Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

    Hello once again to everyone, it is great to have time again to be back writing on PacersDigest after a full winter of coaching. With my season over, and after a couple of weeks off to recharge my batteries, I'll have much more time now as we head into the warmer weather months to contribute to the board.

    Today's topic is something I've been thinking about since Christmas actually, when I was given a book written by Malcolm Gladwell, the famous author, New Yorker (thanks for the correction rexnom) columnist, and friend of the "sports guy", Bill Simmons of espn.com. The book I was given was titled "The Tipping Point : How little things can make a big difference."

    The book covers alot of different scenarios in business and in life, trying to figure out what the difference between successful people/businesses and non successful people/businesses actually are. Without getting too deep into the weeds, that lead me to start thinking about analyzing teams and players in different ways, and to think about what traits that predict future success that I may not have thought enough about before.

    Fast forward that to yesterday, as I was off work and spent the day in downtown Indianapolis for the final four festivities. I attended each of the open practices for the 4 remaining teams: Butler, West Virginia, Michigan State, and Duke. Enjoyed my time in Lucas Oil Stadium quite a bit, and also loved how electric the atmosphere was around downtown yesterday. Concerts, great food and weather, basketball celebrities and coaches all over downtown, lots of fun to be had. But in spite of the basketball hoopla around the day, the most cogent and clever observation I heard about the games came from Dan Dakich on his radio show, which I had on my way to Indianapolis. In interviewing University of Evansville Coach Marty Simmons about Butler, Coach Simmons made the blanket statement everyone is making about Butler being a tremendous defensive team. Dakich then asked what should be obvious to ask but usually isn't: "Why?"

    Not enough people ask "Why", in my opinion.

    Extrapolate that to scouting. Not just scouting opponents, but scouting individual players and also scouting yourself. We all see problems, but do we see "why" those problems exist? We all can recognize talent when we see it, but why is that guy a great player and someone else just average?

    So today, I wanted to look at some less obvious traits in basketball players that make them successful. For the purposes of our discussion of the draft that is ongoing and will ramp up shortly, think about these different factors when analyzing players and teams. I'll have some initial comments about some individual players at both the college and pro levels that are topical as we go forward. Hopefully this can create some good discussions about several different points that I may end up making.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hidden factors of success:

    1. MAKING YOUR TEAMMATES BETTER, AND BEING A GREAT TEAMMATE.

    The old John Wooden saying is that great teammates are more important that having great players. At the NBA level, what you really need are both, preferably in the same guy!

    The comraderie, making everyone feel important and vital to team success, the ability to care about the group more than yourself, the ability to make the game easier to play for your teammates.....that is the foundation for building a long term successful team/program/franchise.

    Now, being a great teammate doesn't mean you have to be beloved by all. Part of being a great teammate means you hold each other accountable for their mistakes and actions, you demand great effort from each other and lead the way in that yourself. It means you fully accept criticism and coaching, and that you communicate in straightforward and honest ways with one another. It means accepting your role, playing within your abilities, and doing things that create a winning atmosphere.

    It does mean either being one of 2 things: Being a willing leader, or being a willing follower. I think we have some willing followers, not sure we have any willing leaders, and we probably have a one or 2 players still who isn't a willing anything.....most losing teams struggle with this area. We aren't nearly as bad as we used to be in this area though, which is to be commended.

    When you think about our current roster, and then ponder which potential draftees and free agents we may add to the mix, don't just look at their stats or the measurables, look at this attribute of success and see if it is present in the heart of who we are looking at.

    2. BEING ABLE/WILLING TO BE COACHED, AND BEING ABLE TO PROCESS INFORMATION.

    This is so important to know about a guy. Will a player take constructive criticism well, or will he rebel against it? Is a player going to pout, fight you, quit, or ruin your lockerroom? No matter how talented, no one is good enough to win with without improvement and being coached up. In professional basketball, you are either getting better or getting worse....no one is staying the same.

    Along with that, can a player take information, learn/process it, and use it to help himself improve? Can a player learn a new play and execute it right on a plane ride home, or with just a walkthrough to go over it? Can a player take detailed information from a scouting report and use it to his advantage or does all that work just overwhelm him? Can a player be told something in a huddle, grasp it, and be able to execute it when he walks out on the floor?

    In other words, it isn't just being willing to be coached, it is being smart enough to know what and how to improve and play the game at a high level.

