jump to navigation

Brandon Jennings’ Italian Education December 8, 2008

Posted by hoopmasters in 1.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Brandon Jennings’ Italian Education

Posted by Brian McCormick on December 6, 2008

In September, I wrote about Brandon Jennings, the Los Angeles-area point guard playing professionally in Italy rather than attending college for a year before entering the NBA Draft. Almost weekly, someone on SoCal Hoops, the gossip message board of record for Southern California basketball, criticizes Jennings and his decision to go to Europe. This week’s criticism reads:

Once again, let it be known that B. Jennings is not the picture poster child…He is only averaging 3-4 points a game in Italy and the NBA scouts have their eyes on other athletes who are right here in college playing great at home. Not a smart move for BJ to think that he could make it to the NBA without a college career first.

The poster wrote some other things, but I’ll focus on basketball. He also provided a link to a Chad Ford article talking about next year’s draft class. Jennings is listed under the “Bad” section:

Jennings isn’t exactly lighting it up in Europe. He’s averaging 4.9 ppg and 3 apg with 28 percent shooting in 17.3 mpg in his first eight games for Lottomatica Roma. It’s too early to be harsh. When you factor in all the difficulties he faces (new environment, new system, intense scrutiny), he has held up fairly well. But he hasn’t helped his stock much by making the move. While plenty of his college counterparts are dominating, we’re still stuck talking about potential with Jennings.

Ford does not criticize Jennings, but says that his performance has not helped his draft stock. Of course, that contradicts an ESPN the Mag article this week written by Chris Broussard:

“Playing in Europe with grown men who are better than him is going to help him mature as a player,” says an NBA GM who is being kept apprised about Jennings by overseas scouts. “And I can tell you this already: He’s a definite lottery pick in ‘09.”

In Broussard’s article, he writes about Jennings’ experience playing in Europe, which is far different than a college freshman’s experience. Is it better? Maybe (I spent the year after I graduated from high school as an exchange student playing basketball in Sweden, so I have a personal bias). Basketball-wise, he will be better prepared for the NBA. Ford says that Jennings is still “potential.” But, what has anyone really learned about any of the freshman in college basketball this year thus far? Ford mentions Stephon Curry and Blake Griffin; but anyone who was unsure about Curry after last season should not be a scout or general manager anyway. Honestly, how did the son of an NBA player with a picture perfect jump shot and reasonable athleticism end up at a mid-major anyway (I always wonder the same about Coby Karl walking-on at Boise State; what are these coaches watching? I saw Karl play when he was in 10th grade and thought he was a DI player, and he wasn’t even 6′5 yet). How many players have really gone head to head with another top NBA prospect?

Jennings plays against professionals every day. His numbers are low because of the European style of play and his coach’s philosophy; the same reason why Josh Childress’ numbers are low in Greece even though he is an established NBA player:

Holding to a philosophy that’s unheard of in America but not uncommon in Europe, Repesa doesn’t believe in a set starting five. He’ll switch starters by the game; he’ll go 10 deep, playing almost everyone at least 15 minutes and hardly anyone over 25. Admittedly fond of Jennings, Repesa wants to bring No.11 along slowly to manage expectations and keep him from burning out over a season that’s more grueling than anything he’s ever faced.

His coach, the former Croatian National team Head Coach who coached in Beijing this summer, says:

“If he’ll be patient, work hard and listen,” Repesa says, “he’ll be a great player. No question.”

This is a coach who helped Toni Kukoc, Mehmet Okur and Carlos Delfino craft their games. This is a coach who does not need to recruit another high school All-American next year. Instead, he has no problem kicking his young star out of practice.

As the team ran through its half-court offense, Jennings made a UCLA cut to the hoop after throwing an entry pass to the wing. He tossed the ball to a teammate and ran halfheartedly down the side of the lane. “That’s not aggressive,” the imposing Repesa, who stands 6′7″, shouted in his thick Croatian accent, raising one arm above his head. “Be aggressive!” Jennings, visibly miffed at being called out, reset the offense with another entry pass. This time he hurled it with a dose of disgust at his teammate’s knees. Before he was halfway through his cut—which was faster but clearly not full-speed—Mt. Repesa erupted. “Get out! Get out! Out of practice!” he screamed, pointing toward the door. Stunned, Jennings left and sat on the steps outside the facility while the team worked out for another 45 minutes.

Would a college coach kick out a player? Maybe. Some probably would not accept a lazy cut and teach his player a lesson. Others wouldn’t because they do not want that type of reputation because they need to recruit another star next year. As jennings said after the experience:

“When you’re The Man in high school, you can do whatever you want,” Jennings says despondently. “This is something new for me, especially playing for a coach who’s real controlling and doesn’t take no stuff.”

While he may not have the stats of some college players, he’s playing against professional players in a far demanding situation. Sure, a player at North Carolina or Duke has some pressure becuse the alumni expect National Championships. But, Roy Williams and Coach K have secure jobs. A coach in Europe has virtually no security. He has to win. Fans demand wins. Club presidents demand wins. Sponsors demand wins. While the Knicks haggle with Stephon Marbury over contracts, European teams cut players with no buyouts. If you aren’t performing, good bye. I felt the pressure in a much less competitive league, and I tried to cut a player after two games. It’s a whole different experience than a college program.

