The Player Development Thread

[HermanG]

Looks like I called it, at least in this game tonight against the Wolves. Great effort from Ace. And they handed him the keys, and he responded, 20 points, 4 boards, so that is good to see. Of course he is still chasing Key himself at 40 pts this game tonight, so far. Wow. I mean we earned a win here with the triple double from Nurk at 14/16/10/1/1, just wild. And Collier with an 18 point double double. One of those nights when everything clicks. And the wild thing is our defense is so bad we could still lose this, even with performances of the year from like 5 of these guys. But a good example of chucking Ace in the deep end to see if he responds, and he did! Good on him!

That is not true at all. They handed him the keys for like 2 possessions in the first half and that went horribly wrong. Then they put him back to play his usual off ball role and he flourished when Minnesota started focusing on trying to slow down Key.

Ace had his best game as a pro but mostly because of him playing clean disruptive defense and finishing well on his cuts/spot up shots. And even though he only got 5 rebounds they were mostly very important rebounds and I was very impressed about the two near the end where he also got the ball out fast to Collier before Minny players could try and steal it from him.

One moment where he also showed maturity (and opted NOT to use "the keys") was with little less than 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter he had plenty of open space to take his favourite midrange jumper but he realized there was time on the clock to look for a better shot so instead he dribbled it out and gave it to Key (who ended up taking a worse shot, but thats besides the point).

 

[KqWIN]

Wrt Ace, “Why not both?”

I think it’s great that he’s involved off the ball and developing that part of his game. I also think it would be great to put him in different situations even if he’s not great at them now.

It goes back to the point I made earlier where “looking the best” doesn’t necessarily mean developing more. If we want Ace to provide the most to winning right now, give him no freedom and restrict him to only off ball and hustle plays. But if winning the games aren’t our priority, I don’t see why we can’t sprinkle in some other stuff as well.

I don’t actually think his big development really relies on off ball vs self created. He just needs to attack the basket and get to the FT line more in general.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Wrt Ace, “Why not both?”

I think it’s great that he’s involved off the ball and developing that part of his game. I also think it would be great to put him in different situations even if he’s not great at them now.

It goes back to the point I made earlier where “looking the best” doesn’t necessarily mean developing more. If we want Ace to provide the most to winning right now, give him no freedom and restrict him to only off ball and hustle plays. But if winning the games aren’t our priority, I don’t see why we can’t sprinkle in some other stuff as well.

I don’t actually think his big development really relies on off ball vs self created. He just needs to attack the basket and get to the FT line more in general.

There's being not being great at them and having no ability to do anything with them. Sure he can try it here and there but it should like 10% of what he does.

 

[KqWIN]

There's being not being great at them and having no ability to do anything with them. Sure he can try it here and there but it should like 10% of what he does.

Ace has played iso ball his entire life, it’s not like you’re asking TH to get loose. But it’s not really important how good he is at those things right now. You let him do some of things you think he has the potential to be.

I want to put Ace in a lot more situations than standing in the corner and occasionally coming off the screen. I’d let him handle the ball a bit, be the offensive hub, and give him an iso or two. The great thing is that it doesn’t have to be one thing or another.

Same is true for the defensive end. I don’t mind putting him in a position where he might get crushed as long as it’s something I can envision him doing at some point.

 

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

There are a lot of schools of thought around this. When we had Deron as a rookie, for example, Sloan was playing him limited minutes, coaching him regularly after plays, and giving him times to stretch himself, the very definition of player development. To which many, including pundits around the league and other coaches even, were complaining that Deron was ready, just hand him the keys. There is some value in allowing someone to fail at their assignments and learn from said failure, rather than coddle incessantly. I take this track with new supervisors/managers/ and even senior managers working for me. Give them good details about the job, make sure they have the support they needs, give them training and clear expectation and make sure they have a good picture of what success looks like, not just failure. Then let them off the leash and let them botch things and learn from that. So it is tough to say what he will respond to the most. I say this is the year to do something like that if they are going to. He has been "bench-learning" for nearly half the season now. Now let him have the keys and make some mistakes of his own along the way. Plus it all but guarantees us a better pick, and frankly that we can just keep the pick to begin with. But if he responds and we are suddenly winning, well that is a major positive in and of itself. But we won't know if we don't let him try. I can't think of many players who said "my career would have been way better if coach had limited my minutes a lot more my rookie year, I hate him for letting me play and learn the ropes on my own".

That's one way to interpret Sloan's handling of D-Will. The other, and which I find more credible, is that Sloan was adhering to some outdated "old-school" code that required him to make D-Will "earn his minutes," notwithstanding he was clearly superior to the people Sloan played in front of him--Keith McLeod and Milt Palacio--who were career journeymen that had done nothing over the course of their uneventful and mediocre careers to earn the starting and otherwise preferred roles Sloan awarded them. Both pretty much disappeared from sight soon after losing Sloan's preferment. From where I sit, Sloan was being pig-headedly stubborn, not some coaching/development savant. If I recall correctly, he only began starting D-Will and giving him a central role when ownership/management rebelled and forced him into it. Although D-Will eventually came to appreciate Sloan, his treatment during his rookie year left him bitter toward Sloan for some time afterward.

 

[LogGrad98]

That's one way to interpret Sloan's handling of D-Will. The other, and which I find more credible, is that Sloan was adhering to some outdated "old-school" code that required him to make D-Will "earn his minutes," notwithstanding he was clearly superior to the people Sloan played in front of him--Keith McLeod and Milt Palacio--who were career journeymen that had done nothing over the course of their uneventful and mediocre careers to earn the starting and otherwise preferred roles Sloan awarded them. Both pretty much disappeared from sight soon after losing Sloan's preferment. From where I sit, Sloan was being pig-headedly stubborn, not some coaching/development savant. If I recall correctly, he only began starting D-Will and giving him a central role when ownership/management rebelled and forced him into it. Although D-Will eventually came to appreciate Sloan, his treatment during his rookie year left him bitter toward Sloan for some time afterward.

I agree with this a lot. There can be 2 things at play here, you know. I think he was going old-school and carrying on the "you earn your minutes" concept. But I also think that is generally what is accepted as "player development", limit their minutes, coach them in between plays, etc., and Sloan did both to a fault. Sloan was rigid in many ways, and for a lot of it, that is why he was successful as a coach, his teams were disciplined and played the way he wanted them to. But it also cost him games at times, being too rigid to adjust to the situation. For D Will it is hard to say what would have been different to have been under a different coach at the beginning, but who knows, he may have blossomed even more than he did in his rookie year, Mitchell-style.

But my larger point stands, that there is no one single way to develop a player, there are myriad ways to go about it. And it is tough to say which approach is the "right" one as really it will depend heavily on the player themselves.


That said, imagine having CP3 under Sloan, being held back like that, limited time, chewed out between plays, the Sloan way. He would have been demanding a trade before the ASG his rookie year. lol

 

[Tremendous Upside]

Ace has played iso ball his entire life, it’s not like you’re asking TH to get loose. But it’s not really important how good he is at those things right now. You let him do some of things you think he has the potential to be.

I want to put Ace in a lot more situations than standing in the corner and occasionally coming off the screen. I’d let him handle the ball a bit, be the offensive hub, and give him an iso or two. The great thing is that it doesn’t have to be one thing or another.

Same is true for the defensive end. I don’t mind putting him in a position where he might get crushed as long as it’s something I can envision him doing at some point.

So you want to sabotage both the offense and the defense in order to lose and tank more effectively. Got it.

Why not just say so?