Another article critical of Larry Brown

[Joe Mama]

Bob Kravitz
Brown needs to look on bright side
August 20, 2004


ATHENS, Greece -- Why doesn't Larry Brown just go home? No, really, why not take the next flight back to the States and spend quality time with the Larry O'Brien Trophy?

The man is miserable here. Maybe not as miserable as Carmelo Anthony, who has been banished to the end of the U.S. bench and is vying for the gold medal in pouting. But Brown, who could go to heaven and complain about the altitude, is seriously gloomy, even by his usually dour standards.


After the United States' 10-point come-from-behind victory over Australia on Thursday, Brown was asked if he believed his players were starting to buy into the Olympic experience.

This was his soliloquy:

"Yeah, but we don't have them all," he said. "But I think they're starting to care about each other and understand the importance of representing our country and doing the right thing."

He could have stopped there.

But didn't.

"It's not easy for these guys," he continued. "A lot of these young people have never been coached. They've never sat on the bench. They've never had to assume a role with a team other than the guy who scores the ball and gets all the shots. So it's been an adjustment for a lot of people, but I think they're trying to come together."

He could have stopped there, too. But didn't.

"And then playing against the people we play, seeing the passion all the teams in this tournament show for their teammates and their sport, that's a lesson and we can learn from that," Brown said. "Just watching them warm up, how they respond to each other, it's a beautiful thing."

Done yet?

Nope.

"People back home, they talk about, 'Wow, we've got all this talent.' They've got basketball players. We've got athletes. They've got kids who are truly committed to being a part of a team, and the Olympic experience is the biggest thing in the world to them. And I'm hopeful with this experience, some of these kids will understand that."

Wow.

Brown couldn't distance himself further from this team if he caught the 9:20 bus to Thessaloniki.

Is Argentina looking for a coach in 2008?

This isn't a little bit self-serving.

This is a lot self-serving.

It's the perfect setup: When Larry Brown's plucky Americans come around and beat those mighty Serbians and Spaniards and win the gold medal, he will be remembered as the man who whipped this strange and disparate group into Olympic champions and the pride of a nation.

Granted, there is some truth to Brown's criticisms, which have been relentless since the team's opening-game loss to Puerto Rico. In that game, his team didn't play hard. And he does have at least one player, Anthony, who has mentally checked out. Anthony played just two minutes against Australia and then announced, "I've got 2008 and maybe even 2012."

The past two games, though, the effort has been unquestioned. Allen Iverson, for one, is playing through a fractured thumb. And a lack of teamwork? When most of the starters were on the bench down the stretch against Australia, all of them were standing and loudly cheering their teammates.

The problem with this team, as everybody knows, is its composition. They can't shoot from the perimeter. Three-pointers? They're 10-for-62 in three games.

"They've got to make jump shots if they're going to win the gold," said Aussie guard Shane Heal. "Everyone will play them roughly the same way, just pack in the zone, and make them make jumpers. And they really haven't done that so far in this tournament."

At least one player inspired something of a smile from Brown: LeBron James. As this tournament has unfolded, it has become clear that A) James needs to play more and B) he's not only the future of the NBA, he's the future of America's Olympic effort.

James came off the bench and changed the game against Greece, and he did it again Thursday against the Aussies. He did it with defense, actually stepping out on Australia's 3-point shooters. And he did it with his passing, making the all-too-rare entry pass to Tim Duncan.

So, Brown was asked, how about James' play?

"The biggest challenges coaches have today on our level is to have guys who think coaching is coaching and not criticism," Brown said. "And I find with him, sometimes he has a hard time looking at me because of how he might be perceived by certain people, but he listens to everything I say. And that's tremendous.

"I have to be relentless about coaching these kids, whether they want it or not. Because I think deep down, if they know you care, they're going to listen. And that is a challenge with this group right now."

Enough, Larry.

Enough

 

[elindholm]

Larry Brown has taken several pages from Phil Jackson's book. Jackson has done the same thing throughout his career -- constantly expressing skepticism about whether his players "get it," refusing to take the blame for anything that goes wrong -- but his style is slightly different. Jackson is smug, while Brown is dour. I guess smug plays better, because while the media has caught on to Brown and is raking him over the coals, Jackson always got away with it.

