2 Years or Never to Learn System

[wiley]

Okay Celtics Bloggers.  Show your basketball stripes.

I've never played organized basketball, just watched a lot of games.  I do have an athletic background, tennis, soccer, baseball, so team sports is not totally alien to me.

Anway, there seems to be a huge range in terms of how quickly young players can learn the system of their N.B.A. team.  Giddens is not quite ready, for example, because he hasn't picked up the system yet.  Powe was criticized at one point for not catching on to certain aspects of the system, etc etc...

IMO understanding an N.B.A. system on offense and defense to the point where you're allowed on the court seems rather daunting (much more so from having not played the sport).  Much more difficult than Soccer for example, because the speed of decisions is slower for the most part in soccer.

So, without talking about ability to hit a jump shot or even having the strength to throw a cross-court pass or jump an inch off the ground, talking purely in terms of understanding the system, that is, where you should be on the floor and when and where the ball should go once it reaches your hands....

how long would it take you to comprehend the Celtics system at the level of say, Scalabrine?  I chose Scal because he (like most bloggers) is the one Celtic whose understanding of the system probably outweighs any other aspect of his game.  In other words that's what he's known for mostly.

So how long would it take you, Celtic blogger, to be able to play with 4 other Celtics and be in the right place at the right time etc....

I expect a wide divergence.  For example, we have a coach on the blog, so I'm guessing he could get the Celtics system in something like a quarter of the season.

I'm putting myself at anywhere from two full years to never, (in terms of being allowed on the court based on understanding alone)

I don't think not making the N.B.A. due to not being able to grasp a system means that a person is stupid.  I view it as having more to do with the speed decisions need to be made at and that certain learning styles of particular individuals might not be well suited to basketball IQ.  For example someone could make a great physicist but be unable to figure out, at the proper speed, an N.B.A. system.

Of course PG's are expected to know the system best, so in your replies feel free to tell me how long it would take you position by position.

Example:  You could be a Celtic center within 2 months and a PG within one YEAR, etc...

[wdleehi]

I could pick it up fast.  (I just pick up things fast)



Now only if I was a foot taller (well, make that a foot and 4 inchs so I can be a C since I don't dribble or shoot well enough to be anything else) and 10 years younger, I could be the backup for Perk they need.

[wiley]

I could pick it up fast.  (I just pick up things fast)



Now only if I was a foot taller (well, make that a foot and 4 inchs so I can be a C since I don't dribble or shoot well enough to be anything else) and 10 years younger, I could be the backup for Perk they need.

We need a steroid for height!  Would you hypothetically want more than the MLE?

[indeedproceed]

I never played organized bball past 7th grade, but I pick stuff up fast, and if you can memorize every single play in a football playbook, both sides of the ball plus know 90% of what other people are doing, then I think you can pickup a basketball system within a year.

[wdleehi]

I could pick it up fast.  (I just pick up things fast)



Now only if I was a foot taller (well, make that a foot and 4 inchs so I can be a C since I don't dribble or shoot well enough to be anything else) and 10 years younger, I could be the backup for Perk they need.

We need a steroid for height!  Would you hypothetically want more than the MLE?

Or Willy Wonka's taffy stretching machine.  I already have the need bulk.

[oldmanspeaks]

It is much harder to teach/learn basketball even though football is much more complicated game. The reason is that much of the identification happens before the snap of the ball and the play structure is well defined with clear alteratives. In basketball no one is EXACTLY where you expect them to be and everything is constant motion. To play at a high level you have to have a court in your head and see everything before it actually happens. This is difficult for young players.

A simple example: I am a fat old man who can't run, jump or see and my partner were playing in a 2 on 2 game last night against two 20 somethings. My partner sensed both players were cheating towards him and gave me the ball. Before I even caught the ball, I could visualize that when the opponents adjusted to the normal defense, my partner would cut inside of the far one and I immediately returned the ball for a quick cutting layup. If anybody on either team had done anything different the correct play would have been something different.

Basically high level basketball isn't just memorizing plays as even youth football has far more plays than basketball, it is about instinctly reacting to motion within the framework of the offense and the defense. I have played with a ton of athletic intelligent guys who never learned to "read a court" and never became top players. I do think it can be taught to a degree but I have met a lot more good football coaches than I have good basketball coaches. Think of basketball like a poker game where you are reading "tells" of both your opponents and your teammates. You already know all the odds (plays) but it is the tells that make or break you.

