Dirk Nowitski Elton Brand Shane Battier Reggie Miller Jamal Tindsley Tony Parker Wally Sczerbiak A few old and a few young... DaDakota
I think European "fundamental soundness" comes from every player being taught the same thing, almost to a fault. Everyone over in Europe is taught how to shoot, make a good bounce pass, cut, set a pick, and work within a team. Even a 7'3" center like Sabonis is making passes and shooting 3's like a guard. The European game is a more "pure" form of basketball. There aren't so many isolation plays, and guys learn to space the floor on offense, and play zones as well as man on defense. However, really significant weight training tends to be laid aside, probably because there simply aren't that many low-post isolations, and that severely cripples European players in the NBA, especially 4's and 5's, because they are guarding bigger, stronger players that are posting them up. American players, on the other hand, are taught more based on their inherent talents. If someone is good at something, that talent becomes the focus of the coaching. That way, you end up with more specialized players that are very good with their portions of the game. The disadvantage is that American players aren't necessarily as well-rounded. Different things are emphasized every year. Remember how the NBA used to be a bunch of shooters? Well, for the last couple of years, athleticism has been emphasized more, and shooting has had less emphasis. But you know what? Shooting is on the way back. US basketball has always been that way, and always will be. Overcompensation in a percieved "weakness" of the American game will create another weakness every time. There's a reason American coaches and GMs are paid so much: finding the right combination of these American specialist players is not easy to do, but done well, an American team will usually beat a European one. Thing is, it's really easy to put together a bunch of Europeans and have them play well together... they have all the same skills. Done well, an American team simply causes too many match-up problems for a European one. I can't really endorse either one, but they both certainly have merits and drawbacks. I don't think the fact that US teams have won most of the battles against the Euros means that their style of play is unquestionably more dominant. Firstly, people in American are more motivated to play professionally because of the huge $ and simple prevalence of the sport in everyday life. In a generation, the Europeans will most likely be caught up, because the average kid now knows that he has a good chance to be drafted. Look at the WNBA: talent in the WNBA has increased exponentially every season. Why? Because now all those little girls that play basketball have something worthwhile to shoot for. Also, most of the nations playing the US are far smaller. A World team might beat a US team... more even in terms of area. Who knows?
pg's-bibby, kidd sg's- T mac, A houston sf- pippen, jordan pf- The big fundamentals tim duncan, elton brand c- ?????are their any centers good enough to be called fundamental. oh mutombo, mourning, robinson, and all the other old guys at the center postion.
I am not sure if any of you guys brought this up buy if you look at the list, most of those players have been playing a while. When you compare those guys to Dirk, Peja, and Gasol, they have been in the league longer. I admit that some of them came into the league fundamentally sound, but all of them have improved their weaknesses. Being a Mavs fan, I know that Dirk is improving every year, and there is no reason to believe that Gasol and Peja aren't doing the same thing. I think to truly have a good idea of the Europeans, you will have to look at the ones that are playing and the ones that have been drafted this year in five or so years and see what kind of players they are.
Mash and Dirk can't pass a lick unless you count airballs that are rebounded and can't play a lick of D shooting counts as D!!!!!
I have trouble believing that American basketball is evolving towards producing more defensive stoppers for the reasons given above. Most people who play basketball don't want to be defensive stoppers. Most of them want to be the guy doing the windmill dunk. When you see a poster of Jordan, he's not swiping the ball. he's dunking from the free throw line. That's probably the most well-known image in the NBA. And it's what our current generation of stars aspired to. Are the players of today better at defense? Maybe. They're certainly stronger, faster, and larger. Which all tends to mean more on defense, as opposed to offense. I mean, being 6 inches taller with better speed doesn't exactly help your jump shot. But it does make you more capable of preventing someone else from getting their shot off. So, you're left with the sheer fact that these kids want to dunk, and have the physical tools to stop other people from doing so. Which means that they have to work that much harder to dunk. This, in turn, means that the other parts of their game are neglected even more. Cyclical...
