Using Nick Young to criticize (again) the previous regimes' player development shortcomings
by Mike Prada on Jun 18, 2009 10:03 PM EDT
in Player Analysis
66 comments
We've already posted a link to Michael Lee's report of Nick Young's workout with Sam Cassell and Flip Saunders, but even though I read it pretty thoroughly the first time, this line jumped out at me when I went back to read it again just now.
In addition to taking defensive tips from Saunders, Young has also been working on getting shots off the ball. Young said Saunders has been putting him through some of the same shooting-off-screen drills that Richard Hamilton used in Detroit.
"Something I'm not used to, but it's working for me," Young said.
Wait a minute. If I'm reading this correctly, Nick Young, going into his third year in the NBA, hoping to make it as a shooting guard next to one of the league's most ball-dominant lead guards, hasn't actually practiced catching and shooting off screens much in his entire basketball career? How exactly did the team expect him to fit in with Gilbert Arenas anyway? What, was he going to learn the skill by osmosis?
Now, a lot of this isn't the team's fault. They aren't responsible for Nick Young's high-school or college coaching, which probably didn't emphasize the fundamentals enough. But it's now been two years since Nick was drafted. You'd think that, if Gilbert was in their long-term plans, the Wizards would find a guard who demonstrated some skill in playing off the ball and spend their draft pick on him rather than a misfit like Young seemed to be. Even if Young was the obvious pick (which he was at the time, despite being a bit of a misfit), you would think the coaching staff would be drilling him constantly in playing off the ball.
See, when I and others whine about the poor player development skills of the previous regime, this is what we're talking about. It's true, Nick Young needs to put in work to become better, but one doesn't simply improve the skills they need to learn exclusively through their own commitment. It takes a dedicated coaching staff that is willing to actually put themselves out there to help rather than just expecting the player to figure it out studying his peers. To hear Nick Young say that he isn't used to drills that improve his catch-and-shoot game makes me think that either the Wizards didn't think he needed to work on those skills (which is foolish) or thought he did, but didn't take enough time to actually work with him on them (which is negligent).
The days when NBA coaching staffs would simply coach, expecting players to know all the fundamentals already, went by the wayside as soon as the high school AAU-type culture became prominent. You have to be able to teach prospects basic fundamental skills in this day and age. The best teams understand that. It sounds like the Wizards finally do get that now. I just wish they could have gotten it sooner.
0 recs |
66 comments
Email
Print
Comments
How exactly did the team expect him to fit in with Gilbert Arenas anyway?
They didn’t. Nick was drafted to come off the bench and compliment Antonio Daniels, not start and compliment Arenas.
by Jheiser3 on Jun 18, 2009 10:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So they set his ceiling as a bench player?
Even so, AD controls the ball a lot and doesn’t really spot up well.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 18, 2009 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Besides
in a perfect world (one in which Arenas actually plays), Arenas would probably play close to 40 minutes. I’d imagine they’d expect NY to be on the floor for at least some of that.
Ignoring the fact that that is largely a question of player development, it’s good to see Saunders getting his assistants involved in stuff like this. Aside from drawing up awful, awful end-of-game plays, what exactly did Eddie Jordan’s assistants, you know, do?
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 3:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And yes
I know that most, of not all, of them were Abe Pollin’s assistants more than they were Jordan’s.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 3:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Taught everyone on the team how to shoot free throws
That’s about it, at least as far as the beneficial stuff.
by pantslessyoda1 on Jun 19, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's .. interesting news.
Better late than never, right? If the Wizards can nurture Nick Young correctly, he could be a vital piece.
I'm the other guy at Third Quarter Collapse, with a Twitter account.
"Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgement." - Michael Corleone
by erivera7 on Jun 19, 2009 12:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
One thing is for sure though
Young frequently practices that step-back, between-the-legs dribble move. Too bad he can’t routinely knock down open perimeter jumpers.
by Matt K. on Jun 19, 2009 6:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
He actually seems good with his feet set
Part of what’s so frustrating about how rarely he would come off screens is that he’s actually got the sweetest stroke on the team. I don’t have any stats to back me up, but he’s always seemed great when he’s got his feet set, and he’s the only guy on the team who I didn’t mind seeing take a fifteen foot pull up on the break.
by pantslessyoda1 on Jun 19, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps I was too quick to doubt Saunders
we’ll see if Young reverts to old habits when the season starts. I think he should settle into his 6th man role a la Ben Gordon
twitter.com/rashad20
by rashad20 on Jun 19, 2009 9:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
my thoughts
EXACTLY
I always liked Eddie Jordan as a person. Very cordial, very forthcoming, even kinda funny sometimes. But I hated his coaching style. I never liked the Princeton (milk the shot clock) offense, and I hated his substitution patterns. But, most of all, I hated how he dealt with the youngsters. I got so sick of seeing Deshawn Stevenson jack up ridiculous shots time after time, and remain on the floor. Then NY comes in, misses two shot, and he’s yanked. Same with Blache. He needed toughness, which he couldn’t get from the bench behind. I really hope Saunders rides these guys in training camp, then gives them real PT during the season.
by CJHutch on Jun 19, 2009 10:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
and I think our memories
are just a bit short. Eddie and his coaches did not develop Blatche and Young in the way some of us might like, but he also took us to the playoffs four years in a row, with great players on his bench such as Peter John Ramos, Samaki Walker, Calvin Booth, Laron Profit, Michael Ruffin, and the immortal Awvee Storey.
If Blatche couldn’t earn time off the bench playing behind that great collection of talent, one has to consider the effort and work being put in by the younger players.
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I respect what Eddie Jordan was able to do here in Washington
He helped change the attitude and culture surrounding this team. He got the Wizards to the Playoffs…. and his teams played an exciting brand of Basketball.
But he also had flaws. He was a terrible x’s and o’x Coach. The Wizards suffered when they needed an in-bounds play or an end-of-the-game play. His rotations made absolutely no sense. His treatment and development of young talent left much to be desired. And perhaps the worst of all, he could not seem to get the team to play any semblance of organized defense. His “protect the paint at all costs, and let the 3-point shooters run rampant” style defense was perhaps his worse fault.
His reliance on “veterans” was, in my opinion, what finally did him in. When all the “veterans” started getting hurt, he had to rely on the younger players; except they weren’t ready – because he didn’t prepare them.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Jun 19, 2009 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't call him a "terrible" play-caller
His rotations and over-reliance on veterans like Michael Ruffin, sure, that’s worth criticizing. But I think he designs a good offense, and while there certainly are better x’s and o’s coaches out there, I don’t think he’s in the bottom third or anything.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
over-reliance on veterans like Michael Ruffin
He averaged what…13 minutes per game? Over-reliance? I think the Ruffin thing is overblown around here.
Sorry about the drift.
by MR on Jun 19, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it is especially overblown
when you look at the rest of the bench Jordan was supplied with….
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In all fairness
how many successful coaches rely on their youngsters to get them to the postseason?
Again, I think everything changed when the Wizards started making the playoffs: developing the younger player took a backseat to postseason success.
by Pryme on Jun 19, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One would tend to think
that if ONE of Nick’s faults was never properly “coached up” , that NONE of his faults were. (Poor passing, poor rebounding, poor defense, unable to play within the Offense, etc…)
Perhaps with the new Coaching regime, we’ll see the same kind of improvement in Nick Young this year that we saw in Rodney Stuckey in 2007-08.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Jun 19, 2009 10:11 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rook, I think thats a bit of a stretch
Good passing is something that the player normally comes into the game with. Court vision isn’t something that I think any coach could teach. And most coaches would agree that defense is more about desire, and less about applying skills.
I don’t want to rail on Young, and I think its fantatic that Saunders and his staff are attempting to develop him as a player, rather than hope and pray that he magically transforms. I just think its hard to believe that his most glaring faults (continual shooting of fadeaways, playing out of control) are entirely the fault of the coaching staff
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Defense CAN be coached....
After watching Cassell repeatedly drive left and get off his shot, Saunders stopped Young and showed him the proper body angle and where to place his feet so that Cassell wouldn’t have an uncluttered lane to the basket.
