Performance under Pressure, Part V

Donovan Bailey said that while athletes participating in the 100m dash share genetics and other physical characteristics, it’s entirely mental when they arrive in the stadium for the final heat. Swimmers and other athletes would be remiss not to take the 1996 Olympic Champion’s advice. Self-confidence, technique, overcoming fear (of success and failure) are among the essential skills possessed by an Olympic Champion.

Michael Phelps won eight gold medals in a single Olympics. He is an amazing athlete. But Phelps also performs consistently and never wavers from his game plan. He’d only have six medals if the competition were as diligent. In the Men’s 4x100m Feeestyle relay, Alain Bernard had a relatively large lead going into the final stretch over Jason Lezak but swam too close to the lane divider, allowing the American to draft behind and out-touch him at the wall. In the Men’s 100m Butterfly, Serbian Milorad Cavic appeared to have a half-meter lead with two meters to swim but lifted his head at the wall and lost by 0.01 seconds. Phelps realized that he was behind and that he was out of sync with his normal stroke rhythm. He took a “chopped stroke” and barely won the event.

In the 1992 Men’s 100m Backstroke, Mark Tewksbury spent the preceding year visualizing his race in Barcelona. He studied the pool when it was under construction and planned every detail of his race months in advance. When he got within meters of the wall, he realized that he was out of sync with his normal stroke pattern and didn’t have enough time for a full stroke. Consequently, Tewksbury reached backwards and won the race by milliseconds. Both Phelps and Tewksbury focused on the mental aspect of swimming and narrowly won gold medals as a result.

Egregious mental errors have occurred in other sports too.

• Women’s Marathon: the field allowed one athlete, Constantina Tomescu-Dita to breakaway and lead more than half the race. The Romanian won by half a minute and it seemed as if the chase pack had forgotten that she was in the race.
• Women’s 400m Freestyle Swim: Katie Hoff led most of the race but decided to touch the wall with a flat palm. Great Britain’s Rebecca Adlington made a last outstretched lunge for the wall and won by 0.07 seconds.
• Women’s Freestyle Wrestling 63kg Bronze Medal Match: Martine Dugrenier was up a point with thirty seconds remaining. After she had taken the lead with a leg-lace takedown, she quickly gave up her back and side control to opponent Randi Millar, losing with seconds remaining.

Why are these athletes losing focus at critical moments? Tewksbury hypothesizes that the fear of success and reaching a life-long dream is as prevalent as the fear of failure. C.B.C. commentators Steve Armitage and Byron McDonald praised Phelps for dominating every element of the race. Tewksbury told anchor Ron McLean that Canada needs to have benchmarks for all aspects of the performance.

What makes up a gold medal swim in London 2012 and what are our improvement targets for each year? Nothing is too small to be measured (and Omega has shown that every millisecond can be timed) and nothing too intangible to be considered. If Canada wants to “Own the Podium”, they have to own themselves first and aim to own all the mental and physical aspect of the competition, like Phelps did whilst winning eight medals.

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.

Clutch Performance

According to a study of collegiate basketball, the two statistics most correlated with winning are field goal percentage and free throws attempted. During Monday’s N.C.A.A. Final, Kansas made 53% of their shots, Memphis shot nineteen foul shots, and the Jayhawks won 75-68 in overtime. The game was close enough that a number of plays could have altered the outcome. Why did Kansas win?

A student said that the result wasn’t fair, that the Tigers only lost because Derrick Rose performed below his normal standards. The reason that Rose shot poorly and went scoreless for so long was the Jayhawks’ defensive pressure: Bill Self alternated between man-to-man with Brandon Rush on Rose, a trapping 2-3, and a box-and-1 (Mario Chalmers guarded Chris Douglas-Roberts). Team defence held Memphis to a dozen points below their average. The 2008 Title Game will become a legendary game because strategy neutralized superior individual talent, like Rick Majerus’ triangle-and-2 versus Arizona ten years ago.

A clutch performer is one who performs consistently during close games. A player who shoots fifty percent would be considered a clutch performer if they made one out of two shots when the game was on the line.

Kansas should be considered clutch performers because they performed as they did all year, for the most part. Down the stretch, Memphis’ defensive stats, such as points per possession, deflections, and stops, plummeted. Did the Tigers choke?

A subjective measure would be to evaluate technique. Irrespective of whether the shot went in, did they use the same technique as they did in previous games and practices. At the line, Memphis seemed uneasy and pulled away from the hoop. Likewise, Kansas appeared soft while boxing out in the final minutes and getting additional stops complicated the comeback attempt.

When Memphis was up 60-51 with two minutes remaining, they likely held a 95% chance or winning (or more). Tigers’ foul shooting - a blight all year – finally caught up to them as they made only three of seven shots down the stretch. But, considering the entire game, Memphis performed at their season average. The term clutch performance is so nebulous because results are totally different depending on the length of the time period considered.

In short, there isn’t any answer because sample size is too small. Mario Chalmers sent the game to overtime with a very difficult three point attempt that he might only make once for every five tries. Memphis used questionable clock management but since they played few close games they hadn’t had the chance to practice that skill (but they should have). And they should have practiced foul shots.