    There are concerns about these with 2 players that are being discussed to be high draft choices in this upcoming draft. Both DeMarcus Cousins and John Wall have major concerns to me as a scout and a coach. In Cousins case, I wonder how he can handle hard coaching and a long season filled with the types of distractions the NBA offers. How will Cousins handle struggles, handle road trips, handle officials bad calls, handle things when they don't go his way? He already showed some immaturity on the floor this year, frequently clashing with his college coach John Calipari. I'm ok with a college kid being slightly immature, after all 19 yr old boys are supposed to be immature.....but his temperement, lack of mental toughness, and conditioning/body type would all have to give me pause when considering him, talent level aside.

    John Wall has other concerns. Forget the character stuff you'll hear, most of that I think is regrettable but for the purpose of this article I will defer on. I have concerns about Wall's game translating simply because I am not sure he processes information well when I have watched him. His world class athleticism makes up for it most of the time at this level, but it won't in the NBA. Can he follow a game plan? Can he execute complex set plays and a deep NBA playbook or will he constantly break plays? If he isn't the best athlete on the floor, can he still find a way to play well? Can you give him a scouting report and rely on him to follow it defensively?

    His shot is not very good from the perimeter at this point. So far in his career his speed and talent have easily overcome that weakness. Every draft expert and fan I know immediately just assumes that because others have done so, that his shot will improve with enough time and hard work. But is that true? Maybe his jump shot is so poor because he CAN'T, or WON'T improve it. Maybe he can't take new information from a coach working with him, or even worse maybe he won't accept the fact that someone else is trying to "change" him.

    These are legitimate concerns to me. Ultimately a team has to decide if they are fixable issues or not, otherwise these guys are players destined to be on talented teams that always seem not to accomplish anything....because you can't win long term with players with those personality traits, no matter how talented.

    3. THE DEFENSIVE ABILITY TO AVOID BEING SCREENED.

    This is on my mind because of the teams in the college final four, particularly Butler.

    Remember the above comment about Dan Dakich asking "why" Butler was a great defensive team?

    On paper they shouldn't be...they are smaller than most quality teams, not overly quick, and don't do anything revolutionary from a scheme standpoint....so why are they so hard to score on?

    The answer is because Butler has the fundamentals of team defensive concepts down cold, particularly about being in the proper stance and positioning on the opposite side of the floor. Butler plays great team defense, because you can't run set plays successfully against them....they take away your main plan of attack with basic fundamentals defensively.

    Because 99% of the time Butler is in the prime defensive placement of "up the line on the line", they see screens coming better than any team does and therefore are able to get through them. They blow up your sets, and make you play improvised basketball against the shot clock, something many teams cannot do. Butler doesn't "hug" their men ever, they always see the basketball and their man simultaneously, and being "on the line up the line" they are always able to jump to the ball when it is passed and be in passing lanes frequently.

    Some experts consider their interior defense to be a weakness. They are wrong. Matt Howard and Gordon Heyward front the post better than almost everyone in college basketball, and make it hard for their men to get position and the ball. Howard in particular has perhaps the best footwork and balance of any big man I have watched in college in a long time. Again, being in the proper placement helps them be able to help "over" instead of helping "up", which is something our own Pacer bigs struggle mightily with. In the rare cases that Butler is beaten off the dribble, they do very well using help to stop the basketball drive and then still be in position to contest a shot.

    Butler's fundamentals defensively are beautiful to watch. I love to watch their defenders chase around screens and avoid them altogether, and watch the frustrations teams have trying to run their stuff and score. Obviously this goes back to the 2nd point right above this one as well, as Butler's kids process information well, know each team they play very well from their tendencies on both ends and are able to use that information to win. They are willing to put the work in to learn those things and to be coached up to do them....all keys to success.

    You can win big with guys like Howard and Heyward, which should be a good lesson to the local college program located 6 miles east of where I am sitting right now in western Monroe County.

    4. HAND EYE COORDINATION, BALANCE, AND QUICK JUMPERS.

    So much is made on draft boards and broadcasts about wingspan, length, size, and strength. All important, but not nearly as much so as these 3 attributes.

    The ability to move your hands quickly when you see something developing, such as a pass coming to you in a short area or an opportunity to get a steal or deflection.

    The ability to not get knocked off balance, the skill of being able to go full speed and then stop and start again suddenly, and the ability to get off the ground not higher, but quicker than your opponent are all such key things to study when you analyze for the draft.

