Aligning coaching instructions

Organizing coaches to work together to benefit a player's development

Fake Fundamentals: Volume 4 and Hard2Guard Player Development Newsletter, Volume 8 now available:

I listened to a podcast with ALBA Berlin’s Carlos Frade.

ALBA Berlin is the EuroLeague team known for playing young players, and especially young local players, and consequently have the reputation as one of the better clubs in Europe for developing young talents. He made a point about all coaches — because players often play with multiple teams at different levels and work with multiple coaches — knowing the instructions and goals for every player.

This is a distinct advantage for well-organized European clubs, but unfortunately, the opposite often occurs, and the opposite is nearly standard practice in the United States. We undermine players’ development, even when every coach has the best intentions or the knowledge to offer something insightful.

Years ago, I attended an NCAA offseason workout with a coach who went on to become an NBA Head Coach. I have no problem saying it was the worst workout I have seen at any level. Unfortunately, I imagine the issues occur more frequently than not.

Two players worked out, one on each basket. I believe there were 18 people on the court, roughly nine per basket, between assistants, managers, volunteers, and student coaches. After every repetition, multiple coaches gave feedback. This is bad coaching, regardless of the level or the competence of the coaching. What is the goal for the player? What is the player working on? What is a player supposed to do with 4-5 different instructions between every repetition?

I trained two players years ago, a high-school freshman and a college freshman. The college player was deciding whether or not to continue playing or quit and start coaching. After the workout, I asked his impressions. He said it was good, but he liked this other trainer better. He said the high-school player traveled and I did not correct it. I agreed. He said the other trainer would have stopped it on every mistake. I said, okay, but he was working on something brand new, and the focus was his shooting. How many repetitions would we get if I stopped every time he made a mistake on something unrelated to our focus? We agreed to disagree. The next year, he coached junior varsity and texted me and said now I understand.

"If you chase two rabbits, you will not catch either one.” — Russian proverb

A player cannot concentrate on five things at once. Regardless of basketball knowledge and acumen, the college coaches did not know how to coach. If the workout is deliberate practice, and we are changing something or learning something specific to improve, why focus on other things? Too many times, coaches are distracted and bounce from one thing to another. First, one coach commented on a player’s footwork, while the second coach commented on his follow through, and the third coach commented on his effort. On the next repetition, each coach added something different. What are we doing? What is the goal? The coaches were not aligned in their instructions and goals for the players; there was no apparent plan. It’s just exercise, not skill development. Every repetition elicited different, often unrelated feedback. The coaches were coaching for themselves, trying to justify their presence on such a large staff, not for the betterment of the players. They were acting as coaches, not actually coaching.

Two seasons ago, I coached an 18-year-old who had had multiple coaches attempt to fix his shot within a few months; his national team coach, his first head coach, his second head coach after the first coach was fired, and a skill development coach, at minimum. I coached a 15-year-old who, at the end of the season, told the club that everyone tried to mess with his shot, except Brian. Neither player had a perfect shot, but both had things to like.

The older player’s situation is not unlike the approach in the U.S. Players have a high school coach, an AAU coach, and a skills trainer, at minimum. Rarely do these three interact or discuss their goals for the players. The high school coach may teach one thing, the AAU coach another, and the skills trainer another. Each may be correct in a vacuum, or at least not incorrect, and offer valid points or feedback. However, who should the player follow when each coach has a different idea or offers conflicting feedback? How does a player know which feedback to listen to and which to ignore? How do we expect players to improve in this environment?

The first time I worked with the older player, as he knocked down shot after shot to warm up, I asked his free-throw percentage. He said he shot around 90% from the free-throw line. Why attempt to change or alter the shooting technique of a 90% free-throw shooter? The younger player had some issues with his shot, but he was a pretty good midrange shooter, and knocked down a few late-game pull-up jump shots in clutch situations during the season. Why mess with success because the technique does not look exactly like your model?

https://twitter.com/180shooter/status/1658911353724182562

Last week, I re-tweeted this video of Aaron Jackson shooting . He seems to control his shot consciously on a few repetitions, which reminded me of my players. With the short time frame between the end of the college season and the NBA Draft Combine, this conscious control may be expected for someone attempting to change his shooting technique. Ultimately, however, consciously controlling one’s shot during competitive games is not a recipe for success.

When I started with the two players, I told them to stop trying to please other people. I offered almost no instruction. Even when the older player asked if this or that was correct, I stayed quiet or asked questions: How does it feel? What do you think? We worked on drills to move their shots in the direction I thought would improve their success, but without much feedback from me, and no internal cuing; they had had enough of that. They needed freedom to explore and move beyond the constraints of their previous instructions.

At the junior college level, I had the environment Frade described because I was the head coach and the individual skills coach. Players received only one message, unless they snuck out to work with a private coach. One reason players improved their shooting percentages, then often regressed at their NCAA school was the consistency of the messaging and instructions. They did not hear one thing today from the skills coach and another from the head coach tomorrow. They did not overthink their shots. They did not receive multiple opinions on their shot from different coaches with different interests.

The problem is rarely the information the coach or trainer gives to the player. Instead, the problem often is the volume of information and feedback, and occasionally the conflicting information and feedback from different coaches. Coaches should observe more than they talk, I believe, but it is hard to post observing on Instagram. Even pre-social media, when I trained players in a public gym, several people watched my workouts, and told the players’ parents that I did not do anything. They told the parents they should take their sons or daughters to another trainer who yelled more or instructed more or used more gadgets and toys. We have a perception of good coaching, and watching silently does not fit our perceptions. We want activity, trainers who sweat with the players, volume, noise. I consulted with a very popular trainer once who talked almost the entire session, and offered almost no information. For 90 minutes, he said “good, good, harder, faster” constantly, with varying tones and volumes, and people regarded the session as great instruction. It fits our perceptions of coaching — noise, volume, activity — despite the lack of any actual information or individualized feedback. What was good? What needs to be faster? What does harder mean when making a dribble move and a layup?

Within organizations (school, AAU), coaches should have a plan for players and share the plan between the coaches so everyone is on the same page. Ideally, these organizations share their plans with the other coaches in the players’ lives, whether AAU/HS or a skills trainer. Not every coach or trainer will agree or want to participate. That happens when nobody is really in charge, whereas in a European club, a well-run club has a technical director or a sporting director who is in charge and gets everyone aligned and moving in the same direction for each player. Ultimately, the coaching must benefit the player, as the player is in the center of PLAYER development, and each coach who touches the player assists in his or her journey.