[Redz]

It is much harder to teach/learn basketball even though football is much more complicated game. The reason is that much of the identification happens before the snap of the ball and the play structure is well defined with clear alteratives. In basketball no one is EXACTLY where you expect them to be and everything is constant motion. To play at a high level you have to have a court in your head and see everything before it actually happens. This is difficult for young players.

A simple example: I am a fat old man who can't run, jump or see and my partner were playing in a 2 on 2 game last night against two 20 somethings. My partner sensed both players were cheating towards him and gave me the ball. Before I even caught the ball, I could visualize that when the opponents adjusted to the normal defense, my partner would cut inside of the far one and I immediately returned the ball for a quick cutting layup. If anybody on either team had done anything different the correct play would have been something different.

Basically high level basketball isn't just memorizing plays as even youth football has far more plays than basketball, it is about instinctly reacting to motion within the framework of the offense and the defense. I have played with a ton of athletic intelligent guys who never learned to "read a court" and never became top players. I do think it can be taught to a degree but I have met a lot more good football coaches than I have good basketball coaches. Think of basketball like a poker game where you are reading "tells" of both your opponents and your teammates. You already know all the odds (plays) but it is the tells that make or break you.

well said

[vwoodruff]

If we're talking about picking up a system, there are essentially two things to remember: typically spacing in an offensive or defensive set and one's place in that set (rotations). The rest is essentially a player's ability to read the opposition and adapt/improvise as necessary. I would say basketball is a bit easier than other sports (e.g. baseball) because mistakes can be hidden a bit easier (a breakdown costing a run is significantly more significant than a breakdown costing a hoop).

That being said... the further up the scale of competition, the more advanced the sets, etc. Many of the players that are NBA-caliber haven't HAD to learn sets because of their abilities to use their skill sets to dominate at their previous levels. The less talent, the more important it is to be fundamentally strong and basketball-smart. Those players with great talent and strong understanding of the game are typically the stars of the league.

My $0.02

[oldmanspeaks]

I believe that a "learning the sets" isn't as much of a problem as is not being able to read the "tells". The superior athlete is used to being able to dominate because they run faster and jump higher and thereby can get by the lesser player. They haven't learned how to read an opponent.
Another simple example. A few years back there was a kid out of high school who was a great athlete and yet he and I played even on the basketball court. That was ridiculous because he was 10 times the player I was. I worked with him for a few weeks and showed him in detail why I was able to score on him and also how I was able to slow him down on scoring. After that he could beat me 11-1 or 11-0 everytime. He had been used to dominating because of his athletic ability but now he knew exactly what to look for. He tried out and made the local college team and was a defensive specialist.

[bballee]

Not all systems equally difficult.

http://www.celtic-nation.com/forum/showpost.php?p=183084&postcount=6

A Celtics player must be above average, most would agree well above average, in both native intelligence and in court sense. The Celtics systems, both on offense and defense, require a higher level of awareness and anticipation in order to appropriately move both the ball and the players into position to maximize their effectiveness. The mano-a-mano duel of isolation offense and stand alone defense are definitely dominate in the NBA; and the determination to rise above this every man is an island approach is the reason the Celtics dominate the league when healthy and on the same page.

[oldmanspeaks]

The Celtic offense isn't more difficult than any other offensive system. However the defensive system requires a LOT of reading by a LOT of players for it to work well. If everyone doesn't read and react to the "tells" the same way, a player can look really really bad. That is why a player like Moore had so much trouble. He couldn't break old habits and trust his teammates to cover his man when he rotated to someone else. (so it isn't just the younger players). At times the defense is counter-intuitive because you are trusting a teammate when he isn't even in sight as yet.

The weakness of the Celtic defense is that EVERYONE has to be in exactly the right place. That is difficult to do when everyone on the court is moving all the time. When most people criticize Perk or whoever for getting beat, in reality it is someone else who actually screwed up. Unless you can do a rewind and look at the tape it is difficult to find the real culprit. The Celtics defense also does better with different combinations. Perk and KG do very well together in the rotations. Against shorter players, so do Powe and BB. I think it is because they work together as a team during practice.
It is true the Celtic defense is awesome when everyone is in synch but substitutions don't go well. I blame Doc a bit for this as he has a tendency to "manage" more than he does "coach". Think of all the athletes that have gone through the Celtics and they are always "too young". When you try as hard as someone like Walker, youth shouldn't be an excuse. And Moore is both experienced and is willing to work and he didn't fit in well at all. 