--If fundamentals wasn't preached in the States, why are the majority of great NBA players fundamentally strong at most all aspects of the game. You said it...the majority of "great NBA players" I'm talking about current European rising prospects versus rising American HIGH SCHOOL and COLLEGE prospects. NOW, the fundamentals are not being as well taught as previously. Rick Fox has been around awhile and Christie is the exception, not the rule. For example top Illinois players such as Sean Dockery may have amazing handles and flashy play, but how well can he shoot? Even Will Bynum(also top in Chi-town, now in U of Arizona) who was badass in HS has been struggling with his shot in college. What about Luther Head, ranked in the top 100 and playing for Illinois but can't make a jumper to save his live. James White is a perfect example of this new breed who can dunk like crazy but have no fundamental game because they never needed to. -- Maybe it is because those teams are being stopped by a trend towards defense. Maybe they can't stop the teams developed around team defense and creative playmakers. If you have a team where everyone can shoot, it doesn't matter how big or physical the other team is. If you have good spacing and ball movement, it cannot be stopped. I still think defense is a little overrated in the NBA. It's light-years ahead of European defense, but the offense is SO GOOD, that it doesn't matter. A creative playmaker can only take you so far, if your teammate is set up wide open and can't hit the jumpshot.
I think it doesn't make sense to pick out the 10 most complete US players and then say "Look! How do those Euros stack up against them? No D! Ha! I told you so!". There's no question that guys like KG, Duncan and Kobe are fundamentally sound players. Unfortunately, not many American NBA players are like them. Look at Maggette, D. Miles, B. Wallace, Kwame Brown. They all have talent. Would you call their games well rounded? I certainly wouldn't. And when you take these guys into consideration, the debate gets interesting.
The difference between American basketball and the rest of the world is largely cultural. American ball is individualistic and physical. The rest of the world see basketball as a fundamentally finnesse kind of team sport. American youngsters see basketball as a collection of athletes showing each other what you can do with a ball. Also, in the US, basketball is a street sport. It's like soccer in Brazil. Kids start playing street ball as soon as they can walk. This together with a system of professional leagues results in Brazil producing far more soccer talent than any other country. Same with basketball in the US. That is also why Brazilian soccer and American bball is flashier than the Euros. On the street, you don't have a coach yelling at you (much less benching you) when you make a flashy move and loose the ball. But when you do get to make a flashy bastket, you are rewarded by all the oohs and aahs. Plus, the NBA marketing strategy is to show the highlights of flashy dunks. Kids watch those and naturally aspire to that kind of plays. In Europe, kids are brought up in a professional system. None of them dare to put individual showmanship above the team concept. So to be sucessful there, you have to be "fundamentally" sound. And they drill your techniques with LOTS of repetition. That's why all Euro players, whether you are a 7 footer center or a 6 footer guard, can shoot consistently. Same is true with the Chinese. Yao is a good shooter not just because he is gifted, but also because he has been drilled since the day he touched a basketball. However many American kids got drilled that way?
But, who claims Brazil lacks training for soccer fundamentals (especially who in Brazil), despite their lack of precision offenses matching Italy and Germany. By contrast, it is hip now in US media to say that American basketball lacks training of fundamentals for the very reason that there is a trend towards fancy versus precision. I don't even look at the trend that way in terms of NBA history. "Fancy" has always existed in probably the same proportion. What is different is the evolution of team defenses, imo? I'm with rimbaud. Too much of a premium on "fundamental basketball" is placed on whether players have midrange games. I can't look at it that way. Many pure shooters at Indiana got dismissed by Knight for their lack of being able to learn his concepts of the passing game.