“If you do this, he can’t go here,” Saunders told Young. Then Saunders slid his feet to force Cassell into a more difficult shot. Young took note, and went back at Cassell.
No matter how much desire or intensity a player puts into defense, if they’re in a poor stance or in a bad position – they’ll get beat.
If a 3rd year player needs to be told where to place his feet, and proper body angle in a one-on-one situation – it’s pretty clear that either:
a: He’s been told that many times before – and just is brain dead
b: He’s not been told that before.
If it’s “a” – then there’s NO hope for Nick Young to become better. I tend to think it’s “b”…
Good passing is something that the player normally comes into the game with.
Sure, If they’ve been properly coached in High School and College… If the player stayed a full 4-years in College, where the College Coach had the time to teach all the fundamentals. But not when these kids come in for one or two years, and then they’re gone.
Good passing can be improved with Coaching – It’s NOT all about “seeing the floor” and “natural instincts”… it’s about floor spacing, moving your body to get your defender in the proper position, creating passing lanes, knowing where your teammates are supposed to be, etc… Those things can be taught. Those things can be learned. Those things can be Coached.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Jun 19, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, that is what I was driving at yesterday...
Young came to the Wizards after just a year at USC and Blatche came after a checkered HS career… Both these guys have great ability, but have most likely have been exposed to coaches whose greatest talent was for recruiting guys with great talent …and then teaching them bubkes.
So whether the Wiz realized it or not, these guys (and just about all the guys in this year’s class are in the same boat) are like those neat toys our Dads used to get for us, the ones that came in a box that said “some assembly required.” I would have thought that was what Ed Tapscott’s job was all about, unless “player development” in NBA lingo means the same as “university development” means in academic-speak… i.e. the development of financial resources and other, uh, “assets”.
That’s why it was always a good bet to pick a player with great upside who also was coached for a few years by John Wooden… or Dean Smth… and that is probably why Ty Laswon, in particular, came out so high on this year’s Draft Rater. The same for Stephen Curry, who has clearly been well-taught (but not bullied) by his Dad.
IF the Wizards wind up keeping their #5 slot, Curry will help them way sooner than Harden, Evans or Hill… and further down Lawson is going to produce NBA dividends way sooner than the awesomely talented (if you can believe that video on True Hoop today) Brandon Jennings.
I’m glad NY at last has someone like Sam Cassell to groom him.
by khrabb on Jun 19, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nick played three years at USC
But your point still stands. If you’re going to draft for “upside,” you need to really commit player development resources so the upside actually gets there.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so you're telling
and I will let point one go – because I was playing devil’s advocate.
but as for point 2 – the last time I checked – Jordan employed the much maligned Princeton offense, which is a fairly complex system. Maybe Nick doesn’t possess the smarts to play within that particular system, or more fairly, maybe his game doesn’t fit….but shouldn’t the blame be place on Grunfeld for drafting players like Young and Blatche who couldn’t to grasp a fairly complex offensive structure. I am assuming that both were taught to play in the Princeton at length, so to argue that it is completely the fault of coaching – and not pass some of that blame onto Young and Grunfeld – strikes me as a bit unfair.
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's definitely more than a coaching problem
And I think it’s an organizational problem as well … you brought up Ernie and I think that’s a really fair point. That’s another post though; the shotgun marriage between Ernie and Eddie and how it hurt us for years.
I only wrote this post because it harps on the coaching shortcomings.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if you are commiting to a relatively complex system...
like the Princeton, which was basically designed to maximize the advantages of savvier players with lesser (tho by no mean inconsequential) athletic gifts… Geoff Petrie, Armand Hill and the President’s brother-in-law for example… then it follows that you should be drafting with at least one eye on the demands of the system… Free-lancers won’t hack it in this system, regardless of their talents.
There may be situations in which a coach and GM who do not share the same philosophy of the game can co-exist, but this was clearly NOT one of them.
The reason the Wizards went to the playoffs was more due to the caliber of the players EG brought in and to EJ’s interpersonal skills with his key guys than to the Princeton, much less to any defensive schemes that were attempted.
