The Season Recap: What is coaching?

Evaluating coaches by their game behaviors

Last May, I flew to Poland to work with a club’s U16 players, watch the U17 Polish Championships, and decide if I wanted to accept the job as the U17 head coach for the 2024-25 season. I have never had such an opportunity to familiarize myself with the competition prior to accepting a job or taking over a team.

The Polish Championship Finals are a five-day event with five games in five days. Teams are divided into two pools of four, and the top two teams advance to the single-elimination final four. I could not believe there was no off-day between the pool play and semifinals last year, and still cannot believe it. I believed the format increased variance and rewarded depth over quality. My club was undefeated last season, and unquestionably the best team during pool play, before losing in the semifinals and finishing 34-1 on the season. From my viewpoint, they were exhausted in the semifinal game due to a short rotation with so many intense games.

The games were competitive and intense, but not necessarily great basketball. Nobody used a full bench, and most teams were heliocentric. There were a number of tall players, and tall wings, but diminutive point guards dominated the tournament, although the championship-winning team was centered around a versatile big guy. The defense was conservative, and the offense was overly-structured, as every team seemingly ran the same four to five plays or actions: European ball screen motion, Spanoulis cuts for the point guards, Danilovic cuts from the corner.

I believed my SABA and NADA philosophies would be a perfect antagonist to the other teams’ common tactics. From day one, I said 12 players would play every game (maximum you can roster for a FIBA game), and we kept and used 15 players (one quit at Christmas). I said we would be the fastest, most aggressive team with constant full-court defensive pressure. I wanted to move the ball and not rely on a single dominant scorer, and I wanted to use our post players as more than screeners and offensive rebounders.

Our season was divided into three competitions: The local Pomorze Region league; the Centralnej Ligi Juniorek (CLJ), a round-robin amongst the 12 best teams for which we qualified in September that replaced a cup for this age group; and the Polish Championships, the playoffs, which started with regional tournaments, quarterfinals (top 32 teams), semifinals (16), and finals (8). The top four teams from the CLJ qualified directly to the semifinals.

We won our first three games to qualify for the CLJ fairly easily, as most expected. Opponents were not prepared for our aggressiveness, and we had a significant size advantage against these teams. I played 12 players in every game, as three players were injured at this time.

Winning to Enhance Development

Next, we started our regional competition and again won easily. We won with such lopsided scores, we believed the region was down this season. We ended with a 45-point average margin of victory, scoring over 100 points per game while also possessing the best scoring defense. Official statistics outside scoring and fouls were not tracked. The second-place team’s total point differential was barely more than our average margin of victory. We went 9-1 as we lost our final inconsequential game with a shortened roster. As it turned out, ours was the only region to qualify three teams for the finals, arguably making it the most difficult region.

Re-Thinking Blowout Victories

The CLJ started in October and finished in March with games played in a series of four stages. We finished 10-1, winning the championship outright. We led the CLJ in scoring (89.1), two-point field goal percentage (54.8%), overall field goal percentage (46.3%), offensive rebounds per game (16.9), blocks per game (6.5), and bench scoring. We also conceded the fewest assisted baskets per game and had the best two-point field goal percentage defense. We finished second in assists (20.6) and steals (14.7) per game, and third in three-point field goal percentage. Somehow, despite shooting the most two-point field goals per game, and likely the fewest midrange attempts, we drew the fewest fouls per game.

The semifinals series was similar. I liked our pool because the teams played closer to our style, but we arguably had the toughest pool, as ours was the only pool to have three CLJ teams, and both teams from our semifinal group eventually advanced to the last four at finals. We led all 16 semifinal participants in points per game (110.3), two-point field goal percentage (63.9), field-goal percentage (52.5), blocks (7.3), assists (27.7), and steals (18.7), and were second in offensive rebounds (19.7).

