Developing the young guys vs winning now

[Vanderbilt_Grad]

These are bit old, but I think that they pretty pertinent given the team’s situation this off season and Cliff’s rotation last year. This is also what comes to mind when folks here talk about moving MKG to the second unit or signing players that will “push” the current starters to try to keep their jobs. (Note, none of this is insider content)

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... -is-oxygen

...player development experts I've talked to at length are unanimous that one of the best things one can possibly do to help a rookie's career is to bless him with the confidence of a supportive coaching staff and minutes to get used to the NBA game -- and very few players get that. Just a week ago an elite player development coach told me that every single player in the NBA can play, and it's really just a matter of opportunities and coaching and the team.

David Thorpe has been making similar points for years. He talks all the time about "the royal jelly." Literally, that's what worker bees feed a chosen baby bee to make her the queen. But it's also, says Thorpe, what coaches and others can feed players to help them achieve their potential. A lot of it has to do with building confidence.

"Playing time is the first part," says Thorpe. "A coach's support is another thing -- it helps you grow as a player if you know you're not going to get yanked the first time you miss a shot. That gives you the confidence to be creative and expand your game. And then the final aspect of the ideal set-up is coaching you up on the new things you're adding to your game. A great recent example of this was Trevor Ariza with the Lakers last season. In the spring, everyone was wondering why they'd let him shoot all those 3s. It wasn't productive. But they needed him to be able to do that, they let him do that, they didn't yank him for doing that, and they coached him how to do that better. And in the playoffs he was amazing at that and helped them win a championship."On a lot of teams, Ariza would have been condemned to the low-earning life of a non-shooter, but the coaching situation, and minutes, turned him into a sniper.

I'm not saying that playing time is all it takes to make any bench player good. I am saying that if you have the goods to be really special, playing time is an essential ingredient in developing to elite status. (Oxygen isn't all you need to be an Olympic runner. But Usain Bolt can't win any medals without oxygen. It's one of many essential ingredients.)

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... ng-players

Of all the things coaches hate, globally televised boneheaded mistakes surely top the list.

That's why so many teams keep young players stapled to the bench in big moments.

Coaches are playing "correct" Grays over "still learning" Valanciunases all over the league. It satisfies a coach's sense of order and control. Every coach wants his team to play the right way -- which is not so different from following coach's orders. Without that, what's the point of having a coach?

Meanwhile, the guy who plays the "wrong" way often helps his team more, thanks to the many advantages of youth.

Popovich gets the same unproven players every team gets -- in fact, he gets worse ones. The Spurs haven't had a lottery pick since Tim Duncan in 1997. Nevertheless, he plays young players relentlessly and aggressively all season long. He plays young unproven players when his team is ahead. He plays them when his team is behind. He plays them when his team is in first place and when they're in last. He plays them in all four quarters and in overtime. And, most importantly, he does it season after season.

In 2001-02, the Spurs were a 58-win contender with an unconventional 19-year-old rookie French point guard who couldn't really shoot, didn't rack up a lot of assists, was undersized and didn't play great defense. Any coach would have benched Tony Parker while he was learning, and it's no secret why. I'm not sure I can recall a coach more openly exasperated with Parker than Popovich was that season.

But you know what Popovich did? He played Parker more minutes that season than Parker played this season -- when he was an MVP candidate -- saying all along that he wanted to see if Parker could develop into the kind of player he knew he could become.

It's about keeping the stars fresh, which is crucial. And it's about developing the young corps. The right way to distribute minutes is up and down the roster. When you get it right, you can end up with fresh veterans and trusted young players, both of whom can work wonders.

I share a lot of these same thoughts, and its part of the reason I think that Cliff is the wrong coach for MKG and perhaps Charlotte as a team in the long term. Don’t get me wrong. Cliff did the best coaching job that the Bobcats had ever had up to last year overall, but he has some fundamental weaknesses as a coach. His insistence on running ‘his’ system regardless of team personnel was detrimental to several players on the team. His rotations, especially his refusal to let young players ‘play thought mistakes’ hindered the development of the younger guys. The talk about limiting the number of rookies on the team was also telling about Cliff’s trust and ability to develop players. He also appears to strongly believe that part about vets = win now.