 

[George O'Brien]

"It's not easy for these guys," he continued. "A lot of these young people have never been coached.

It is one thing to criticize players he didn't choose, but to criticize the rest of the NBA coaches is likely to get him into even more hot water.

BTW, does Brown STILL think the Pistons should have drafted Carmelo?

 

[cardsunsfan]

Did you hear how he responded to a reporter who asked if he had enough international coaches and if someone like Don Nelson would be able to help? Brown said Nelson has enough problems coaching the Mavericks...wow!

 

[Chaz]

Brown may not have the best personality for the job but I don't doubt his coaching ability or his basketball knowledge.

If the players want to win gold they should play the hand they were dealt and adjust to the coach. The same can be said for Brown who maybe needs to adjust to the players he has and make the most out of what they are willing to give.

Ultimately it does rest on the players sholders. Who thinks of the coach first when you think of a winning basketball team? Anthony needs to stop being a baby and be a man. He may yet be needed to give this team a lift and make a contribution. He needs to get his head right and be ready for that chance when it comes.


While Larry Brown can be questioned for airing these sentiments in public I can't really argue about any of what he said.

 

[Lars the Red]

For crying in the mud, guys, read what he says! Some of you have started to believe in this touchy-feely crap the rest of the world is buying into. This is competitive sports. It's not a feel good session at the local Sierra Club.

This was his soliloquy:

"Yeah, but we don't have them all," he said. "But I think they're starting to care about each other and understand the importance of representing our country and doing the right thing."

Does he have them all? Do they seem to be kind of coming around? So far, he's dead on.

He could have stopped there.

But didn't.

"It's not easy for these guys," he continued. "A lot of these young people have never been coached. They've never sat on the bench. They've never had to assume a role with a team other than the guy who scores the ball and gets all the shots. So it's been an adjustment for a lot of people, but I think they're trying to come together."

They haven't been coached and coached well. They've been coddled, caressed and generally treated like Gods, but they sure haven't been coached. As for the NBA coaches, I don't think you'd find any of them that spends half a practice working on fundamentals and basketball theory. Some of the guys do seem to be starting to understand what the '92 guys figured out right away, you can't be a star on an all star team.

He could have stopped there, too. But didn't.

"And then playing against the people we play, seeing the passion all the teams in this tournament show for their teammates and their sport, that's a lesson and we can learn from that," Brown said. "Just watching them warm up, how they respond to each other, it's a beautiful thing."

Is he wrong? Isn't it wonderful to see passion? Don't you miss that too?

Done yet?

Nope.

"People back home, they talk about, 'Wow, we've got all this talent.' They've got basketball players. We've got athletes. They've got kids who are truly committed to being a part of a team, and the Olympic experience is the biggest thing in the world to them. And I'm hopeful with this experience, some of these kids will understand that."

Beautiful. Perfectly discribed. We don't have players that appreciate this great experience or recognize their need to improve.

So, Brown was asked, how about James' play?

"The biggest challenges coaches have today on our level is to have guys who think coaching is coaching and not criticism," Brown said. "And I find with him, sometimes he has a hard time looking at me because of how he might be perceived by certain people, but he listens to everything I say. And that's tremendous.

In other words, take off your skirts boys, toughen up and get the help you need. As for James, it really says a lot about the type of players we have over there when James feels awkward looking Brown in the eye for coaching help. Your more of a man than they are Lebron, do what you need to do to be a better basketball player and screw what the others think.

"I have to be relentless about coaching these kids, whether they want it or not. Because I think deep down, if they know you care, they're going to listen. And that is a challenge with this group right now."

Enough, Larry.

Enough

He hasn't quit on them, though it's obvious that some have quit on him. Brown is doing what needs to be done to make this a better team, and the players better, not just for this tourney, but for their careers. I think it shows very little if people can't see through some of these negative comments. A blind man could see it as completely misguided.

 

[elindholm]

I think it shows very little if people can't see through some of these negative comments. A blind man could see it as completely misguided.

So what's the advantage to making the comments public? No one is questioning whether Brown has good reasons to hold those opinions. The issue is whether it's good coaching to embarrass and shame the players when they are already defensive about their performance.