The finals were similar. I again liked our pool, but we met the two teams to beat us during the season. We went 2-1 in our pool to advance to the final four. We avenged one of our losses in the final game of pool play, beating our local rivals 103-85 in a win-or-go-home elimination game. We used fourteen players during the three games and played 12 players in all three games. Almost everyone played between 10 and 20 minutes in each game; a few played more when I knew they would have a day off. We only had 10 healthy players at practice as recently as three days before our first game, and we planned ahead to rest these players to avoid five games in five days. Ten players appeared in the semifinal and final games. Playing 12 is hard, especially when everyone plays well.

We met the winner of the other pool in the semifinals in a rematch from two weeks earlier. Our opponent had won the Polish Championships at U13 and U15 with this generation (2008). We led almost the whole game and prevailed 101-96.

We played the preseason favorite, who featured six U15 and U16 national team players from the previous two summers, in the championship game. They beat us in pool play, and earlier in CLJ, and were the team to knock out my group of players from the playoffs last season. We won 108-100 to win the U17 Polish Championships with a final record of 33-3.

We again led the finals in scoring (99.4), two-point field goal percentage (61.3%), field-goal percentage (52.1%), assists (30.4), steals (12.4), and blocks (7.2). We were second in free-throw percentage (65.9%) and three-point percentage (31.2%). Surprisingly, we finished seventh of eight teams in offensive rebounds per game (12).

Ultimately talent wins. Most people considered there to be one favorite (who we beat in the championship game) at the beginning of the year, and a group of five teams behind them. Those were the top six teams at the finals. The rosters who appeared the best on paper performed the best during the season. We were not an overlooked or unknown team that overachieved. Winning both championships was an achievement (U19 had two winners — cup and championships — and last season had two separate winners), but I do not want to oversell my role. We had good players and were expected to be good and have a shot to win a championship. We met or slightly exceeded these expectations.

My purpose in describing this season is not to brag, but to answer the questions I often receive: Can you win playing SABA and NADA? Yes.

From Day 1, I explained there were two ways to win games: Outshoot your opponent or use more possessions (more shot attempts). We worked to improve our shooting, which improved from 24% on three-point field goals early in the season to 31% at the finals, and we embraced a style to create more possessions (steals + offensive rebounds).

The Opening Lessons

I said we would play 12 players in every game, and 12 players played in 33 of our 36 games; by play, I mean more than token minutes when the game has been decided. Only one player played 30 minutes in a game all season, and that was due to an injury to another player in the first three minutes of the game. We played fast to create more possessions to make playing everyone easier. We played everyone because I believe players need minutes to develop, I believe playing time and development maintain practice competitiveness throughout the season, and I believe playing 14 players at the finals with five games in five days provided an advantage in the semifinals and finals, despite being the only one of the four finalists who faced an elimination game in its last pool-play game.

We excelled at the things we emphasized: Possessions, pace, scoring, shot selection, field-goal percentage, offensive rebounding, steals, assists, blocked shots, reducing assists, and two-point field goal defense. We played almost exactly as I described we would play a year ago before I had even accepted the job, despite the team losing its national-team point guard (Spain) and previously playing a very traditional, structured, set play style. Therefore, I may not have had an effect in terms of winning and losing, as the team seemed destined for the top six regardless, but I did mold the group into my style of basketball.

The federation hosted a coaching clinic for young coaches working on their certifications in conjunction with the finals. The consensus, as I was told, was that I did not do anything as a coach; the talent won the games.

I do not yell and scream at players. I do not walk on the court on every possession like my counterpart in the championship game. I actively avoided using timeouts because I trusted our depth to wear down opponents and did not want to give their players extra breaks. We ran three basic plays for the entirety of the championship game, including SLOB and BLOB. I did not draw up special ATOs. I trust my players and our practices. Players perform in the games; I’m not there trying to insert myself into the theater.

The Benefits of Simplicity

It is a fair criticism. I am unabashedly a player’s coach — the players won the games. However, imagine, hours before a championship game, a representative of the federation denigrating one of the coaches in the championship game for not being overly emotional and demonstrative on the sidelines or not running more sophisticated plays; for trusting players, the work in practice, skill development, and depth. It is not hard to understand why Poland, despite the great financial investment and overall economy, large population, and far above-average height, underachieves internationally in basketball. The federation values the act of looking like one is coaching, as portrayed on television and films, more than actual coaching and development through practice.