That said I do view the presence of Mark Price and Ewing as positive indicators for “getting it” about the need to develop the young guys. I also think that Cho not giving up draft picks at the trade deadline last year was a good sign for the future.

But where I go with this is that if the Hornets sign Deng and move MKG to the bench, he may never develop here in Charlotte. Without playing time or the trust of his coach MKG’s odds of success go WAY down. Similarly if you turn PT into a competition instead of an opportunity I think that you run the risk of destroying both the team chemistry overall and the young guys confidence in particular. Not many 18 to 20 year olds will really feel comfortable with the idea of being one mistake away from losing their starting job and potentially being out of the league after their rookie contract.

Similarly I have no real trust that the team could develop a guy like LaVine (who needs a lot of work) or even Young (who needs less, but still isn’t fully NBA ready yet) with the #9 pick … not yet anyway. I think this is a big part of why we see McDermott (as NBA ready as a college guy can get) as the guy outsiders see the team drafting this year if they keep the pick.

I honestly don’t know what to hope for at this point. Trading MKG might be best for both him and the team at this point. Ditto for the 9th pick. But I can’t help shaking the feeling that, if they do that, then the team is going to end up in the same situation they were in under LB. Good veteran team, but with no real future.

[MasterIchiro]

Development is a 2-way street. When you give a player minutes, he has to show growth and adaptation. I suspect Cody Zeller will be rewarded with more minutes due to his post all star PER 36 numbers 15/8 or 15/9. He was playing around 17 minutes/game all season and that was enough PT for him. He took it, ran with it, and improved on his end. And he should be rewarded with more minutes. These coaches watch these guys in practice on a daily basis, nearly every day and they see if players are responding to instruction/guidance/coaching etc. Some players just don't have the talent to fulfill their end of the bargain. Like MKG can work on his jump shot endlessly and it may never improve because he doesn't have the talent to shoot the basketball.

I think we should all be careful not to rush to some conclusion that Charlotte is a poor situation for all young players nor should we assume that because we signed a win-now vet (Al Jefferson) and plan to sign another (according to Higgins) that the whole team is based on win now players.

I think every organization should strike a healthy balance.

Popovich can give more leash to younger players because his core has been Duncan, Ginobli and Parker.

Charlotte will find a balance.

If they choose to freeze, reduce minutes or erase MKG from the roster, they'd still have pick 9, Kemba, Zeller and Biyombo as young players. It's false to think that just because they're not getting big minutes, the coaches don't have a gauge on development pace/timetables.

[Snidely FC]

Yeah, my thinking is that this team still considers Kemba, Biz, MKG, Taylor & Zeller to be young, developing players, so they will be wary of adding too many more young players. One rookie from this year's draft, the readier the better. Two would be pushing it. Three would totally upset the apple cart. That's why I'm expecting at least one of our picks to be traded, or at the very least stashed in Europe.

[Vanderbilt_Grad]

Actually, as indicated in part of the quoted section above, Parker wasn’t ever guaranteed to be the player he turned into. He was able to develop into the Parker we know today largely because of how Pop developed him … giving him plenty of PT and allowing him to play though and learn from his mistakes. Giving players minutes is one of the primary keys to developing them and the more minutes the better.

It’s great to say that every organization “should strike a healthy balance” but the reality is that very few NBA teams do. The Spurs are a well know exception and my point was that the Bobcats / Hornets have historically been really bad at finding that balance. They have been consistently good at building strong veteran teams or recently going mostly young (but developing poorly due to coaching choices).

This is no “rushed” conclusion, but rather one that has years worth of data behind it. No one and no team is perfect. There is no shame in admitting to the warts of “our” own team.