I don't think they need to be coddled -- by all means, ride them hard in practice and demand their best effort both on and off the court. But a truly great leader realizes that sometimes he has to make an adjustment in his approach in order to get the best out of everyone.

Brown isn't doing that. Instead, he's using his position as Olympic coach to get on his soapbox and whine about how none of his players have his wisdom, experience, or passion for the game. A teacher-student relationship requires mutual respect. Brown needs to stop berating his players and start honestly trying to reach them as people, but he's too stubborn to do that.

Ultimately, he deserves the same blame that the players do: He's more concerned about "being right" and "earning respect" than he is about playing winning basketball. Talented players, whether their attitudes are good and bad, see right through hypocrisy; there is nothing they tune out more quickly. That, in the final analysis, will be the final undoing of Brown and his team.

 

[Joe Mama]

I do agree with much of what Larry Brown has been saying. I don't agree with his complaints about the effort here in the Olympics, but I agree with most of the rest of it. I just don't think he should have said most of it to the media. IMO all of his complaints serve one purpose. That is to place the blame squarely on the players if and when they fail. He probably remembers all of the criticism his friend George Karl received after the world championships.

PS I have a hard time believing that Larry Brown didn't have any input into what players were chosen to represent the team, especially after the original players started dropping out. I've read several times that it was he who wanted WERE rather than a shooter like Michael Redd.

It's not like this is a new thing for Larry Brown. This has been a complaint about him just about everywhere he's gone.

Joe Mama

 

[Lars the Red]

So what's the advantage to making the comments public? No one is questioning whether Brown has good reasons to hold those opinions. The issue is whether it's good coaching to embarrass and shame the players when they are already defensive about their performance.

I don't think they need to be coddled -- by all means, ride them hard in practice and demand their best effort both on and off the court. But a truly great leader realizes that sometimes he has to make an adjustment in his approach in order to get the best out of everyone.

.

Oh my God! Are we afraid of hurting their sensitive little feelings? Are they going to feel 'dissed'? This is such crap. Did Larry jump all over them in the pre-Olympic tour or did he try to give the pat answer and let them off the hook? The answer is he let them off the hook. Well guess what kids, it didn't work. He's doing the one thing that puts these guys in a position to take some responsibility for themselves. He's agreeing with what the entire country and what the rest of the world has been saying for that matter in regard to their play, behavior, and obvious lack of respect for the games. Larry obviously has a great deal of respect for the games, much more so than the respect he has for many of these whiners he has on this team. I applaud him for the honest expression and would hope others wouldn't be hypicritical about the comments by making the, 'gee, he shouldn't be mean to the players in public' and get on board with someone that expects a little more from the pampered boys.

I would have thought this would have brought a 'hell ya' from anyone that is disgusted with the effort and 'me first' attitude we've seen from this pathetic group. Embarrass them. Kick them in the butt while their down. Mock them at every turn. Do what ever it takes to shame a coward. They don't deserve respect, why give it to them!

 

[elindholm]

Are we afraid of hurting their sensitive little feelings? Are they going to feel 'dissed'?

They might, yes. Should that not be a consideration? The players have made it very, very clear that they aren't going to be "converted" in the next several days. Adopting a hard-line moral stance isn't going to work at this point.

This is such crap.

I agree. So is the right approach to throw up your hands and say, "This is crap, F it, we're going to lose," or to try to work within the crappy system?

Do what ever it takes to shame a coward.

If I were the coach, I'd rather win. It would be different if this were a long-term gig, but it's not. It's a one-shot. Do the best job you can with the group you have, warts and all. Then, next time, say, "I don't want to coach a bunch of babies," and walk away.

They don't deserve respect, why give it to them!

Because it offers the best chance of winning, and that's what Brown was hired to do.

 

[sly fly]

I love Larry Brown. Enough said.

 

[sly fly]

The only grudge I hold against Larry Brown is that he didn't get Bobby Knight to assist him.

 

[Joe Mama]

Wait a second. Where is this "me first attitude" I keep reading about? Except for Carmelo Anthony I. sure haven't seen it. The two first dream teams had several advantages over this one I don't have anything to do with attitude or effort during these games.

Size: the first two Dream Teams or much larger and talented in the middle. Between the two teams there were four centers who are top 50 players of all time. They had Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, Shaquille O'Neal, and Hakeem Olajuwon. This team has 4 power forwards.