[billysan]

The Celtic offense isn't more difficult than any other offensive system. However the defensive system requires a LOT of reading by a LOT of players for it to work well. If everyone doesn't read and react to the "tells" the same way, a player can look really really bad. That is why a player like Moore had so much trouble. He couldn't break old habits and trust his teammates to cover his man when he rotated to someone else. (so it isn't just the younger players). At times the defense is counter-intuitive because you are trusting a teammate when he isn't even in sight as yet.

The weakness of the Celtic defense is that EVERYONE has to be in exactly the right place. That is difficult to do when everyone on the court is moving all the time. When most people criticize Perk or whoever for getting beat, in reality it is someone else who actually screwed up. Unless you can do a rewind and look at the tape it is difficult to find the real culprit. The Celtics defense also does better with different combinations. Perk and KG do very well together in the rotations. Against shorter players, so do Powe and BB. I think it is because they work together as a team during practice.
It is true the Celtic defense is awesome when everyone is in synch but substitutions don't go well. I blame Doc a bit for this as he has a tendency to "manage" more than he does "coach". Think of all the athletes that have gone through the Celtics and they are always "too young". When you try as hard as someone like Walker, youth shouldn't be an excuse. And Moore is both experienced and is willing to work and he didn't fit in well at all. 

To be a bit of a 'Devils Advocate', I think Doc only can go so far with the players he has. Two motivated, undersized and enthusiastic guys still are not the same as two seven footers with the same skill sets as back up bigs.

[Eeyore III]

The Celtic offense isn't more difficult than any other offensive system. However the defensive system requires a LOT of reading by a LOT of players for it to work well. If everyone doesn't read and react to the "tells" the same way, a player can look really really bad. That is why a player like Moore had so much trouble. He couldn't break old habits and trust his teammates to cover his man when he rotated to someone else. (so it isn't just the younger players). At times the defense is counter-intuitive because you are trusting a teammate when he isn't even in sight as yet.

The weakness of the Celtic defense is that EVERYONE has to be in exactly the right place. That is difficult to do when everyone on the court is moving all the time. When most people criticize Perk or whoever for getting beat, in reality it is someone else who actually screwed up. Unless you can do a rewind and look at the tape it is difficult to find the real culprit. The Celtics defense also does better with different combinations. Perk and KG do very well together in the rotations. Against shorter players, so do Powe and BB. I think it is because they work together as a team during practice.
It is true the Celtic defense is awesome when everyone is in synch but substitutions don't go well. I blame Doc a bit for this as he has a tendency to "manage" more than he does "coach". Think of all the athletes that have gone through the Celtics and they are always "too young". When you try as hard as someone like Walker, youth shouldn't be an excuse. And Moore is both experienced and is willing to work and he didn't fit in well at all. 

Great posts. TP

My only (limited) observation is that quickness is often confused with BBIQ.  For example, a lot of times it might look like Rondo has a super sense of the court, when he's really just quicker than everyone else.  (Not that he has bad court sense ...)

The quality of reading "tells" that you mention is really completely different than just learning the abstract playbook.  That's my take-away lesson.

[oldmanspeaks]

You are correct about a fast player looking like he has a higher BBIQ because they sometime create a situation that any idiot can see.
As far as "tells", they work best within a system/team concept. i.e. When I know my teammate is going to force the offensive player to the baseline (or to the middle depending upon the team concept), I can look for the tell of the offensive players crossover to bring him to exactly where we want him. I start my rotation to the spot knowing where my rotation help is coming from. Everything starts with the offensive player's crossover but seeing where he is going to go only helps if I know the rotation is going to happen.
(basically what you are doing is guessing based upon previous obseravations. I blocked a big guy's shot yesterday because he had a habit of bringing the ball low when he came along the baseline for a layup. I made a huge overplay for the block because I knew I was going to get help on the inside if the made a last second correction and brought the ball back to the middle).

I mentioned the Celtics weakness. What is great about it is that the offensive player gets surprised by unexpected rotations because the normal dish lanes disappear resulting in hesitations (and hesitations lead to bad decisions).