Making players “earn” their minutes is a seemingly common sense notion, but it’s a false one if you are trying to develop young guys in the NBA.

[ball teacher]

These are bit old, but I think that they pretty pertinent given the team’s situation this off season and Cliff’s rotation last year. This is also what comes to mind when folks here talk about moving MKG to the second unit or signing players that will “push” the current starters to try to keep their jobs. (Note, none of this is insider content)

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... -is-oxygen

...player development experts I've talked to at length are unanimous that one of the best things one can possibly do to help a rookie's career is to bless him with the confidence of a supportive coaching staff and minutes to get used to the NBA game -- and very few players get that. Just a week ago an elite player development coach told me that every single player in the NBA can play, and it's really just a matter of opportunities and coaching and the team.

David Thorpe has been making similar points for years. He talks all the time about "the royal jelly." Literally, that's what worker bees feed a chosen baby bee to make her the queen. But it's also, says Thorpe, what coaches and others can feed players to help them achieve their potential. A lot of it has to do with building confidence.

"Playing time is the first part," says Thorpe. "A coach's support is another thing -- it helps you grow as a player if you know you're not going to get yanked the first time you miss a shot. That gives you the confidence to be creative and expand your game. And then the final aspect of the ideal set-up is coaching you up on the new things you're adding to your game. A great recent example of this was Trevor Ariza with the Lakers last season. In the spring, everyone was wondering why they'd let him shoot all those 3s. It wasn't productive. But they needed him to be able to do that, they let him do that, they didn't yank him for doing that, and they coached him how to do that better. And in the playoffs he was amazing at that and helped them win a championship."On a lot of teams, Ariza would have been condemned to the low-earning life of a non-shooter, but the coaching situation, and minutes, turned him into a sniper.

I'm not saying that playing time is all it takes to make any bench player good. I am saying that if you have the goods to be really special, playing time is an essential ingredient in developing to elite status. (Oxygen isn't all you need to be an Olympic runner. But Usain Bolt can't win any medals without oxygen. It's one of many essential ingredients.)

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... ng-players

Of all the things coaches hate, globally televised boneheaded mistakes surely top the list.

That's why so many teams keep young players stapled to the bench in big moments.

Coaches are playing "correct" Grays over "still learning" Valanciunases all over the league. It satisfies a coach's sense of order and control. Every coach wants his team to play the right way -- which is not so different from following coach's orders. Without that, what's the point of having a coach?

Meanwhile, the guy who plays the "wrong" way often helps his team more, thanks to the many advantages of youth.

Popovich gets the same unproven players every team gets -- in fact, he gets worse ones. The Spurs haven't had a lottery pick since Tim Duncan in 1997. Nevertheless, he plays young players relentlessly and aggressively all season long. He plays young unproven players when his team is ahead. He plays them when his team is behind. He plays them when his team is in first place and when they're in last. He plays them in all four quarters and in overtime. And, most importantly, he does it season after season.

In 2001-02, the Spurs were a 58-win contender with an unconventional 19-year-old rookie French point guard who couldn't really shoot, didn't rack up a lot of assists, was undersized and didn't play great defense. Any coach would have benched Tony Parker while he was learning, and it's no secret why. I'm not sure I can recall a coach more openly exasperated with Parker than Popovich was that season.

But you know what Popovich did? He played Parker more minutes that season than Parker played this season -- when he was an MVP candidate -- saying all along that he wanted to see if Parker could develop into the kind of player he knew he could become.

It's about keeping the stars fresh, which is crucial. And it's about developing the young corps. The right way to distribute minutes is up and down the roster. When you get it right, you can end up with fresh veterans and trusted young players, both of whom can work wonders.