Skills: almost every player on that team could shoot.

Weaker competition: the teams that the first two dream teams faced were not nearly as strong as the teams this dream team will face. Don't get me wrong. Those teams would have stomped Puerto Rico, Greece, and Australia, but it is a contributing factor. The rest of the world is catching up.

Guys like Stephon Marbury are not lacking effort. They just aren't good at international basketball. He and Jefferson are trying very hard. It's not translating into good, international style basketball however.

I still don't believe for a second that Larry Brown's comments are meant to be motivational. This is all about blame. If/when United States team loses its the fault of the selfish, lazy American players and the idiots who put the team together. If they win it can only be because of Brown's great coaching.

Joe Mama

 

[Lars the Red]

Are we afraid of hurting their sensitive little feelings? Are they going to feel 'dissed'?

They might, yes. Should that not be a consideration? The players have made it very, very clear that they aren't going to be "converted" in the next several days. Adopting a hard-line moral stance isn't going to work at this point.

No. Not in the least. If Larry had come out and called them the laziest, stupidest SOB's, then you have a gripe. To point out their extremely obvious weaknesses and attitude issues can hardly be considered anything more than coaching, and that is what Larry does. He isn't going to change either, and I'll bet you that this showing by the NBA players and the glaring inadequecies of their game will cause a greater conversion on their part for the next several years. They have the problem, pussyfooting around it makes no sense.

This is such crap.

I agree. So is the right approach to throw up your hands and say, "This is crap, F it, we're going to lose," or to try to work within the crappy system?

Who needs to do the work??? Isn't it apparent to the world that it's a player/skill issue? The '92 team had 5 times the number of HOF players on it and they were willing to make changes in their games to compliment each other and be successful. These egomaniacs can't seem to get it through their heads that they just aren't very good basketball players.

Do what ever it takes to shame a coward.

If I were the coach, I'd rather win. It would be different if this were a long-term gig, but it's not. It's a one-shot. Do the best job you can with the group you have, warts and all. Then, next time, say, "I don't want to coach a bunch of babies," and walk away.

So it's all about letting the babies have their way? And that accomplishes what? Will they shoot better? Will they pass the ball better? Will they play better defense? You want to have a group hug, but what exactly will that do? I would rather see a mushroom cloud rise above the locker room and have a complete meltdown, than watch Larry Brown flop on his back and take one for the team. They need the adjustment, if this is what it takes to change the NBA's way of playing basketball, then it's a price that is well worth it.

They don't deserve respect, why give it to them!

Because it offers the best chance of winning, and that's what Brown was hired to do.

No, giving them foot massages and telling them there all that doesn't do dick. You can readily see what pampering has done for these malletheads. I don't want to see the US fall apart in the eyes of the world from a basketball standpoint, but we're already doing it. Brown is a coach and one of the more successful one's at that. I don't want him to stop coaching, stop teaching, and just be a babysitter/cheerleader for a group of basketball retards.

 

[Gaddabout]

The original dream team: Magic Johnson, John Stockton; Michael Jordan, Clyde Drexler; Scottie Pippen, Chris Mullin; Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Christian Laettner; David Robinson, Patrick Ewing.

It was the greatest basketball team ever assembled, but they won big because those two point guards could run any offense under any rules. Toss in Jordan, and those three guys in their prime could've won with a quality AAU team in support.

Magic and Stockton made those guys look like they'd been playing together for years. There's simply no comparison to the U.S. team's point guards that followed them. I know of no coach that can produce that kind of chemistry with an NBA/US collaboration team without point guards like those two.

 

[Lars the Red]

Wait a second. Where is this "me first attitude" I keep reading about? Except for Carmelo Anthony I. sure haven't seen it. The two first dream teams had several advantages over this one I don't have anything to do with attitude or effort during these games.

Size: the first two Dream Teams or much larger and talented in the middle. Between the two teams there were four centers who are top 50 players of all time. They had Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, Shaquille O'Neal, and Hakeem Olajuwon. This team has 4 power forwards.

