Floor Raiser Versus Ceiling Raiser

How a coach's mentality affects skill development

“More games are lost than won.” — Casey Stengel, New York Yankees

Coaches generally view their role as raising a team’s floor and rely on the players’ talent to raise the ceiling. Stated another way, coaches seek to avoid losing. Bob Knight said, “In order to win, you must first eliminate the things that go into losing.” Coaches often cite turnovers, bad shot selection, missed free throws, not knowing the plays, conceding offensive rebounds, not sprinting back on defense, and lack of communication as the things that go into losing.

Multiple coaches on podcasts have spoken recently about limiting players’ three-point shooting based on practice drills, benching players for shooting certain shots, substituting for players who commit turnovers, and the importance of only attempting safe and secure passes. John Wooden said, “The close games are usually lost, rather than won. What I mean by that is games are mostly won because of the opponent making mistakes during crucial moments.” Coaches attempt to limit mistakes to avoid losing and raise the team’s floor.

Of course, the limits, substitutions, and secure passes generally apply to most players, not the best or most-talented players: Coaches need someone who can make a play outside the offensive sets! Watch nearly any team at any level, and one or two players — those identified as the best players — play through mistakes, slumps, and turnovers, whereas everyone else has a sub waiting for him or her. Stephen Curry and Luka Doncic earned their opportunities to dominate the ball and attempt ridiculously difficult passes and shots because their talent is the difference between mediocre and championship contender. Smart coaches embrace these players. However, how do they develop these players when viewing their role as raising the floor, not the ceiling?

Limiting or reducing mistakes is the path to improvement when raising the floor, not expanding options and possibilities. This mentality causes coaches to embrace many Fake Fundamentals, such as two-hand passes (FF4), no jumping to pass (FF3), no baseline drives (FF2), triple threat (FF), and more. Coaches are not looking for players to expand their skills, but to stay squarely within their comfort zones and make easy plays.

A video resurfaced with Isiah Thomas critiquing Chris Paul’s game because he plays safe, blaming it on an obsession with the assist to turnover ratio. Players internalize avoiding mistakes and making the safe plays because most coaches spend a great deal of time admonishing mistakes and turnovers. However, the best players often are near the lead in turnovers per game, partially because they possess the ball the most, thus they have the most opportunities for turnovers, but also because they attempt to make plays, increase options, and be creative, which is why they are great players.

Conservative coaching tends to be the safest route to prevent loses, which may be the best approach to insure some measure of success, especially with less-talented teams. A conservative approach likely reduces the ways in which a team can lose a game. Teams limit damage by using zones and pack-line defenses; emphasize defensive rebounding and boxouts; and rely on set plays, specific shooters, and safe passes. The overall tone is don’t lose the game, regardless of a coach’s message in pregame speeches. Play it safe.

We evaluate coaches primarily through won-loss record, and avoiding loses is the best approach in the short term, although this approach may not help players develop for the long term. Coaches are incentivized to use a short-term approach when players move from coach to coach and season to season. Few coaches coach players for more than one to two seasons now, and those seasons may be only three to four months. The threat of players leaving for a new program or transferring schools often turns coaches into short-term, win-now coaches.

A short-term approach focused on avoiding losses may be most prudent when time is limited. Transition defense, defensive rebounding, converting free throws, and limiting turnovers are primary floor raisers: Win the possession battle (offensive rebound differential + turnover differential), eliminate the opponent’s easy baskets, and make undefended shots (free throws). These areas reward effort as much as skill or talent: Sprint back on defense, box out, and make safe and secure passes and decisions. While not necessarily easy, these are quick fixes in comparison to developing a non-shooter into a shooter or a dribble-happy combo guard into an expert level decision-maker.

Coaches will say with complete sincerity, “It’s the Jimmy’s and the Joe’s, not the X’s & O’s that win games.” When asked if that means they spend a lot of time on skill development, they reply, “Who has time for individual skills? Our next opponent runs 50 sets, we need a new press break, and we need to add four more zone BLOBs.” They raise the floor and rely on the talent to raise the ceiling on its own.