    On the last point, just forget watching someone's vertical leap. Instead watch and try to find the guy who is in the air FIRST consistently when you watch a game. In a crowd, who is the guy who makes the initial leap into the air....a certain "quick twitch" to his athleticism is what you want, not some guy who jumps over the backboard.

    Also try and watch prospects, particularly bigs, who leap TWICE for a rebound, and who rebounds OUTSIDE OF HIS AREA. In other words, try and watch where a guy is positioned when the shot is taken, and see how many rebounds he gets outside of his natural habitat, rebounds that he shouldn't be able to get but he does because of great instincts, aggressiveness, or the ability to have quick twitch.

    5. THE ABILITY TO CONCENTRATE

    This is so crucial to success as a team and basketball individual.

    Is this a guy who focuses for an entire game? Is this a guy who's mind drifts and effort ebbs and flows not because he is a bad guy, but just because he is mentally too weak to concentrate for a long enough time? Does he learn what he should in practice drills and situations? Does he listen when being told something? Can he start a job/workout/game and finish it?

    Does he let the crowd bother him? Does he lose focus in the huddle? Does he let his family or other distractions get in his way? Does his mind wander in meetings? Can he block out things in his personal life and get the job done?

    I think these are questions we need to think about with regard to all potential draftees for sure, but also with guys on our current roster. I'm not sure even our best players CONCENTRATE well enough to win with them. Brandon Rush I think is a key factor to whether we will ever be good enough to contend or not in the future, but he I think struggles with this very badly from game to game, quarter to quarter, and even possession to possession. I also think this is a major weakness of Granger, and it is holding him back from being as good as his talent level says he could be despite the fact that he is already a pretty damn good player.

    6. PLAYING WITH INTELLIGENCE CREATES SUCCESSFUL SITUATIONS

    In other words, games can often be won not by making more great plays, but by making fewer dumb mistakes.

    Our Pacers do lack a "creator" of successful situations. Not just on offense either....but on defense as well. We need a player offensively who can create a good scoring chance going to the rim in tough situations, we need a player who can create a good scoring opportunity by setting a great screen to get a shooter a great shot, instead of players who set mediocre ones that lead to contested tough shots. We need a player who plays great defense in the post, creating a situation where no one has to come double team. We need a player who fights through multiple screens, creating a situation where a team has to run different plays they aren't used to to win. We need a guy who is a physical force inside, creating an atnosphere where no one wants to drive the lane. We need a guard who looks to involve his teammates, "creating" a winning pace and style of play and atmosphere.

    Again, let's go back to Butler for a minute. Last week on a crucial play, Kansas State ran a shooter off a staggered double screen near the low block, popping him out to the right wing. This is a common NBA tactic, and a play familiar to us as Pacers fans. The KState guard came free momentarily for a chance to make a crucial 3 point attempt.

    But Butler's bigs created a situation where that wouldn't hurt them. Seeing him come free, Matt Howard made a great play, sprinting from the low block area where his man was screening all the way to the right wing to cover up the KState shooter. Lacking patience, the KState player at the wing area caught the ball, saw he couldn't shoot it and fired it back to the top of the key. Then Howard and Mack made another great play by being able to SWITCH BACK to their respective men to avoid any mismatches inside.

    No way did Butler's coaching staff teach or plan that. That was just high level basketball IQ by Butler's kids. That smart play created a situation to where Kansas State was forced into a busted play situation with the shot clock running down, and they couldnt engineer a shot to score. Butler went on to win obviously.

    Guys who make smart plays that create winning situations, no matter if they are in the box score or not, those are the guys you need.

    7. RELENTLESSNESS AND MENTAL TOUGHNESS

    Guys who play hard constantly, guys who show no mercy, guys who play with a hunger and intelligence and toughness to just never ever stop. Guys who are consistent, willing to give no ground. Guys who play great in the first quarter, and play great in the 4th. Guys who never quit on a play, guys who play harder and tougher in hostile crowds or when times are tough. If a prospect puts up huge numbers, but does it all in the first half of games or does it all at home, that is a problem.

    How does a player handle adversity? How does he react when teams bait him, or he gets a bad call against him, or if his team struggles?

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    So, as we go forward with the few remaining games we have left this season, then look onward with anticipation to the draft, let's look at our current roster and with the draft prospects in a different light. Particularly when it comes to draft prospects I'll be writing about in coming weeks, I wanted to give you all some things to chew on when you watch teams play this weekend and beyond.