Did you see the opening ceremonies? Did those guys look like they were embracing the Olympic spirit? Have they come out with an intense attitude on the defensive end every game? The attitude of Anthony is so glaringly bad that it overshadows some of the others. He is not alone. And your point about the size issue is somewhat correct, but we aren't getting beaten up on the inside. We also should be causing matchup problems for the slow teams we are playing. Odom is quick and 6'10". James is extremely quick and 6'8". Anthony is athletic and 6'9". These guys should be a bear for teams to deal with.

Skills: almost every player on that team could shoot.

And one would hope that the NBA itself would be producing players that could shoot, but they are not. And instead of trying to point out the handful that can, and are not on this team, it's time to start addressing the greater issue which is the lack of skills.

Weaker competition: the teams that the first two dream teams faced were not nearly as strong as the teams this dream team will face. Don't get me wrong. Those teams would have stomped Puerto Rico, Greece, and Australia, but it is a contributing factor. The rest of the world is catching up.

They are, but you have to look at how tough the Russians were. The Yugos were, by Chuck Daly's account, possibly a better squad than his team, but were broken up just prior to the games. The rest of the world is catching up, but we also have to admit that we are coming back to them.

Guys like Stephon Marbury are not lacking effort. They just aren't good at international basketball. He and Jefferson are trying very hard. It's not translating into good, international style basketball however.

The defense isn't there. International isn't what they play now, but it's not like we've asked them to play water polo. They've had a couple of months to adjust to the variation in the game they already know and play.

I still don't believe for a second that Larry Brown's comments are meant to be motivational. This is all about blame. If/when United States team loses its the fault of the selfish, lazy American players and the idiots who put the team together. If they win it can only be because of Brown's great coaching.

Larry is doing both. He's trying to motivate a bunch of egomaniacs and he's trying to show the process as flawed. I don't know what else he can do. He's not going to be able to develop the basic fundamentals that they should all have in the next couple days. He's not going to just sit back and let them do what they want. He's trying to force them to step up and make some decisions on how they want to be seen as men, based on this experience. If they go down, they have the opportunity to at least go down showing some heart and the desire to improve their play. Or they can just go whining, making all the excuses so many of you want to help them with.

 

[elindholm]

I would rather see a mushroom cloud rise above the locker room and have a complete meltdown, than watch Larry Brown flop on his back and take one for the team.

That's evident. You're angry at the players, so you want to punish them. That might, down the road, teach them a lesson, or it might just alienate them. It's hard to predict. But either way, it would be a decision fueled by ego, not a desire to win.

I think what our disagreement comes down to is how much difference Brown (or any other "hard-line" coach) can possibly have in just a couple of months, when up against players who have been developing their bad habits and attitudes all of their lives. If it were possible for a coach to be so convincing, so quickly, then I'd be with you -- bitch everyone out and turn their lives around in a single summer.

But I don't think it's possible, and I think anyone who has worked in a teaching situation with "bad apples" would agree -- especially one where the relationship is short-term. It takes time. Time to break down the arrogance, time to reveal the weaknesses honestly, time to establish communication, and time to gain the trust necessary to teach.

You seem to think that Brown can just walk in and say, "I won a title, I'm a genius, and none of you guys can play. Now shut up and listen to me, and I'll fix all of your problems." That's not the kind of teaching very many people respond to. We can argue about whether they should be able to respond to it, but they don't.

How long did Hubie Brown need before the Grizzlies were really on his side? It was a lot more than eight or ten games. And Hubie had two things going for him that Larry doesn't: he's a hell of a lot more charismatic, and the egos he was dealing with weren't nearly as big.

Teaching isn't just knowing what you're talking about and having principles. It's knowing how to deal with people -- all kinds of people. If there's no communication, there's no learning. Some students will respond well to an attitude of, "F you, do it my way because I'm right," but most won't. A teacher who can reach only 10% of his students just isn't very good at his job, no matter how smart he is or how well those 10% perform once they absorb his wisdom. In this day and age, you can't lead unless people believe in you, and they'll never believe in you until they think you believe in them.

Teachers who need their genius affirmed never amount to anything. The ones who succeed are those who are willing to be humble, and to value the relationship over the need to "be right." Eventually you can get people to do things your way, but it takes a lot of time. Without time on your side, a hard-line stance is doomed.

 

[Lars the Red]

The original dream team: Magic Johnson, John Stockton; Michael Jordan, Clyde Drexler; Scottie Pippen, Chris Mullin; Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Christian Laettner; David Robinson, Patrick Ewing.