Basketball-wise, colleges have 20 hours for film and practice. A professional team has unlimited time.

Here mornings are spent lifting weights, sprinting on soccer fields or running through the rocky terrain of nearby woods. Afternoons are spent resting on the minibeds in the minirooms of the minihotel. Evenings? Time to run through drill after drill and get yelled at—again.

Jennings is already in a professional environment and will play 60 games against professional competition. His teammate is Allen Ray, the former Villanova star and Boston Celtic. It’s a much different environment than college. It’s not for every 19-year-old kid, but there is a reason why NBA teams like drafting players from Europe: they are already professionals. They understand how to practice, how to take care of their bodies, and more.

Jennings will not be just “potential” in June when the NBA Draft occurs. He will be seasoned. He will have experience in a professional environment.

“Whoever needs a point guard next year, I’ll be ready,” says Jennings, whose contract has small buyout clauses after each season. “This is great preparation, because it’s a big learning experience over here.”

He may not have stats to match Stephon Curry or Blake Griffin, but NBA teams will know that he can handle coaching and the professional environment. His skills will be tested against players playing in the EuroLeague, which is much more competitive than even the best college league.

“If he had gone to college, they would’ve babied him,” says one NBA scout. “This will make him mentally tougher. And after playing for this coach, he’ll know how to play the game.”

Mike Leach and Unconventional Wisdom November 15, 2008

Posted by hoopmasters in learning, TheCrossovermovement.
Tags: , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Mike Leach and Unconventional Wisdom

Posted by Brian McCormick on November 15, 2008

Texas Tech football coach Mike Leach is probably my favorite coach in any sport. Besides being unconventional, he’s hilarious. His office is decorated like a pirate ship. That’s awesome.

Michael Lewis’ Moneyball is one of my favorite sports books. I’ve written articles based on it and I think I wrote a graduate school paper based on it.

Reading an old N.Y. Times article written by Lewis about Leach, then, is pure fun.

Leach changes the way you look at football.

Leach remains on the outside; like all innovators in sports, he finds himself in an uncertain social position. He has committed a faux pas: he has suggested by his methods that there is more going on out there on the (unlevel) field of play than his competitors realize, which reflects badly on them. He steals some glory from the guy who is born with advantages and uses them to become a champion.

I said the same thing about the UCLA SpecialOlympics program when I was in college. We did more as volunteer college students than the paid staff in our area, so they tried to stop us because we reflected poorly on them. We forced them to work harder.

People, and coaches included, like the status quo. People defend the current basketball system at length because they profit from it. If the system changes, or if players developed differently succeeded, they would have to change to stay relevant, and change is hard. It’s much easier to latch onto a mediocre system with which you are familiar, even if you think it is flawed, than to change it.

Leach’s agent says:

“He makes them nervous,” O’Hagan says. “They don’t like coaching against him; they’d rather coach against another version of themselves. It’s not that they don’t like him. But privately they haven’t accepted him. You know how you can tell? Because when you’re talking to them Monday morning, and you say, Did you see the play Leach ran on third and 26, they dismiss it immediately. Dismissive is the word. They dismiss him out of hand. And you know why? Because he’s not doing things because that’s the way they’ve always been done. It’s like he’s been given this chessboard, and all the pieces but none of the rules, and he’s trying to figure out where all the chess pieces should go. From scratch!”

I stopped working basketball camps because I had the same reactions. Coaches dismissed my questions or points as soon as I made them because they were different. Before I published my book, people on the yahoo coaches’ board thought I was a lunatic and automatically disagreed with every point that I made.

I question things. I don’t think crossing your feet on defense is wrong and I don’t think defenders should look at a player’s stomach. This is just crazy talk to most coaches. I think static stretching and running miles are useless for basketball, which goes against the old school approach. I don’t think you need height to win. I hate the shell drill. Heck, I hate 90% of the drills that you see at a normal practice. Zig-zag drills are a waste of time – I have a whole set of drills that I call “time wasters” that include such standards as the three-man weave. So, I’m crazy: Crazy like a pirate…

I just do not understand doing things because that’s the way they have always been done. I don’t believe a drill is good because Billy Donovan does it. I don’t think it matters what offense you run. I think the coaches that get on message forums and try to copy a play, drill or system exactly as someone else does it are unimaginative and probably not very good coaches. Just because Vance Walberg has his guard cut one way when this happens does not mean that you can’t tweak it to fit your personnel – the whole offense will not fall apart if you adjust to the players on your team. It’s not an all or nothing proposition.

I think we spend far too much time worrying about the incidentals of coaching – what play should I run? what’s a good press break for a 2-2-1? is a 2-3 better than a 3-2? – rather than the important aspects of coaching – communication skills, motivation, emotional intelligence, motor skill learning.

I don’t understand why so many people fear change. Without change, there is no growth. Without growth, life stagnates, and when it stagnates, it dies.