athleticism vs fundamentals: which is more successful?

I just know the Jazz have a bunch of stiffs besides Kirilenko, and they are in a fight for a playoff spot ahead of teams like the Clippers and Suns who have some of the most athletic players in the league. It could be all Jerry Sloan, but I don't think Jerry Sloan and Mike Dunleavy are at far extremes in terms of being able coach. Sloan is better, but it's not like Dunleavy is a dumbass. Sloan picked guys to play on his team who might have already had learned the fundamentals of winning basketball before going to the Jazz, or he got guys who were apt to learn basketball fundamentals very easily. This is why I would like to see the Rockets draft a senior point guard coming out of a good college program. They will be available in the 2nd round. Maybe Charlie Ward comes to the Rockets. It could be Brent Barry. Those guys seem to have a sound foundation in knowing how to play basketball with their limited physical skills.

 

If anyone wants to see a fundamental point guard who can shoot the lights out, just watch the Kings with Bibby. Mike Fratello was raving about Bibby saying he had limited physical skills but was able to shoot like a madman. Shooting is the most important fundamental of all.

Grizzlies were crazy to trade him. They would be competing for a title with him.

 

At their current age, they are dependent more on their fundamentals than their athleticism. They aren't youngsters anymore.

 

This is an excellent article concerning a possible seachange in a return to fundamentals due to the zone defense rules.

http://www.yaleherald.com/archive/xxxi/2001.04.13/sports/p27elitorial.html

Time for a change
BY DARCY WIECKS

With a new champion crowned just last week, the 2001 college basketball season has sadly come to an end—undoubtedly a disappointing time every year for a true basketball fan. Yes, I'm differentiating between college basketball and the one-on-one, drive-to-the-hoop style of the NBA. The NBA has also recognized the prevalence of this isolation play and voted on Wed., Apr. 12 for a new set of rules that includes four major changes: implementing a three-second rule on defense, giving teams just eight seconds (currently 10 seconds) to cross midcourt, redefining the term "incidental contact" to decrease the number of touch fouls called, and ridding the league of illegal defense.

The rule changes should make NBA basketball faster.

Jerry Colangelo, owner of the Phoenix Suns and head of the commission on the rule changes, emphasized the league's desire to encourage scoring, fast breaks, and full-court defense. "We want to quicken the game," Colangelo said. While the numerical results of the poll were released, positive voted from only 20 of the 29 teams had been required to approve the change.

So what do these changes mean for the NBA? The end of illegal defense will allow teams to play zones, which would eliminate the one-on-one offense that allows strong offensive players to score easily. Zone defense will encourage jump shots and team offense. By allowing just eight seconds to cross mid-court, defenses will be encouraged to press, forcing turnovers as guards rush to move the ball up the court.

With NBA scoring averages down about three points per game in the last decade, it comes as no surprise that the league would adjust the rules to increase scoring. But will it really help? Does the NBA still have quality outside shooters who will be able to drain jump shots when play inside the key is hindered by the new zone defense? Many critics have speculated that the rule will decrease scoring further, as the NBA has shifted its play to highlight the abilities of strong individuals who can take the ball one-on-one against virtually any defender in the league. Kevin Loughery, former NBA player and columnist for CNNSI, commented that the league lacks "pure shooters" who will benefit from the "jump-shooting contest" that NBA basketball will supposedly become.

Perhaps Loughery is right—the rule change will encourage shooting. But would a return to the basics be a negative change for NBA basketball? The zone defense promotes the basketball player as an all-around athlete with strong fundamentals, as opposed to a tall player who can make short jumpers, layups, and dunks—obviously not the most challenging shots in the game when the basket is a mere two feet away and players can practically reach the backboard without jumping.

Both NBA rookies and current league leaders in field goal percentage illustrate the current problem in the NBA. DerMarr Johnson and Jamal Crawford, the sixth and eighth picks respectively in the 2000 NBA Draft, have shooting percentages below 40 percent—Johnson's is a dismal 38 percent and Crawford's an even worse 33 percent. Of the top 10 leaders in field goal percentage, eight are forwards or centers over 6'7", and legendary guard and sharpshooter John Stockton is the only player listed solely as a guard—he's also the only one shorter than 6'5". I don't deny that Shaquille O'Neal, the overall leader in field goal percentage, is a talented basketball player. However, one would be pressed to prove that his 7'1" stature and proximity to the basket by nature of his position don't contribute to his 57 percent average and his consistent ability to put the ball in the hoop.

Don't get me wrong—I love watching players dribble past two defenders to dunk, but I also value strong perimeter shooting, the fast break, and watching a successful full-court press. As Duke topped Arizona in the NCAA Championship game, Mike Dunleavy '03 led the team on offense with 21 points, which included a perfect demonstration of what the NBA hopes to achieve with this rule change: three three-pointers in a row that electrified the crowd, provided Duke with a lead that the Wildcats could not overcome, and demonstrated the importance of outside shooting.

 

This above article was written awhile back, but look at the Kings. Their management had the foresight to acknowledge a significant change in the NBA had happened, so they built a roster that could benefit from that change rather than fight it. Should someone get a athletic dunker or a dead-eye shooter in the draft? I'd rather take Peja than Shawn Marion.

 

After watching the Suns game, I'm putting Steve Francis in the athlete with no fundamentals category. The guy can't break a press which all good guards learn in college. He can't make an outside shot which forced him to fight for layups against Amare and Shawn Marion's outstretched arms. That's just nuts. Making an outside shot is the single most important fundamental in basketball in my opinion.