I think Flip and EG have a chance to turn this around, so far they seem to be on the same page.
by khrabb on Jun 19, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
An Argument Can Be Made
And I will go ahead and make it. The Princeton is a complicated offense, as you said. So perhaps that is why Eddie had to spend the majority of the practices focusing on it. And maybe that constant need for training on a complex offensive system took time away from emphasizing, or even covering, skills such as catch-and-shooting off of a screen or positioning one’s body on defense in order to prevent penetration.
Perhaps that is why teams that utilize a simpler offensive system tend to do better overall. While a pick-and-roll offense might not be rocket science, it is simple and effective, allowing for coaches to focus on and reinforce other skills, like, you know, defense.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're 100% on the mark
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but
Eddie spent a lot of time in the preseason trying to work on D.
by MR on Jun 19, 2009 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not individual defense, though, did he?
I thought most of that time was spent implementing the new defensive system that, as we found out, was pretty terrible.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
but every pre-season there was a lot of D talk. Obv it didn’t work out too well, but I believe he sincerely tried.
by MR on Jun 19, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I agree that he tried
and I definitely think that a good defensive system can make up for individual defensive shortcomings (see also: Cleveland, Orlando), the system Jordan used just wasn’t that.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Triangle's a complicated offense
and the Lakers and Bulls did well/have done well with it for years. But then, their respective GMs made sure to acquire players who would fit into the system.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And additional, their coaches worked hard with players individually to learn the skills needed
At least as well as they could have. Sure, some players didn’t work out, but most of those were veterans signed for very cheap. The young players all were good fits for that system (Farmar, Luke Walton, Kukoc, etc).
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good Point
But I seem to remember that both Chicago and Los Angeles had core players that had been brought up in different systems before the Triangle was implemented. Which would make sense. Teach your players how to do fundamental things first. Then once they learn it, move on to the more complicated. Nobody had to teach Jordan/Pippen or Kobe/Fisher how to play defense or shoot off of a screen by the time Phil came along.
Of course, a lot of it had to do with just having great coaching. Phil Jackson is the only coach I know of that successfully implemented the Triangle. Perhaps he is such a great coach that he can successfully implement a complicated offense while still properly teaching good defense at the same time. I mean, the guy has won 10 championships, so he must be doing a lot of things right.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
From what I remember from the Jordan Rules
they had a hell of a time convincing Jordan to play in the triangle. Because, at its heart, its a system that benefits the team rather than the player.
a player like Young, who is a great young talent, but is known for freelancing, would probably huge problems with the Triangle.
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
except for Karl Malone and Gary Payton, right?
they were just trying to buy a ticket to the ring brigade.
by Pryme on Jun 19, 2009 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And how'd that work out?
By “bringing in players that fit the system” I meant doing things like (in LA’s case) drafting Walton, bringing Fisher back from Utah (and yes, I know there were other circumstances involved there), acquiring guys like Ariza, Odom and Gasol, etc.
And true, no one had to teach Fisher how to shoot off a screen, but they had to teach Farmar.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
And perhaps the greatest coach in NBA history taught Farmar. Phil Jackson might just be an exception to my theorized rule. Or I could just simply be wrong.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Simmons has an interesting podcast today
with Don LeBetard in which they theorize that coaching really doesn’t matter at the professional level. They use last year’s finals coaching matchup between Rivers and Jackson as a main example. Simmons goes on to state that in his 700 page basketball book, he only spent four pages on coaching, because he discoverd it didn’t really matter.
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Find That Very Hard to Believe
I’m going to need some more convincing before I believe that. Can you provide a link to the podcast?
Jordan/Pippen couldn’t win a championship until Phil. Shaq/Kobe couldn’t win a championship before Phil. Phil has won 10 out of the last 18 championships, so how is his coaching irrelevant? In fact, over the past 18 seasons, the NBA Finals have been won by only 6 head coaches. Four of those six head coaches won multiple times. So forgive me if I’m wrong about this, but this just strikes me as poppycock.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its the one up right now on the ESPN homepage
and to your point – coaches have little effect without the proper personnel.
erego – Jackson didn’t have the horses last year – so they were not beating the Celtics.