There’s a reason coaches insist that players work on that shot. I record every free throw taken in practice in order to evaluate players. Dean Smith believes that foul shooting is the one true individual stat in practice.

Individual Tigers didn’t work on this skill enough during the year and coach John Calipari erred by not making free throw shooting a point of emphasis until it improved beyond sixty percent. Kansas matched Memphis’ athleticism so the game came down to individual skills. Bill Self told his team that they’ll be reminded of this game for the rest of their lives and Memphis will remember their choices and lack of practice at the line.

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?

Perspective

Pressure basketball has succeeded at almost every level (we all remember Rick Pitino’s failed transition to the Association in 1997) for a number of good reasons. Dialing up the intensity increases the sport’s difficulty and certain teams play much better at faster tempos, for starters.

Naturally, teams troubled by pressure can always practice. Talent is the single biggest factor for winning games (the reason Pitino’s Celtics floundered was because they did not win the 1997 lotttery) and passing, dribbling, cutting, and other skills can always be improved. Scoring also reverses the pressure by curtailing the opponent’s fast break; scoring is highly dependant on talent and mental training.

But the biggest improvements must concern mental training. First of all, teams must possess the capabilities to “slow it down”: see openings before they occur, understand what is happening, deconstruct the play into a collection of manageable actions, and take initiative to attack the opponent rather than watching the full-court pressure from afar. Intelligence is the great equalizer in all fields.

Fear of failure raises individual tension levels. The worst outcome from a single bad pass is a turnover and two (rarely three in transition) points. The worst outcome from a single loss is disappointment until the next opportunity to prove yourself. Basketball is not the be all and end but merely the beginning of it all.

People still take the sport too seriously. I actually agree with Bobby Petrino’s decision. His position with the Atlanta Falcons was horrible: the team’s best player was jailed for two years, players would argue with him on the sidelines, and the other thing worse than their current season was what the future held. For his own sake and making the most of himself, he made the right choice to move to Arkansas. Certainly, loyalty and commitment were compromised but nobody should put excessive stress on themselves until they become Randy Walker or Skip Prosser. Perhaps I am wearing rose-tinted glasses.

If a team plays for self-actualization, the final score is irrelevant. Players can still set new personal bests despite losing -- although this becomes frustrating if repeated over time. A basketball game is just two hours in length; control what you can and execute as well as possible. Players are in total control of their own excellence. The past is the past; don’t let mistakes compound into disaster.

Players’ health is also paramount, whether on the Association hardwood or the world’s pick-up courts, and it is never justified to give anyone the Mardy Collins at any level. Coaches are under excessive pressure and this adversely affects players, from seizing up at critical situation or creating a situation where flagrant fouls (among other inappropriate actions) are acceptable.

As Tim Duncan said about Isiah Thomas:

“It’s a bad situation when a coach puts himself in that position and goes after a player. It’s very uncalled for. I don’t know what his intentions were with that and we have bigger plans than trying to hurt somebody. I would hope that people would understand and respect that and obviously they don't.”
- Tim Duncan

The San Antonio Spurs play at a different level than the New York Knicks. The goal is to get to that level. As Irv Blitzer taught the world in Cool Runnings: “A gold medal is a wonderful thing. But if you’re not enough without one, you’ll never be enough with one.”

So relax, keep it real, and handle all basketball situations with peace of minds that comes from the self-satisfaction of knowing you did your best to be the best you are capable of becoming. Personal and team success comprise the big picture.

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.

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.

Performance under Presure, Part II

Congratulations to the Raptors and their Association playoff berth. After Andrea Bargnani’s appendicitis, Jorge Garbajosa’s broken leg, and an underwhelming performance versus Kevin Durant’s next team, the Boston Celtics, Toronto regrouped and won the next two games, clinching a playoff berth. Many players shouldered the load and the team executed well under the pressure caused by the recent adversity.

Michael Ruffin, on the other hand, did not execute well under pressure. On Friday, Washington was leading by three points with seconds remaining. After Ruffin intercepted a sixty-foot pass by Anthony Parker, he simply needed to dribble out the clock and wait to be fouled. However, Ruffin tossed the ball into the air, directly to Morris Peterson, who made the game-tying shot at the buzzer.

Clearly, neither Ruffin nor the Wizards visualized the situation ahead of time in order to mentally prepare themselves. Peterson had prepared himself, practicing half-court and other trick shots at the end of practice each day (skills that can help win both H.O.R.S.E. and real games). As a coach, Eddie Jordan could have also done a better job of envisaging his substitutions for the end-of-game situation and communicating instructions to the Washington players.

Nevertheless, it is always a pleasure to watch athletes execute well under pressure. A similar - but more light-hearted - example would be the performances of WWE superstars at last night’s Wrestlemania. For the most part, the wrestlers laid out well-conceived matches and performed to their athletic potential. Ideas like mental training, planning, and visualization apply to all sorts of performances.

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.