It was the greatest basketball team ever assembled, but they won big because those two point guards could run any offense under any rules. Toss in Jordan, and those three guys in their prime could've won with a quality AAU team in support.

Magic and Stockton made those guys look like they'd been playing together for years. There's simply no comparison to the U.S. team's point guards that followed them. I know of no coach that can produce that kind of chemistry with an NBA/US collaboration team without point guards like those two.

Your forgetting that Stockton was hurt much of the time. That team was great because the players on it were all willing to do what it took to make it that way. They took the minutes they were given and played the game. They didn't get the calls. They didn't have 48 minutes. They played on a court with a funny shaped lane, a closer 3 pt line, two refs, zone defenses, the whole bit. But they were willing to do what it took to win.

 

[Lars the Red]

I would rather see a mushroom cloud rise above the locker room and have a complete meltdown, than watch Larry Brown flop on his back and take one for the team.

That's evident. You're angry at the players, so you want to punish them. That might, down the road, teach them a lesson, or it might just alienate them. It's hard to predict. But either way, it would be a decision fueled by ego, not a desire to win.

I'm angry at the league. I'm angry at the state of basketball in America. I hope it alienates some of them, because I don't seem enough redeaming qualities to hope otherwise. And your wrong that it's a decision fueled by ego, it's a decision caused by ego. Brown would rather lose a job, lose a player, lose a game than go against what he knows to be the right thing for a team and for the sport.

I think what our disagreement comes down to is how much difference Brown (or any other "hard-line" coach) can possibly have in just a couple of months, when up against players who have been developing their bad habits and attitudes all of their lives. If it were possible for a coach to be so convincing, so quickly, then I'd be with you -- bitch everyone out and turn their lives around in a single summer. But I don't think it's possible, and I think anyone who has worked in a teaching situation with "bad apples" would agree -- especially one where the relationship is short-term. It takes time. Time to break down the arrogance, time to reveal the weaknesses honestly, time to establish communication, and time to gain the trust necessary to teach.

Our disagreement comes from the fact that you feel if Larry was nice, the players would somehow play better, and I can't see how. I also don't see were ducking a battle is going to somehow make the war easier. It's a huge problem with American basketball and American sports in general. Coaches, just like the teachers in our schools, aren't given the opportunity to teach. They have to babysit. We are so afraid of alienating, or hurting someone's feelings, or holding someone accountable for their actions, that we have a massive problem that has us coming back to the pack more than having the pack catch up to us.

You seem to think that Brown can just walk in and say, "I won a title, I'm a genius, and none of you guys can play. Now shut up and listen to me, and I'll fix all of your problems." That's not the kind of teaching very many people respond to. We can argue about whether they should be able to respond to it, but they don't.

How about if he says, 'Guys I'm the coach. Some think I'm pretty good, some don't. I want you to be the best players you can be, and I want you to represent your country as well as you can. This is what we're going to do......' Of course some of you might find that to be too demanding on those tender feelings.

How long did Hubie Brown need before the Grizzlies were really on his side? It was a lot more than eight or ten games. And Hubie had two things going for him that Larry doesn't: he's a hell of a lot more charismatic, and the egos he was dealing with weren't nearly as big.

Hubie got rid of a couple of guys that weren't buying. People who were involved said the team was starting to grasp it even during preseason with a couple of exceptions.

Teaching isn't just knowing what you're talking about and having principles. It's knowing how to deal with people -- all kinds of people. If there's no communication, there's no learning. Some students will respond well to an attitude of, "F you, do it my way because I'm right," but most won't. A teacher who can reach only 10% of his students just isn't very good at his job, no matter how smart he is or how well those 10% perform once they absorb his wisdom. In this day and age, you can't lead unless people believe in you, and they'll never believe in you until they think you believe in them.

Your way too new school for me. I don't care if you have to dump an entire group of people to send the right message. If you don't want to better yourself and aren't willing to subordinate yourself, you probably won't go very far. I'd rather toss a couple of bad apples out and show them rotting to all the others. Let people know that it's not a matter of being an individual or any of that, it's about being able and willing to follow the guidelines. I've always hated the fact that in this day and age, people have the opinion that they have the right for just about everthing including a free, public education. That just isn't the case. Everyone has the opportunity for a free, public education, just as long as they follow the guidelines set down by the schools. If those guidelines aren't followed, then you need to be booted. See how much fun life is when your main goal is to complete your GED at the age of 35 when your in a system that has even less freedom because lockdown and lightout are at 9:00.