    I'd be interested in some other hidden things about players you guys see as important as well. I have a few more that I am not mentioning in this piece, just to hopefully help generate some good discussion. I know I have rambled some in this typically for me long post, and I appreciate all of you who have taken the time to read it.

    Lastly, once again it is good to be back on the board, and having the free time to be able to put some thoughts together and post them here. I've read this site almost every day all winter, and I've missed the sharing if ideas and opinions with all of you. It has been a dark season for our Pacers I know, but I still believe it is always the very darkest right before the dawn.

    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 04-04-2010, 01:04 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

    When looking at a draft prospect, the first thing I ask is "What can this guy do at a plus level in the NBA?"

    He might be a very good all around player at the college level, but if he doesn't have one skill that will obviously carry over to the NBA at a plus level, then I start looking for other guys who have that.

    As for what a guy like John Wall is able or unable to comprehend in a playbook, we don't know. We just know he has great skills, athleticism and instincts. I know for most of the year, he looked like a guy who was only in college because (by rule) he had to be there. IMO, he's the best talent and the safe pick at #1.

    A thing to remember about Butler in a lot of these college defenses: A lot of these types of college defense that try to keep the ball out of the PG or main playmaker don't translate to the NBA for a simple reason. In the NBA, there are too many good ballhandlers on the floor at the same time for this to work and that's why you don't see it being implemented.

    A lot of what Butler does defensively can be major disruptions to college offenses because most college offenses are extremely primitive (compared to the pros) and have inferior athletes and ballhandlers. If you are able to take out one or two elements of their main attack, you can severely disrupt them.
    Last edited by d_c; 04-03-2010, 04:21 PM.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

      Some of those remind me of Hansbrough..

      1. Dont know yet if he can make his teammates better but I think its possible for teammates to feed off of his intensity and energy. I guess thats " better " but probably will not make much of a difference in the W / L column at the end.

      2. It seems that he is coachable.. Whether or not he can apply it at the highest level and use what he learns during games. Can he break the habbit of being right hand dominant on shots? Example : We have all seen him do left handed hook shots in practice but I dont recall him using it in a game.

      His spin move is another example of where using a left hand would be more beneficial.. In the post - spins to his right - using right hand to shoot which means the ball is closer than its should be to the defender allowing for contested shots and blocks. Using a left hand in the situation makes it much easier to get a clean shot off.

      3. He is a big man so he probably cannot avoid screens other than trying to push through them.

      4. He is probably average in these areas. Not a real quick jumper , has pretty good hand / eye coordination from what I have seen and average balance I suppose ( he aint a ballerina ).

      5. Seems like he maintains concentration and pays attention to what is going on even when on the bench.

      6. This one remains to be seen.. I do however remember a play early in the season where he set a screen for Granger and then handed the ball to him while maintaining the screen allowing Granger a wide open look at a 3 ( screened 2 people if I remember correctly ).

      7. Seems like this one is what he is known for.. Very relentless on offense , defense and even when making a bad play it doesnt seem to bother him.

      There was an instance where Gerald Wallace or maybe it was Stephen Jackson got into him a little bit and he walked away.

      So I think Hansbrough has a lot of what is mentioned here and to me its just whether or not he can improve on what he has. I think he can improve his jumper , range and shot selection but the other stuff is hard to tell right now.
      Last edited by Psycho T; 04-03-2010, 05:38 PM.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

        Is there anyway we could hire the coach of Butler to be our Coach on Defense?
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

          Re Wall with respect to T-Bird's point #2, I noticed that he constantly
          let the fairly, poor shooting, left-handed PG from W.V. 'beat him going
          to his left'. I have to assume that Calipari and crew's gameplan was
          to give the kid room and to take away his left hand.

          Wether Wall couldn't comprehend that (hard to believe) or just ignored
          it is an open question. But either way, it's an issue.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success



            Removed the quote of tbird's entire article. If you only have a general response to such a large post, it's generally considered good forum etiquette to not take up so much extra space by quoting it all.



            This is actually quite well known in the sports world. In baseball it's called Money Ball and it involves putting a value on ALL of the attributes of ballplayers, with extra value added for the intangibles that aren't normally valued like home runs, rbi's, etc
            Getting to balls that the "average" player wouldn't, being an aggressive baserunner, outfield assists, etc
            ALL the biggest teams in baseball use the system, "something metrics" now, Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, etc

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

              p.s. Gladwell writes for the New Yorker, not the Times

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                It seems that T-Bird always has some awesome insight that he gleaned from a book. I know on more than one occasion I've read a book he mentioned and I will read this one as well. Could T-Bird's bookclub be far behind?