Our team looked impressive and certainly did not appear out-matched in terms of talent by the team whose entire starting lineup played for the U16 NT last summer. Of course, if the talent was equal, why was only one of our players selected last summer?

Our starting lineup in the championship game (we rotated starters throughout the season; there was no starting five) featured a point guard, selected as the team’s best player, who had never played point guard prior to this season; he was a post two seasons ago and a wing last year. Most believed one wing, the tournament MVP, peaked at U15. The other wing was a post until this season, and he was not considered likely to be on the team when I visited last spring. Our power forward was a center last season, and was used as a center by our U19 team when called up. Our starting center, selected all-tournament, was a year younger, has played basketball for only two years, and people within our own club were upset he received so many minutes early in the season because he was mistake-prone. Once teams start to win, and players start to excel, people forget the starting point; they ignore the development and recalibrate their opinions. Of course, we played for the championship; look at all these talented players. Nobody envisioned this starting lineup at the beginning of the year or even two months ago.

It was easy to see the luxury we had to sit our leading scorer from the CLJ in our first game of pool play, two starters from the semifinal game in our second game, and our all-tournament selection in the third game. However, depth does not just happen. I overplayed our young big in our opening games to give him more game repetitions. I yelled at our experienced guards in practices to pass him the ball and stop blaming him for every mistake, taking them aside and explaining that we would not achieve the goals they had set — winning the Polish Championship — without him performing well at the end of the season.

My own club disagreed with my methods. They did not approve of playing 12 players every game and did everything short of telling me not to play everyone. They said it was fine when we were winning by 80 points, but once we played some serious games, surely I would shorten to an eight-player rotation like a good coach. I stood firm and said no. This is how I coach. I do not count subbing in a player for the last three minutes in a 25-point game as playing. In one game, we used 11 players. In the final two games, we used 10 players, and I still am mad at myself for not playing everyone in the semifinal game. Twelve played in the other 33 games.

So, yes, we had depth. The club attracts good players, but depth only develops when it receives minutes, and often the minutes must precede the preparation to perform in those minutes, especially with developing players.

The one thing that did not develop as much as expected was our three-point shooting, at least on paper. We did shoot a higher percentage at the finals than at any other stage, which demonstrates some improvement. Also, our percentages are affected by smaller sample sizes; we attempted 21.8 three-pointers per game in the finals, but at least one to two attempts per game were end-of-quarter or end-of-shot-clock heaves. Take out two attempts per game, and we shot 34%, which is good for this age group, especially on a team whose leading three-point percentage shooter last season shot 25% and on a team with all 14 players attempting three-pointers during meaningful games (not as jokes at ends of blowouts). Equal opportunity depresses team percentages, but increases development; the young all-tournament post hit a big second-half three-pointer in the championship game, while most coaches (even within my club) would have prohibited him from shooting three-pointers all season. You cannot expect a player to hit a big shot while trailing in the second half of a national final without first allowing him to miss shots during the season without consequence.

The other failure was not getting two of our taller players ready to contribute meaningfully in the finals. Both were new to the club and suffered injuries early in the season that delayed their acclimation to the team and my style. Both have as much potential as anyone on the team, and both demonstrated glimpses of their potential in a few games. Lacking the confidence to insert them into the final two games, even if I can defend the decisions rationally, will always feel like a shortcoming for me for this season. Hopefully it motivates their work this summer, and they avoid the early-season injuries and break out next season, as they were so close to getting over the hump a few times this season.

Things appear obvious at the end of the season. I look like I don’t do anything on the sideline because my work is done. I trust the players. My short pregame speech encapsulated this: We earned our spot. We are prepared for the moment. There is nothing left to do but take a deep breath and go out and perform.