Teachers who need their genius affirmed never amount to anything. The ones who succeed are those who are willing to be humble, and to value the relationship over the need to "be right." Eventually you can get people to do things your way, but it takes a lot of time. Without time on your side, a hard-line stance is doomed.

Again, your kindler, gentler method won't produce any more 3 pointers, or hustle on defense, or polite behavior in the Olympic Village. All your doing is putting off a battle that is long over due. And as for your idea that Brown see's himself as a genius, your way off base. He see's himself as a guy that knows the game of basketball. He's been a success at every level. He loves to teach it to others, but he doesn't see a need to beg for the opportunity to help. If players don't see his knowledge as beneficial, Larry just lets them go on their merry way. He isn't demanding respect, or telling the world he's a genius. He's just a coach that is willing to teach if your willing to learn. If your not, that's your deal, but don't say he didn't try.

 

[George O'Brien]

The real Dream Team (none of the rest deserve the title) had possibly the greatest collection of players to EVER play on the same team (an All Star team splits them). But beyond being the best players ever to play together, other than Laettner (his presence was a joke) - this was a team of veterans. Most had been in the NBA for at least six years and most for much longer.

Experience matters, although admittedly it hasn't helped Marbury. The youth of this team is ridiculous. Look at their years of experience

Okafor - 0
James - 1
Anthony - 1
Wade - 1
Boozer - 2
Stoudemire - 2
Jefferson - 3

Odom - 5
Marion - 5
Duncan - 7
Iverson - 8
Marbury - 8

I don't think it is accident that the five most experienced players have generally done better than the younger players.

 

[Lars the Red]

Experience matters, although admittedly it hasn't helped Marbury. The youth of this team is ridiculous. Look at their years of experience

Okafor - 0
James - 1
Anthony - 1
Wade - 1
Boozer - 2
Stoudemire - 2
Jefferson - 3

Odom - 5
Marion - 5
Duncan - 7
Iverson - 8
Marbury - 8

I don't think it is accident that the five most experienced players have generally done better than the younger players.

If your only going to talk about pro experience, you have a point. But Okafor has four years of college ball and some international experience. Wade had 4 years and some international. Boozer 3 and some international. Jefferson 3 and some Int. It's also important to point out that many of the guys they are playing haven't had a load of pro experience, especially NBA (the best basketball on the planet ) experience either, but they seem to be handling it better.

 

[George O'Brien]

If your only going to talk about pro experience, you have a point. But Okafor has four years of college ball and some international experience. Wade had 4 years and some international. Boozer 3 and some international. Jefferson 3 and some Int. It's also important to point out that many of the guys they are playing haven't had a load of pro experience, especially NBA (the best basketball on the planet ) experience either, but they seem to be handling it better.

But Europeans get to start playing pro ball at 16, they have no limits on practice time (like the NCAA), and play on teams with schedules that permit practicing during the season (none of this six games in eight days road trips).

The standard cliche is that young American players don't practice enough and young European players don't get enough game experience.

 

[Lars the Red]

But Europeans get to start playing pro ball at 16, they have no limits on practice time (like the NCAA), and play on teams with schedules that permit practicing during the season (none of this six games in eight days road trips).

The standard cliche is that young American players don't practice enough and young European players don't get enough game experience.

Is there a limit on the number of leagues a kid can play in during summer? Or the number of games they can participate in during summer? Really, I don't know. When I played I played in 4 leagues, and we used to hit at least 4 or 5 tourneys during the off season. Tourneys were usually 8 games in two days, and the leagues were at least a game a week.

Just for the sake of arguement, I doubt that you could practice as much as the Euros do here in the states. The only way it would work is if you completely changed the mindset of the American players. The Euros do hours and hours of drills everyday. You'd have to hold a gun on most of the Americans to do half of the drills they do.

