Over-Coaching

[shazam_guy]

Coming up to the Houston game, Don Nelson tried to keep the starting line-up a secret.

"I'd rather that you go to the game and see who starts," Nelson said to reporters. "There are 15 guys on our team, and it will be five of those guys. ... Our opposition reads the paper, and, in the morning at breakfast, they could have a better clue. Why would we do that?"

Now, here's my question: is it just me, or is this a really irritating example of over-coaching? Are there any other coaches in professional basketball that think that surprise starting line-ups are much of a factor in the game? Pretty much every great team I can remember, I can name the starting five plus a sixth man. What is Nelson's starting five with the Warriors this year? What was it last year? Playing time and positions are in constant flux under Nelson, and it seems to me that's a real negative for young players. And I think this is a big part of the reason he does it: he thinks he's out-coaching the other team. Does anyone out there agree with him?

[Coxy]

Good lord no.


Nellie seems to like the fact that we have a 10-11 deep team and he can chop and change it at his disposal whenever he feels the matchups are in his favour. If we play X team, then great the Don says, I can start a small 5. If we play Y team, then I'll go with this lineup. In the Dons infinite wisdom, he hasnt seemed to work out the effect chopping and changing a lineup around has on the team in regards to confidence, cohesion and growth.

He's too smart for his own good sometimes. In trying to outsmart the other team and the other coaches, he will more often than not outsmart himself. Players need defined roles every night so they can consentrate and focus on their nightly job for good. So what if the other teams know what we are going to do? A great game plan featuring defined roles for each player to consentrate on far outweighs the cost of the other team knowing what our lineup and team is about.

You think Phil Jackson or Greg Pop come up against teams and say "Oh dear, they're a small team so I think I'll bench Pau/Tim today". NO. The most effective basketball is complete execution of a defined strategy set out by a smart coach, and no amount of Nellieball will EVER be more successful than it.

**** off Don you fat prick. Thanks.

[Thugleavy_34]

The greatest basketball coach of all time has this to say:

"I focused our team's attention on "us" to the exclusion of everything else...I told them, 'Be prepared with your preparation, not theirs; your execution, not theirs; your effort and desire, not theirs. Don't worry about them. Let them worry about you.' "

[Souvlaki]

Heh, you guys are grasping at straws now. Kind of sad. I feel sorry for you honestly.

Nelson keeping the lineup a secret is probably more to just annoy the media. But if it has any small chance of helping, why not? Second, it's not like we have real superstars on this team. The skill level difference between the starters and the bench is not significant. To that end, I can see why being flexible with the starting lineup is rather trivial.

[old rem]

i don't mind it. We have a lot of "starters" and a few of them do always start. The others platoon. The players pretty much know what's up. They DO want to get minutes,but if they can be adaptable,that's good. We have more instability from turning over the roster so much.

[old rem]

Actually, I worry more about Nellie undercoaching. I think he takes shortcuts,doesn't deal with details.

[Chris Porter's Hair]

Yes, it does seem ironic that Nelson is simultaneously accused of undercoaching and overcoaching. I don't like everything the guy does by a long shot, but we're off to a frustrating start, and it seems like a lot of people are lashing out anywhere they can. Do I like that he has such a helter skelter rotation? Not really; not sure that's helping anything. Do I care in the slightest if he doesn't announce the starting lineup beforehand? Nope. If the players don't know who is starting, that I might care about, but I bet they do.

[KR4]

My coach in college always had the same starting lineup - all year. It was total BS. My Junior year I was playing nearly the entire game, every game, coming off the bench for a dude who literally played until he made a mistake, which took 2 mins on average. So on the opposite side of the spectrum where the starting lineup is cemented, its harmful as well.

My opinion is that the starting lineup should be known at least before shoot around.

[Thugleavy_34]

My coach in college always had the same starting lineup - all year. It was total BS. My Junior year I was playing nearly the entire game, every game, coming off the bench for a dude who literally played until he made a mistake, which took 2 mins on average. So on the opposite side of the spectrum where the starting lineup is cemented, its harmful as well.

My opinion is that the starting lineup should be known at least before shoot around.

A player can play his way into or out of the lineup. That change has to happen over a course of games though, and the rationale for it is based on the play of your team rather than how you match up with your opponent.

[Thugleavy_34]

Heh, you guys are grasping at straws now. Kind of sad. I feel sorry for you honestly.

Nelson keeping the lineup a secret is probably more to just annoy the media. But if it has any small chance of helping, why not? Second, it's not like we have real superstars on this team. The skill level difference between the starters and the bench is not significant. To that end, I can see why being flexible with the starting lineup is rather trivial.

Souvs, I can't speak for others, but in my experience successful teams have had consistent rotations. I would feel the same way whether Nellie was coaching here or not.

[floppymoose]

Successful teams also have players that make the starting rotation obvious, rather than a mix of washed up vets and up-and-coming youngsters.

We aren't unsuccessful because we don't have a consistent lineup.

We don't have a consistent lineup because we aren't successful.

[shazam_guy]

First off, I just named that game this season because it was under my nose. This particular aspect of Nelson-ism has bothered me for years.

Second of all, this has nothing to do with our bad start or grasping at straws to criticize Nelson. I'll bet I've seen more seasons than Souvlaki or almost anyone else around here and I don't give a crap about the first few games. I could have written another general anti-Nelson rant if that was my mood, instead I was just raising a question about one (to me) odd trait of his.

Floppymoose, you probably have a point. But that's in part back to Nelson, too, because he tends to prefer similar guys with similar talents precisely so he can switch them in and out at different positions.

[shazam_guy]

Oh, and it's perfectly possible to over-coach AND under-coach, and Nelson's a perfect example. He's obsessed with match-ups on offense to the point of using people like Barnes, Azubuike, and Pietrus as power forwards, but he doesn't give a damn about defense. What else would you call that?

[KR4]

Successful teams also have players that make the starting rotation obvious, rather than a mix of washed up vets and up-and-coming youngsters.

We aren't unsuccessful because we don't have a consistent lineup.

We don't have a consistent lineup because we aren't successful.

"I eat cuz I'm depressed.....and I'm depressed cuz I eat."

[cladden]

Successful teams also have players that make the starting rotation obvious, rather than a mix of washed up vets and up-and-coming youngsters.

We aren't unsuccessful because we don't have a consistent lineup.

We don't have a consistent lineup because we aren't successful.

"I eat cuz I'm depressed.....and I'm depressed cuz I eat."

Someone's been reading the Little Prince.