I would disagree by throwing Dr. Jack Ramsey out there – but hey, I’m not a professional sportswriter.
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of Course
You always need really good players to win a championship. But I would argue that is not always enough. You often need really good coaching to go along with really good players. Having one and not the other tends to not produce the results desired.
The Lakers are a really good example. Before Phil Jackson, they had great players (Shaq, Kobe, Fisher, Horry), and were consistently making deep playoff runs. But they couldn’t get the job done. Insert Phil Jackson and voila, championships followed. Of the six coaches who have won championships over the past 18 seasons, I would argue that only one of them has not proved his greatness – Doc Rivers. So I simply don’t believe that it’s all about the players, at least not yet.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I don't really believe that either
almost especially with regards to last year. The thing about the Triangle is that it should reach a point where the players are the ones making all the decisions and calling the plays, and the coach doesn’t have to do much in-game. You could argue that Jackson losing to Rivers had more to do with the Lakers players not making the right decisions (or, because Gasol was still relatively new, not knowing the right decisions to make) than with Jackson being out-coached by Rivers.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Coaching matters in this sense
Coaches may not win a lot of titles, but they can sure lose a lot of titles. In my opinion half of Phil Jackson’s titles are won because he lets the other coach (ala SVG in this Finals) screw it up while he gets out of the way (once the game starts that is, to me Jackson does most of his coaching on the practice court).
"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck
by George Templeton on Jun 19, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Having Jackson helped
though he’s not the main Triangle x’s and o’s guy (or at least he wasn’t in Chicago). I agree that Jackson’s one of the two or three best coaches in the league, and having him teach any system would help, but the problem is that not enough other coaches have adopted the Triangle to compare the way he does it with others.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That Reinforces My Point
… but the problem is that not enough other coaches have adopted the Triangle to compare the way he does it with others.
If I remember correctly, other coaches have tried to implement the Triangle, but were unsuccessful and gave up. I forget who exactly, but considering that this is a copy-cat league, my guess is that if any coach could teach that system well, many others would be doing it.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
or they would have hired Tex Winter
just as other have attempted to hire away the Celtic’s D coach who was on our staff for 8 seconds.
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Celtics Might Be an Example
Of a great coaching-by-committee team. Doc Rivers without Tom Thibideau, not so good. Tom Thibideau without Doc Rivers, not so good. Doc Rivers + Tom Thibideau + 3 really great All-Stars, championship.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 19, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would have been Tex Winter (I think)
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think thats a great point...
but if you are going to commit to Jordan for the last three years, why keep drafting players that didn’t fit the system? We obviously signed players like Daniels and Songalia who could learn the system fairly easily, but this philosphy doesn’t carryover into the draft?
Its always Roger Mason (Jr.) time!
by ledellforlife on Jun 19, 2009 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it was more that his game didn't fit
Eddie Jordan’s version of the Princeton offense blurs the lines between point guard and shooting guard, so that both players have responsibility for bringing the ball up, starting plays, etc. That’s just not really NY’s strength. As Prada has said, the team’s inability to figure out how best to use Young’s strengths speaks to a combination of not drafting a player who fit Jordan’s system and then not helping that player learn and adapt or not changing the system to fit his strengths.
Now writing for Ridiculous Upside, now with more draft coverage.
by Jon L on Jun 19, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gilbert and Butler turned themselves into all-stars under the previous regime (AJ too).
Mason found a way to make himself a valuable contributor and has made a place for himself in the NBA. McGuire seems to be doing the same thing.
All of these players play similar positions to NY.
Let’s not deflect too much blame for Young’s inability to progress in his NBA career. He’s been given the chance. He’s got to do it for himself.
by MR on Jun 19, 2009 11:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is exactly the line of thinking that bugs me
The organization has a stake in doing as much as possible to teach their players rather than just hoping they “get it” themselves. For them to be shirking on that responsibility only shoots themselves in the foot.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The title of that post was probably a bit harsh
Nevertheless, player development is not all on the player. Just because some players “developed” doesn’t mean the organization’s development infrastructure works.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but what is the organization going to do
if a guy doesn’t show interest in improving? I don’t mean to say that NY has NO interest, but in the NBA you have to have EXTRA interest. Put in extra time, hire private trainers, work out in the offseason, be the first at the gym and the last to leave. Arenas has his own KEY!