I share a lot of these same thoughts, and its part of the reason I think that Cliff is the wrong coach for MKG and perhaps Charlotte as a team in the long term. Don’t get me wrong. Cliff did the best coaching job that the Bobcats had ever had up to last year overall, but he has some fundamental weaknesses as a coach. His insistence on running ‘his’ system regardless of team personnel was detrimental to several players on the team. His rotations, especially his refusal to let young players ‘play thought mistakes’ hindered the development of the younger guys. The talk about limiting the number of rookies on the team was also telling about Cliff’s trust and ability to develop players. He also appears to strongly believe that part about vets = win now.

That said I do view the presence of Mark Price and Ewing as positive indicators for “getting it” about the need to develop the young guys. I also think that Cho not giving up draft picks at the trade deadline last year was a good sign for the future.

But where I go with this is that if the Hornets sign Deng and move MKG to the bench, he may never develop here in Charlotte. Without playing time or the trust of his coach MKG’s odds of success go WAY down. Similarly if you turn PT into a competition instead of an opportunity I think that you run the risk of destroying both the team chemistry overall and the young guys confidence in particular. Not many 18 to 20 year olds will really feel comfortable with the idea of being one mistake away from losing their starting job and potentially being out of the league after their rookie contract.

Similarly I have no real trust that the team could develop a guy like LaVine (who needs a lot of work) or even Young (who needs less, but still isn’t fully NBA ready yet) with the #9 pick … not yet anyway. I think this is a big part of why we see McDermott (as NBA ready as a college guy can get) as the guy outsiders see the team drafting this year if they keep the pick.

I honestly don’t know what to hope for at this point. Trading MKG might be best for both him and the team at this point. Ditto for the 9th pick. But I can’t help shaking the feeling that, if they do that, then the team is going to end up in the same situation they were in under LB. Good veteran team, but with no real future.

I agree with you and I've been saying all season that Cliff was handling MKG ALL WRONG. I've even been stressing that MKG was our 2nd overall pick and for a guy whose only real weakness has been a suspect jump shot (that his coaching staff made worse) there was no reason for this guy (who brings so much to the table) to be muzzled the way that he was.

If you think about it, MKG couldn't beat anybody out who played the SF position as far as clearly getting more minutes, and he couldn't even finish games over guys like Taylor, Tolliver, and then CDR. No matter how well MKG played you knew he wasn't gonna finish the games, that was problematic to me. I've seen the guy get 16 points in one half only to be frozen out of the offense the second half, what's worse is he's the youngest guy on the team with the biggest motor, it was no reason to monitor his minutes when the vets on the team played 30 plus minutes every game.

I hate to say it, but unless someone really talks to Cliff, I do not see MKG being here this time next season. What's worst is MKG hasn't even scratched the surface of what type of player he's going to be, not cause he's got much to learn, it's cause its much he hasn't gotten to show.

[catch20two]

I think it's pretty simple that winning games is more important than developing players because there's only but so much development a player can make when they're developing bad habits and losing which lead to a losing mentality. But at the same time I want to say that Clifford used MKG all wrong by banishing him from the most crtical parts of the game when he's our best defender. Even the advanced numbers support that the #spacing lineups that put MKG on the bench in the 4th only made our team worst, not better. I also think that Clifford kinda misused Biz as well. Clifford treated Biz as if he came on the floor and did nothing, as if it was a punishment to him as a coach to play Biz because of obligations, but all Biz did was come in the game to protect the rim at a elite level and rebound like a mad man.

[penquin11]

I think it's pretty simple that winning games is more important than developing players because there's only but so much development a player can make when they're developing bad habits and losing which lead to a losing mentality. But at the same time I want to say that Clifford used MKG all wrong by banishing him from the most crtical parts of the game when he's our best defender. Even the advanced numbers support that the #spacing lineups that put MKG on the bench in the 4th only made our team worst, not better. I also think that Clifford kinda misused Biz as well. Clifford treated Biz as if he came on the floor and did nothing, as if it was a punishment to him as a coach to play Biz because of obligations, but all Biz did was come in the game to protect the rim at a elite level and rebound like a mad man.