Balancing the need to be competitive with the need to develop players is difficult, especially during a short season. In the long run, because players’ talent or skill level raises a team’s ceiling, developing more skilled players is advantageous. Of course, recruiting or acquiring talented and skilled players is easier than developing these players. Skill development is time consuming and arduous, and there is no guarantee the work pays off with sufficiently talented players. The end is unknown. A top player transferring in is known. Relying on transfers and acquisitions prolongs the short-term cycle; college coaches often spend as much or more time recruiting the next players as they do instructing and developing their current players.

Again, my concern is not the subjective correctness of this approach, but the impact on skill development when we are concerned with short-term results and emphasize only effort and effort-related parts of the game and see reducing mistakes as the surest way to improve.

How do players develop when they move from a short-term high-school coach and season to a short-term AAU coach and season? Who is incentivized to take the long-term approach?

Individual skills coaches and trainers grew in prominence by filling this void. Parents saw the short-term coaching in high school and AAU and sought other avenues for skill development. Of course, most trainers work in a vacuum; their lessons do not need to transfer to actual game play. They often are outside the system. They use drills for the sake of mastering drills. One prominent trainer even said recently it did not matter if drills transfer to game performance. Why are we training if not to play better during games?

The same approach that leads to avoiding losses does not necessarily lead to wins or skill development. Players need to stretch their skills to improve, which may lead to mistakes. One does not become a three-point shooter by shooting eight-foot shots and one does not become a dynamic point guard by making point-to-wing entry passes and sprinting to the opposite corner. Wooden said, “If you're not making mistakes, then you're not doing anything. I'm positive that a doer makes mistakes.”

Coaches raise the ceiling by encouraging doers. We nearly lost a game one season because a player threw the ball out of bounds late in the game with a behind the back pass. I barely reacted. She developed into a player who probably deserved to be an All-American the next season. We had one of the best offenses in the country, but we tended to commit a lot of turnovers. We tried things. We expanded our skills. I wanted players to play with a free mind, not to question whether or not they should shoot a shot or make a pass.

The best players make plays. They do not learn to make plays by avoiding mistakes; they are not consumed by assist to turnover ratios. They learn by trying new things and stretching their skills. Not every game or every moment is the best time to stretch one’s skills and try a new move; smart players understand situations, time, and score. However, avoiding these efforts is a risk-adverse approach, and nobody gets very far without taking a chance or risking something.

I often encourage players to try new things in practice, even when I know they are unlikely to use the skill directly in a game. The effort to learn something new likely has value in and of itself, and the improvement may improve a skill indirectly.

Two years ago, in our joint practice, an U15 player said he needed a new move as we did a one-vs-one transition drill. He asked me what he should do. I encouraged him to go through the defender’s legs. He did and scored. He asked for another move. I suggested an in-and-out through the defender’s legs, a move Hot Sauce popularized in the And1 Mix-Tapes. He did it and scored. I looked up and his coach was admonishing him. Responsible coaches do not encourage players to dribble through a defender’s legs; this is not serious practice.

Years ago, when I coached U9s, half of our team did the slip ’n slide move from the And1Mix-Tapes in pregame warmups. We encouraged this as it was fun and a challenge for them. It is not something we expected to see, although one player pulled it off in a game, but it encouraged players to try new things and expand their skills. What is wrong with fun?

Jamal Crawford often talks about how he never did dribbling drills, but ended up with the best handle in the NBA. He challenged himself and tried new things; he was not obsessed with his assist to turnover ratio.

There is a time to focus on raising the floor and limiting mistakes, but that time is not the developmental level, in my opinion. No youth or high-school coach is being paid to win championships (that I know of). Ultimately, for most players, youth and high-school sports is predominantly about the experience and maybe learning some life lessons along the way. Why purposely avoid fun? Those lucky few who move on to higher levels need to expand their skill sets too. Throwing in some fun drills, some challenges to stretch their skills, and allowing players to play through mistakes in games will enhance this development.