooden was correct when he said that “it’s what you learn after you know it all that counts.”

"Il Mago"

Lately criticism has abounded concerning Raptors forward AndreaBargnani, initially justified, now provided by columnists seeking topics, attempting to feed a need. Evaluating Bargnani is challenging, on account of several injuries affecting his performance since late last season. Foot and knee injuries have deprived “Il Mago” of his quickness and first step. The first months of his career had been promising and raised everyone’s expectations.

Now, the knives are out. But anyone who writes off a draft pick in their second year is asking to become a victim of other general managers, ignoring the precedent set by Steve Nash, Dirk Nowitzki, and Kevin Garnett, the last three M.V.P. winners who struggled mightily during their second seasons.

Obviously, Bargnani is not at this level - the entire draft class was considered weak at the time - but pundits have been disappointed by a range of talents, from Tracy McGrady to Kwame Brown, so any number of paths are possible.

Andrea Bargnani stated the Raptors’ first few games of 07-08, playing a quasi-Euro centre next to Chris Bosh’s power forward. After a number of underwhelming performances, he was bench in favour of Rasho Nesterovic and coach Sam Mitchell has inconsistently dispersed minutes since. Now, as of Saturday’s game in Phoenix, the Italian is back in the starting lineup, apparently to stay.

Nesterovic is a vastly underrated defender who possesses an array of post moves. Despite occasionally poor shot selection, he deserves to start in the Association. Toronto will suffer if he continues to be DNP-CDed. Bargnani could become stronger but if he followed Nesterovic’s example of persistence he would immediately become a better defender. Adding more inside post moves to his game would allow him to become more like Arvydas Sabonis, and other players who combined inside and outside games.

Starting again as Toronto’s centre, Bargnani performed much better in his increased role. In addition to improving his ability to defend, he could develop his decisiveness and confidence in order to play with more aggressiveness, draw fouls, and shoot higher percentage shots. Few possess Bargnani’s skill set but it is meaningless if he doesn’t use it to the fullest extent.

Jamario Moon should be benched in favour of Bargnani. Certainly, Moon’s “joie de jouer” and vertical leap have endeared him to Toronto fans but he performs inconsistently and if anyone should give up minutes, it is him.

Currently, Moon’s main flaw is a tendency to force outside shots and avoid driving to the basket to force contact. This is similar to what Bargnani should improve so if he doesn’t want to play with more intensity, Moon should continue to receive the benefit of the doubt. But Jamario Moon does not need to play forty minutes per game so there is certainly room to scale back his burn.

This decision is slightly complicated by Toronto’s system, which works best when sparked by the defence. The offence struggles the most when the players (Jason Kapono, Carlos Delfino, T.J. Ford) jack bad outside shots. The last thing the Raptors need is more weak defence and outside shooting. Attacking the basket, posting up, cutting, sharing the ball, making reasonable outside shots: all attributes of Bargnani’s that can jumpstart the Raptor’s motion offence -- if he wants to.