I don't always agree that winning now is more important than developing talent. Russel Westbrook wasn't a "win-now" player when he entered the league and nor was Tony Parker (among many others). That stated they got the nod and developed into productive players. Giving a player playing time and reason to be confident is huge, as without confidence you will never play to your potential. That is why I wish MKG and Zeller were playing starter minutes.

[jakenc]

Development of our young guys is the only way we'll become more than a first round and occasional second round team (barring a huge FA signing).

If we give up on MKG this offseason I'm gonna lose it. Too much talent and potential not to be given a chance (standing in a corner on offense for 25 minutes a game isn't much of a chance). With the appropriate minutes and involvement in the offense early season which he's already worthy of, by the second half of the season he'll likely be performing above and beyond anything the bench SFs could offer. I hope Thibodeau and Cliff hang out a bit and we see MKG playing Jimmy Butler minutes next season.

[Jungleking]

Winning now WAS one of the best developmental tactics for our young guys this season. MKG got playoff minutes against LeBron, Kemba Walker got to play against one of the most aggressive perimeter defenses of the last decade. Those playoff minutes matter.

We're also in a situation where there's only so much development that young players can get from playing time alone. Playing time will start to help MKG more when he fixes his shot. If that hitch is still in his shooting motion, he's not going to develop much. He'll be a broken offensive player. Same goes for Biz. I do think that Zeller could have used some more playing time, and it's a little worrisome that Clifford took that tact.

[Makaveli92]

MKG need to develop himself, he has no jumpshot, everytime he shoots the ball I cringe. He's never gon average over 30 minutes shooting like that, no matter the team.

[Makaveli92]

The way MKG plays, i think the minutes he's getting now are just right, 24-28 minutes a game.

Zeller minutes should increase next season, Biyombo's should stay the same.

[mrknowitall215]

There has to be a balance between player development and developing a winning culture with the beam slightly tilted towards winning more than developing players at all cost. I thought Clifford was in a privileged position to do both with MKG, but his evaluation of MKG was wrong, and I could also state the same thing about Biyombo. The way Clifford played Zeller through his struggles throughout most of the season though there was no doubt every bit of a development over winning element in play

[Liver_Pooty]

MKG's development is done in the off season. You can't exactly learn how to shoot a basketball during an actual game.

[penquin11]

MKG's development is done in the off season. You can't exactly learn how to shoot a basketball during an actual game.

Things you do learn in a game:

+ Holy antijumpshots! When I drive the ball on the baseline, with my exceptional speed and finishing ability, I can still score!

+ Huh, I just nailed a big shot (or layup), maybe I should take more of these!

+ Wow, even though I missed on that layup I still drew a foul, maybe I should drive more often.

+ Hey, when I don't simply stand around, and am active off the ball and make cuts, I am able to get easy shots!

+ Oh yeah, I can jump pretty high, maybe I should try to get an alley-oop.

+ Oh yeah, I'm pretty strong for my position, maybe I should try the post!

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

Development happens in games. You don't get better by not playing, look at Trevor Ariza, look at Paul George, look at Lance Stephenson, look at _________________. Do I think he will fix his shot in game? No. But to be fair, I don't expect him to fix his shot at all. But if Rondo, Avery, Allen, and others game operate without great shooting, so can he. The problem isn't entirely that MKG can't shoot, its that he is a offensive liability because he doesn't have an offensive impact at all (if you don't drive, cut, shoot, or do something, you aren't bringing anything to the offense). When he is aggressive, it's great, but it is really rare that we actually see MKG play aggressively on Offense. Shooting is only one facet of the offense...

[Liver_Pooty]

MKG's development is done in the off season. You can't exactly learn how to shoot a basketball during an actual game.

Things you do learn in a game:

+ Holy antijumpshots! When I drive the ball on the baseline, with my exceptional speed and finishing ability, I can still score!

+ Huh, I just nailed a big shot (or layup), maybe I should take more of these!

+ Wow, even though I missed on that layup I still drew a foul, maybe I should drive more often.