One thing I know for sure. I play basketball with teenagers regularly. A lot of them are very talented. But all of them play like Allen Iverson. They either jack up 3s or go full speed to the basket. I have yet met a youngster who wanted to play like John Stockton. I know, I know. Stock is hated here. But we are talking about fundamentals. I'd pick Stockton as the quintesential fundamental freak. OK, maybe it's a bad illustration. Kids like Iverson b/c of his tatoo, and loathe Stockton b/c of his pants. Nothing to do with basketball skills.
I only have 2 points: 1."Team defense" as you call it is so overrated. You keep saying team defense in America is so strong that you have to have creative playmakers, because a line-up of 5 jumpshooters couldn't handle the pressure. That's what you're saying, right heyp? I agree with you in saying 5 guys with just shooting skills and no d won't fare well in the NBA. The Europeans used to just have shooting skills, but now they are starting to show more versatile skills including handling, passing, and athleticism. No matter how good a "team defense" is, if you have one good ball-handler and four other guys who can pass decently and shoot well, they could still fare well with ball movement and good spacing. So this team defense shutting down mid-range shooters, I don't completely buy. Would you think Duke was a good defensive team in college? Would you agree Indiana was a good 3 point team in college? What happened there? 2."...it is hip now in US media to say that American basketball lacks training of fundamentals for the very reason that there is a trend towards fancy versus precision. " What is this reason? I don't see what you're saying Anyways, if you look at top NBA players, then you are correct. They do have fundamental skills. The thing is that scouts are comparing European prospects who have been playing in the pros to American prospects in college or HS. Look at the top level recruits at any school. They are all used to getting by on their atheticism and taking it to the rim every time. They can't get away with that forever. They have to have a better understanding of the game. I'm not saying none of them do, but people see Europeans as more fundamentally sound because they will pass the ball and they can make the jumpshot. Look at most top HS seniors going to the big college and see how many of them have shooting as one of their strengths. Someone like Amare Stoudemire is a freak. He can dunk on anyone. Now if he only had a mid-range j...In Europe, everyone is taught to shoot no matter what their height, i.e. Dirk, Pau, Hedo, etc. What a 7 footer does has been transformed due to Europeans who can shoot, but also some Americans like KG. People like James White, Sean Dockery, the blue-chips going to top 25 schools. The people that will leave school early to enter the lottery. THese are the ones compared to Europeans. These are the ones suffering and dropping out of the 1st round when Tskitisvilli, Nachbar, and Welsch are picked above them. I do think it's gone a little overboard, but it is a wake-up call. Don't get me wrong. I still love the American game much more and think they can be more fun to watch, but should just learn how to shoot better. I know the fundamentals are taught at some places, but odd as it may sound, it often is not at the highest American levels.
overrated?? Why do European leagues so clearly lack it, though, if it is so easy? Team defense??? Chucky Daly popularized if not invented Rotational Defense. That takes a lot of court awareness, preparation, coaching and team work. You have to know who on the court you are going to leave, in what situations and how you are going to rotate off of that. Team defense is further not overrated in terms of zones. Coaches teach zones just as much as anything in HS and College. imo, you are overrating the amount of knowledge and teamwork required of teaching Jump Shooting and swinging the ball around to the open man, if you say Team Defense is overrated. What is overrated on the defensive end, if anything, is the individual SG "stopper." What is overrated as fundamentally sound is the black-hole, pure shooters like Wally S who Garnett complained about for disrupting the flow of the team. Defense wins championship, and it must be taught, to include court awareness and basic fundamentals like moving your feet, blocking out, fronting and backing, not be shielded by the offensive man, patience on jumping, timing etc. Correct. I'm saying the rotation defense of Chuck Daly stopped the two best team offenses that the NBA has ever seen, arguably. Chicago and several other teams copied that (if not the entire league). My supposition is it is a viable strategy to develop conservative offenses around one superstar playmaker or low post scorer and for the coaches then to concentrate surrounding him with the leagues best defense, despite sacrificing better shooting. It is a matter of strategy, not fundamentals. The point is: is one league more fundamentally strong, or is the difference more like the difference between Brazil and Germany. My point in one question is: Does Peja know more about how to play fundamental basketball than Doug Christie? Look at the role players of the best teams and the stars of the best teams. I don't see symptoms of lack of fundamentals. As for the players who truly go for flash over learning the game...for every one of them, there is a Wally Schicabob who is a pure shooting black hole, where motion ends.