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                  Many thanks Tbird. I lost your email you sent me after last summer's forum party due to the server crash. I still appreciate you sending it and your thoughts. How about that Hibbert kid?

                  I really think that Bird understands there is more to the game than athleticism. I believe Bird to see many of these attributes in players. That is why I have supported him so fervently in his GM duties. Morway and Brid have had very little ability to "make a splash" because of financial inflexibility. I am excited for our upcoming draft to see the direction we go. I have a feeling we will be targeting players with many of the basketball IQ type intangibles. I think you look at Hibbert and Rush, and their one of their biggest attributes is their understanding of the game. Understanding the flow of the game. You can say the same about Hansborough. I think Hansborough is one of those players with "athleticism", but lacks the balance and quickness to utilize that athleticism. His measurable athleticism from combiine style workouts was prevalent, but he is not going to jump stop on a dime to pull up for a jumper over a taller player IMO. The defender can more easily catch up defensively to contend a Hansborough shot for this reason. He will need to adapt to improve that aspect of his game.

                  I think these intangibles is why we sent Bayless to Portland for Jack McRoberts and Rush. Jack has the toughness intangible. He is coachable and many times acts as an on-court coach. He is a great teammate. There are many reasons Jack is better than he otherwise should be. McRoberts was more of a developmental player at the time, but you knew he possessed that quick athleticism and seemed coachable. His basketball IQ seemed uncertain because he only played a shot time under Coach K. Rush is a very smart adaptive player. I agree that he may lack concentration or possibly be a bit inconsistent emotionally. I think this comes with a bit more maturity, but he may always be like this. One common thing is that all of these guys seem like great teammates.

                  I think our team is going to be great because of these attributes in many of our core players. I think we need more talent, but I think we will be ready for a stabilizing veteran in two or three years that can really help bring our young guys to the next level.
                  Last edited by pacergod2; 04-05-2010, 12:22 PM.
                  "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                    Also, T-bird. Does Rush remind you of a young Joe Dumars? Think about Joe in his second year in the league. He could score but often deferred.

                    Joe Dumars on www.basketball-reference.com.

                    His PPG are similar. His solid defense was eerily similar. His quieter personality. His willingness to adapt to that particular game. I do notice that BRush takes more threes at this point in his career, which I wish he was more willing to go into the paint, but he could develop that with a new coaching philosophy too IMO. Dumars was an above average passer and good rebounder. Rush is an above average rebounder and a good passer, but neither player really wowed you in the box score with those strenghts.

                    Rush is a bit bigger than Dumars and I would say Dumars was a touch quicker. Both played excellent on-ball defense. Joe worked fiercely on his defense early in his career and really developed his defense, which paved the way for his offense to improve at the NBA level. I can only hope Rush has a similar career.

                    Dumars in 2nd year in 30.4 Mpg - 11.4 Pts, 2.1 Rbs, 4.5 Asts, 1.1 Stls - 0.493 FG%, 0.409 3P%, 0.748 FT%
                    Rush in 2nd year in 30.2 Mpg - 9.5 Pts, 4.2 Rbs, 1.4 Asts, 0.7 Stls - 0.418 FG%, 0.414 3P%, .651 FT%

                    The biggest concerns I have are his willingness to score by getting in the lane and taking advantage of his mid-range game like Dumars did. Rush has a lot to work on with his scoring, but I think a different system and more talent around him would help quite a bit. I think if Rush was able to get to the FT line more as part of his arsenal instead of settling for threes like our entire team does, he would become a much more versatile and effective scorer. Dumars had a gorgeous stroke, and I think Brandon has good mechanics on his stroke, but lacks the consistency that Dumars developed. Hopefully Rush gets there.
                    Last edited by pacergod2; 04-05-2010, 12:25 PM.
                    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                      PS - How'd your season go?
                      "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                        Very interesting post.

                        Always thought that the moment Manu killed that bat early in the season was under-appreciated by basketball analysts and writers. He showed composure, the willingness to take responsibility and solve problematic situations, self-confidence and exquisite eye-hand coordination - some of the most important traits that make him such a great basketball player (Manu has always lead the Spurs and the Argie NT in hand-eye coordination tests).