+ Hey, when I don't simply stand around, and am active off the ball and make cuts, I am able to get easy shots!

+ Oh yeah, I can jump pretty high, maybe I should try to get an alley-oop.

+ Oh yeah, I'm pretty strong for my position, maybe I should try the post!

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

Development happens in games. You don't get better by not playing, look at Trevor Ariza, look at Paul George, look at Lance Stephenson, look at _________________. Do I think he will fix his shot in game? No. But to be fair, I don't expect him to fix his shot at all. But if Rondo, Avery, Allen, and others game operate without great shooting, so can he. The problem isn't entirely that MKG can't shoot, its that he is a offensive liability because he doesn't have an offensive impact at all (if you don't drive, cut, shoot, or do something, you aren't bringing anything to the offense). When he is aggressive, it's great, but it is really rare that we actually see MKG play aggressively on Offense. Shooting is only one facet of the offense...

Then he can get better playing 28 minutes a game or so. You guys act like he plays Biyombo type minutes.

[fatlever]

zeller was getting minutes last year when he didnt deserve them. cliff stayed with him and it payed off in the 2nd half of the year. if zeller was a 5 year vet playing like he was playing, he would have been on the end of the bench. MKG got a steady 15-30 minutes a game regardless of his play, good or bad. he started every game last year that he was available. MKG is getting plenty of playing time. We'd all like to see him get more minutes in the 4th and be more involved in the offense.

i agree with those who say its likely we trade or stash at least one of our 3 picks. i cant see us bringing 3 rookies into this team. we have enough guys that need minutes to develop as is, while at the same time, balancing the need to win games to make the playoffs again.

also a bit unfair to compare teams to the spurs. as long as duncan was there, the spurs were a lock for 50 wins. they had the luxury of giving guys minutes that normally wouldnt get them. credit pop for realizing that developing his bench and resting his stars was ultimately more important than fighting for home court, which they got half the time.

[Liver_Pooty]

zeller was getting minutes last year when he didnt deserve them. cliff stayed with him and it payed off in the 2nd half of the year. if zeller was a 5 year vet playing like he was playing, he would have been on the end of the bench. MKG got a steady 15-30 minutes a game regardless of his play, good or bad. he started every game last year that he was available. MKG is getting plenty of playing time. We'd all like to see him get more minutes in the 4th and be more involved in the offense.

i agree with those who say its likely we trade or stash at least one of our 3 picks. i cant see us bringing 3 rookies into this team. we have enough guys that need minutes to develop as is, while at the same time, balancing the need to win games to make the playoffs again.

also a bit unfair to compare teams to the spurs. as long as duncan was there, the spurs were a lock for 50 wins. they had the luxury of giving guys minutes that normally wouldnt get them. credit pop for realizing that developing his bench and resting his stars was ultimately more important than fighting for home court, which they got half the time.

Well said, MKG got plenty of minutes to develop, and will continue to do so.

[catch20two]

I think it's pretty simple that winning games is more important than developing players because there's only but so much development a player can make when they're developing bad habits and losing which lead to a losing mentality. But at the same time I want to say that Clifford used MKG all wrong by banishing him from the most crtical parts of the game when he's our best defender. Even the advanced numbers support that the #spacing lineups that put MKG on the bench in the 4th only made our team worst, not better. I also think that Clifford kinda misused Biz as well. Clifford treated Biz as if he came on the floor and did nothing, as if it was a punishment to him as a coach to play Biz because of obligations, but all Biz did was come in the game to protect the rim at a elite level and rebound like a mad man.

I don't always agree that winning now is more important than developing talent. Russel Westbrook wasn't a "win-now" player when he entered the league and nor was Tony Parker (among many others). That stated they got the nod and developed into productive players. Giving a player playing time and reason to be confident is huge, as without confidence you will never play to your potential. That is why I wish MKG and Zeller were playing starter minutes.

Can only tank using the development excuse but so many years. We did and it resulted in MKG, Taylor, and Zeller instead Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden level talent.