PDA

View Full Version : The Full Court Press and Malcolm Gladwell



GuyFawkes38
05-13-2009, 01:08 PM
I keep hearing about the brilliance of Malcolm Gladwell. And then I stumbled on this article by him on the equalizing force of the full court press:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/11/090511fa_fact_gladwell?printable=true

Gladwell centers his argument on a grade school girls basketball team and their brilliant, inexperienced basketball coach:


The second principle was more important. Ranadivé was puzzled by the way Americans played basketball. He is from Mumbai. He grew up with cricket and soccer. He would never forget the first time he saw a basketball game. He thought it was mindless. Team A would score and then immediately retreat to its own end of the court. Team B would inbound the ball and dribble it into Team A’s end, where Team A was patiently waiting. Then the process would reverse itself. A basketball court was ninety-four feet long. But most of the time a team defended only about twenty-four feet of that, conceding the other seventy feet. Occasionally, teams would play a full-court press—that is, they would contest their opponent’s attempt to advance the ball up the court. But they would do it for only a few minutes at a time. It was as if there were a kind of conspiracy in the basketball world about the way the game ought to be played, and Ranadivé thought that that conspiracy had the effect of widening the gap between good teams and weak teams. Good teams, after all, had players who were tall and could dribble and shoot well; they could crisply execute their carefully prepared plays in their opponent’s end. Why, then, did weak teams play in a way that made it easy for good teams to do the very things that made them so good?

So Gladwell decides to extrapolate the effectiveness of the full court press from one girls basketball team and declares that if coaches embraced the full court press, they could beat more talented teams? Ugghhhhhhh

Anybody who watches basketball understands that the opposite is true. Less talented teams must slow down the tempo to limit the opposing teams' possession count (that still probably won't work...but there is hope that the opposing team might choke on those fewer possessions).

Gladwell is an idiot. I won't read his books.

On a side note, although Pete Gillen and Skip Prosser were great coaches who built the X program into a powerhouse, I never liked their full court style of play. I considered Matta and Miller's half court offenses an improvement. I'm hearing that Mack will embrace a more full court style and that worries me a bit.

BBC 08
05-13-2009, 01:47 PM
Read his debate with Bill Simmons today on espn.com and you will think differently about him. I was already a fan of his but after reading this debate I like him even more.

XU 87
05-13-2009, 01:59 PM
On a side note, although Pete Gillen and Skip Prosser were great coaches who built the X program into a powerhouse, I never liked their full court style of play. I considered Matta and Miller's half court offenses an improvement.

I agree, at least as it relates to Skip and his style. The full court style of play is great when it's working. But it's not so great in March and even worse when you're in a possession game that's close. Skip's Xavier teams, particularly the last few years, looked like they had no idea how to win a close game at the end.

GuyFawkes38
05-13-2009, 02:23 PM
Read his debate with Bill Simmons today on espn.com and you will think differently about him. I was already a fan of his but after reading this debate I like him even more.

I'm looking for it now (Simmons is very knowledgeable on bball and I could see him having some issues with this full court press thing).

Edit: wow, very long exchange. From a quick glance Gladwell seems like a smart guy. The full court press thing was stupid. But I guess Gladwell was just using that to make a point on a different subject.

danaandvictory
05-13-2009, 02:30 PM
So Gladwell decides to extrapolate the effectiveness of the full court press from one girls basketball team and declares that if coaches embraced the full court press, they could beat more talented teams? Ugghhhhhhh

Oh my God, I agree 100% with GF. Something must be wrong.

Gladwell is a professional contrarian. He's sometimes very intelligent. This argument is just ludicrously stupid though. The fact that a taint-licking moron like Simmons engages in a 600,000 word beejer about this "theory" (citing the 1994-95 Celtics! How could anyone forget them!) is hilarious.

My favorite part of this exchange today is the assertion that Pitino's current Louisville teams are full of unrecruited scrappers who buy into his system and help U of L overachieve. Does that assertion jibe with any reality you're familliar with?

Fred Garvin
05-13-2009, 07:54 PM
Oh Simmons referenced a Boston team. That never gets old. As if we don't get enough of that with Gammons and the Sox.

wkrq59
05-14-2009, 03:49 PM
I think Gladwell is absolutely right WITH RESPECT TO HIGH SCHOOL, ESPECIALLY GIRLS, GAMES.
To seriously state that the full-court press used on a constant basis will enable weaker teams to beat stronger ones is just plain false. The exceptions were the UCLA teams of Wooden, Denny Crum's Louisville teams --when they used the denial defense--and for a year, the Las Vegas teams of Jerry Tarkanian.
In the pre-shot clock and three-point days, the teams of Pete Newell and Ed Jucker, who's defensive ideals were forerunners of today's successful defenses, showed full-court really does not work.
When Tarkanian and Richardson at Arkansas (40-minutes of hell) got in tight games the press often failed them.
And of all things, Xavier fans should remember Jim McCafferty 's 1958 team won the NIT by breaking consistently the full-court press of Bradley.
However, if you look at the number of high school teams, boys and girls, who feature the full court, especially in the early tournament games, you'll find winners. And those winners are often teams with losing seasons.
I recall Jerry Doerger's McNicholas teams were very tough in the tournaments despite so-so regular seasons because of the press at least partially. Also, remember no shot clock in high school makes a big difference.
The press in all its forms is a powerful weapon when it is used unexpectedly after made free throws as a change of pace. But not as a steady diet for one big reason.
If you score off a press, more often than not one of two things will happen. Your opponent will break the press and score quickly and then immediately press you and as we know, teams that press don't like to be press and psychological low can set in immediately. Or he'll send one player long for a full-court pass and beat you. :D

GuyFawkes38
05-14-2009, 10:20 PM
Very true Q.

In fact, my grade school basketball conference had a couple teams which full court pressed non-stop and as a result dominated (to the dismay of a bunch of parents who felt like full court pressing hurt the basketball development of kids at such a young age).

Jumpy
05-15-2009, 07:49 AM
Very true Q.

In fact, my grade school basketball conference had a couple teams which full court pressed non-stop and as a result dominated (to the dismay of a bunch of parents who felt like full court pressing hurt the basketball development of kids at such a young age).

And so we have the moral of this thread. Play full court press against high school girls and Gay Fawker and you will dominate.