                        But we don't get to see draftees in those situations, so evaluating a certain kind of intangibles pre-draft is way more difficult than assessing if a player sets good screens, low and wide or if his dribble is easy to be disrupted in traffic or even if he panics when managing a game where the shots aren't falling or stays calm and composed directing the team. At least from the place of a fan. I remember how 2 years ago WV forward Joe Alexander was the sensation of the tournament. One of the strongest selling points about him was his strong work ethic - I recall reading stories about him sleeping in the gym and how well he responded to Huggins and all that stuff. Two years later he's probably living his last weeks in the league for awhile and during his stay he showed poor work ethic and unwillingness to be coached - he even admitted publicly that for his entire rookie season he didn't care for what his coaches were telling him; contempt and disrespect for the team rules (he had an affair with a dance team member and was an enthusiast party-goer); and a tendency to milk small injuries. That's an underrated skill that is rarely discussed, btw: staying healthy and having the ability to handle some pain and play through injuries. There's the type of injury that is a product of bad luck but many others are a result of carelessness behaviour. Alexander is also a good example of what the OP writes about athleticism: I was always amazed by how slow and uncoordinated he was sliding his feet laterally and badly impressed by his inability to change directions when driving to the rim (high center of gravity, very long steps). Yet, due to his ability to dunk from the free-throw line + explosiveness on his first step he was sold as being overly athletic. So, pretty much everything we were supposed to know about Alexander was wrong.

                        I'd love to know who are the guys who do their stretching correctly and take care of their nutrition to avoid muscular injuries, who are the guys who can really communicate with their teammates when defending (Popovich once fired a guy he had just signed because he'd talk when playing but whatever he was saying was completely incomprehensible; as he traded Udrih due to him being weakminded that he'd lost his confidence after any kind of criticism from the coaching staff/benching), who are the guys who can self-motivate and those who are only in shape because they have a college coach in their hear every day, etc but I tend to be sceptical about what I read when it comes to intangibles. I agree this kind of less obvious attributes are extremely important to determine the outcome of a players career though and that a player like Cousins has indeed showed some worrying signs, even for someone who only watched him in a pair of occasions like myself. Wall... he's more Derrick Rose than Deron Williams right now, he still needs to learn his craft, how to manage a game, throw different stuff at the defence, set up his teammates, etc., but his raw abilities are too promising to pass on. No idea of his learning ability; following him the entire season could give some clues but I only start watching college basketball in June.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                          How is the ability to use your off hand effectively not #1 on any list? Has anybody seen David West, Brandon Roy or Carlos Boozer over the last 4 years?

                          Ever notice how some NBA players are able to get to the basket anytime they want despite not being nearly as athletic as other players that can't?

                          Here's a hint: when you don't know which direction your man is going to dribble, it makes him a little harder to stay in front of.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 04-05-2010, 08:10 PM.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                            I think Billups fits the mold.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird analysis: Little discussed hidden attributes for players that lead to success

                              Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                              (...)
                              4. HAND EYE COORDINATION, BALANCE, AND QUICK JUMPERS.

                              So much is made on draft boards and broadcasts about wingspan, length, size, and strength. All important, but not nearly as much so as these 3 attributes.
                              I came across a reference to a paper about the NFL draft combine (via
                              the frontal cortex) and I thought about this thread when skimming through it.


                              http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Ab...ance_in.1.aspx

                              The NFL Combine: Does It Predict Performance in the National Football League?
                              Kuzmits, Frank E; Adams, Arthur J
                              Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

                              From the abstract:

                              Combine measures examined in this study include 10-, 20-, and 40-yard dashes, bench press, vertical jump, broad jump, 20- and 60-yard shuttles, three-cone drill, and the Wonderlic Personnel Test. Performance criteria include 10 variables: draft order; 3 years each of salary received and games played; and position-specific data. Using correlation analysis, we find no consistent statistical relationship between combine tests and professional football performance, with the notable exception of sprint tests for running backs. From a practical standpoint, the results of the study should encourage NFL team personnel to reevaluate the usefulness of the combine's physical tests and exercises as predictors of player performance. This study should encourage team personnel to consider the weighting and importance of various combine measures and the potential benefits of overhauling the combine process, with the goal of creating a more valid system for predicting player success.
                              Basically the NFL draft combine, including the interviews and the psychological tests, is a big waste of time and resources. I'm fairly sure the same could be said about the NBA combine.
                              Last edited by cordobes; 04-11-2010, 06:05 PM.

                              Comment

                              Previous template Next
                              Working...
                              X