I just find it hard when there are underskilled guys like Dee Brown out there to feel too sorry for Young.
by MR on Jun 19, 2009 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously Nick has enough interest to do these drills with Cassell and Wittman
To become a major superstar, of course you have to have that extra drive, but if we’re just talking about a functional role player, I don’t think it’s as necessary as you say. And again, this doesn’t even speak to the psychological effect a coach’s player development philosophy can have on a player’s drive.
Bottom line is, whether Nick is at fault or not, the important point is that the organization clearly didn’t do enough to try to help the guy if he’s first learning how to shoot off screens only now.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
An issue of responsibility
Should GMs draft talented players who lack fundamentals so they can puut butts in the seats, or less talented, more fundamentally sounds players that will take longer to produce wins?
by Pryme on Jun 19, 2009 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bottom line is, whether Nick is at fault or not, the important point is that the organization clearly didn’t do enough to try to help the guy if he’s first learning how to shoot off screens only now.
Certainly if this is the case there is enough blame to go around that everyone can gorge themselves on it.
I guess my main point is that we see players come every fall with a new move or skill that they’ve added in the offseason. During the season is a poor time for that. Butler added the 3 a few years ago. McGuire obviously worked hard on his midrange jumper. BTH comes back with much better free throw shooting.
I don’t see NY doing any of that. If all the rest of the team (and the league) does it and he doesn’t, then I find it hard to blame the coaches too much.
by MR on Jun 19, 2009 12:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But he did come back last Summer with a new skill
that sick between the legs crossover was perfected last summer. That’s also the move that Butler started working on during last season – the one he hit the game winner on.
It’s very difficult – as fans – to know what’s going on with each player during the Summer. We know that Nick says he wanted to get stronger and work on his defense this Summer – and it appears that he’s at least trying to do that. Whether that will pay dividends for this coming season or not – well, we’ll just have to wait and see.
I don’t think I ever remember reading about Eddie Jordan, Tapscott, or any of the other assistant coaches “teaching” Young anything about defense in past off-seasons. SO I, for one, am encouraged that Nick is being shown defensive stances, positioning and schemes by Saunders and Cassell THIS Summer. . . . . “Coach him up” Flip……
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Jun 19, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
when ny was drafted
“playing without the ball” was tagged as one of his weaknesses. i highly doubt the staff never worked with him to improve that. just because he’s still “not used to it” doesn’t necessarily mean the past regime or previous coaches never coached him on it.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Jun 19, 2009 1:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If he's not used to it, then he probably needed more work on it than he's had
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Jun 19, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah. he definitely needs more work. i hear you there.
i read the article. sounds like he’s just not used to the drill they’re using. different coaches run different drills… hopefully this one produces results.
i definitely can’t argue that the past regime had good results with developing players. they didn’t. i think it’s pretty extreme to insinuate they didn’t really try to though.
EG hasn’t had the best record with drafting players either… although i liked what he did last time he traded a #5 quite a bit.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Jun 19, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's hard
to knock the job Grunfeld has done. I’m not saying he’s been perfect, but given the years we had to endure with big Wes at the helm, Grunfeld has been exec of the millennium. I know the same argument can be made for Eddie Jordan. There’s no doubt he deserves praise for getting us to the playoffs 4 years in a row, when none of our thousand other coaches could get us there once. The problem is, we never really improved. In four years. So it was definitely time for Eddie to go. Look at Flip. He goes to the conference finals four years in a row and he gets fired. If he makes it to the conference finals here, he may be put in the DC Sports hall of fame.
The bottom line is, we have a ton of young guys on our team, and they’re all underdeveloped. While they have to accept the responsibility for it, the coaching staff does as well. I think Eddie would’ve preferred to trade all of his young guys for proven veterans.
by CJHutch on Jun 19, 2009 8:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Bullets Forever
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