I think you misunderstood "Team defense is overrated" I didn't mean IT was overrated, I meant the team defense of the teams playing currently is not as good as you say. I know defense wins championships, but I also know good offense always beats good defense. You are correct. Team defense DOES take more work and practice than just learning how to swing the ball to the open man. --What is overrated on the defensive end, if anything, is the individual SG "stopper." What is overrated as fundamentally sound is the black-hole, pure shooters like Wally S who Garnett complained about for disrupting the flow of the team. Agree --Defense wins championship, and it must be taught, to include court awareness and basic fundamentals like moving your feet, blocking out, fronting and backing, not be shielded by the offensive man, patience on jumping, timing etc. Agree, but it's not necessarily being taught more in the US About zone defenses...you should know good jumpshooters KILL them with ball movement. --surrounding him with the leagues best defense, despite sacrificing better shooting. It is a matter of strategy, not fundamentals. That's the thing I'm saying. The defenders you're talking about are a little overrated. Yes, players like Hedo are getting ate up, but wouldn't you agree defense improves with experience? The Europeans already have the shooting and size, and now athleticism. So with a little time, they should be more developed than a rookie out of college. --is one league more fundamentally strong, or is the difference more like the difference between Brazil and Germany. It's not comparing the leagues. NBA is far superior fundamentally and overall. It's comparing the prospects that are being drafted. --My point in one question is: Does Peja know more about how to play fundamental basketball than Doug Christie? Look at the role players of the best teams and the stars of the best teams. I don't see symptoms of lack of fundamentals. How many Doug Christie's are there? Again, I'm not comparing European prospects to NBA players. The whole thing about the argument, if I'm understanding, is why are European players being DRAFTED over American college players? Most are saying because of their coaching, pro experience, and fundamental drilling. Their defense will come around, but they are better schooled than the urban ballers that you see populating top 100 national recruiting lists who have gotten away with athleticism their whole life. With this athleticism come better defense, but how long will it take for the Europeans to catch up with that? And is the American defense that good currently, anyways? I think the offense can be so good sometimes that it doesn't matter.
Why do you think Europe lacks low post games, exemplified in the lack of true PFs coming from Europe? There is not only a fast, Brazilian creative/street aspect to American bball, but it is also a power game. Power, defense and creative scorers (in the low post, high post and perimeter) defines US ball...not just "street aspect." With such power in this game, there is a tendency to match it with power. Raw power alone fails, though. The power has to learn the fundamentals of playing the low post game, defense, rebounding, position, moves, footwork...everything that is taught at the famous PF/C camps in the States. The other strategy is not to try to match power with power, rather to out precision it with the finesse strategy of 5 shooters and transition, but that is a strategic difference. One is not more fundamentally strong or playing the game "the right way" over the other. Just like no one says Brazil lacks fundamentals versus Germany.
Creativity and fundamentals are not opposites. Both are equally important aspects of good basketball. But sometimes over emphasis on one can result in the neglect of the other. Euro players are traditionally perceived as all fundamentals and no creativity. They are changing now. American basketball is now perceived to be all creativity and no fundamentals. It is probably overblown. But what the alarmists are saying is that American kids should stop just aspiring to the athleticism they see on highlight films and start learning the fundamental skills that win basketball games. And coaches should put more emphasis on *drilling* (not just teaching) kids these skills. And I agree with them based on my observation of today's youngsters.
I think tozai hit the nail on the head here. It's not that American b-ball stars lack fundamentals, but that the average NBA prospect has poorer fundamentals than the average European prospect. I don't know if this is the result of coaching differences, or the fact that European prospects usually play against better competition at a younger age.