 

[George O'Brien]

Is there a limit on the number of leagues a kid can play in during summer? Or the number of games they can participate in during summer? Really, I don't know. When I played I played in 4 leagues, and we used to hit at least 4 or 5 tourneys during the off season. Tourneys were usually 8 games in two days, and the leagues were at least a game a week.

Just for the sake of arguement, I doubt that you could practice as much as the Euros do here in the states. The only way it would work is if you completely changed the mindset of the American players. The Euros do hours and hours of drills everyday. You'd have to hold a gun on most of the Americans to do half of the drills they do.

The NCAA has sharp limits on practice time. It is their theory that players should study. Summer leagues are fine, but limited. Camps are great for HS players, but my understanding is that college players are extremely restricted.

None the less, I'm sure that dedication to practicing drills is a major limitation. The fact that Europeans get paid to practice while American HS and college guys don't is a problem. I don't understand why the NBA teams don't have required twelve month programs, but it seems that most guys have to workout on their own rather than with coaches.

Why can't the Bulls lock Eddy Curry up and make him workout every day and keep him away from the snack machine? I'm guessing it against the player's contract to do that in a players dominated league.

 

[elindholm]

Hey Lars, good discussion.

Brown would rather lose a job, lose a player, lose a game than go against what he knows to be the right thing for a team and for the sport.

You're probably right, but that makes him a poor choice for this gig. I think you'd agree that the problems of USA basketball run much deeper than this group of twelve players. I guess part of your motivation is to make an example out of them. If doing so leads to constructive wholesale changes, then the ends might justify the means, but I think the implications of this Olympic team's (anticipated) failings won't be nearly as far-reaching as we might hope.

Our disagreement comes from the fact that you feel if Larry was nice, the players would somehow play better, and I can't see how.

Really? That seems obvious to me. Why the hell can't anyone on team USA (except Iverson, who is used to Brown) hit a three-point shot? Sure, they're all flawed shooters, but they aren't that flawed. Subtract Iverson and the team is something like 10% from behind the arc. That's just absurd.

The most likely explanation is that Brown has them all psyched out. They know he's going to rip into them for every miss, every time they don't work the ball inside first (regardless of how impractical that is against the collapsed defense), every time they do something "selfish" like attempt an open 20-footer.

You said yourself that they need to be able to catch-and-shoot instead of trying to drive everything. Well, I watched the second half of the Lithuania game, and there was a fair amount of catching-and-shooting, but still no one other than Jefferson and Iverson could make anything.

Confidence plays an enormous role in shooting; surely you'd agree with that. These players are all terrified to shoot, and Brown has to bear a lot of responsibility for that.

We are so afraid of alienating, or hurting someone's feelings, or holding someone accountable for their actions

Just so we're clear, I completely agree with you here. There is way too much coddling all throughout our society, especially in the education system. But the "substitute" teacher can't be the one to solve the problem. It's like if you encounter a random eight-year-old with terrible manners and decide that, by gum, you're going to be the one to set him straight. It won't work. It has to be the kid's parents.

How about if he says, 'Guys I'm the coach. Some think I'm pretty good, some don't. I want you to be the best players you can be, and I want you to represent your country as well as you can. This is what we're going to do......' Of course some of you might find that to be too demanding on those tender feelings.

There's no need to be sarcastic. I think saying something like that would be great, but Brown undermines the entire process when he then goes to the media and whines, "No one is listening to me, and that's why we're losing." Don't you think the players are justified in feeling betrayed by that?

Hubie got rid of a couple of guys that weren't buying.

And he did it in such a way that it didn't embarrass the players who were buying in. If you're one of the players trying to do the right thing and get in line behind the coach, and then the coach goes off about how "some people" aren't following his lead, that's really alienating, because the entire team is guilty by association.

Let's take Stoudemire for instance. Is Brown happy with Stoudemire or not? No one here knows. Stoudemire rarely plays, but we can say that that's because he's stuck behind Duncan in the rotation. We know he was punished for being late to a practice. Is Stoudemire on Brown's s-list or not? It's not a big deal that we don't know, but I guarantee you that Stoudemire doesn't know either.

And that's awful. There can't be any learning without genuine feedback. Stoudemire doesn't know whether he's doing the right things or not, because whatever Brown says in private, he then nullifies it by denigrating "some of these young guys who have never had any coaching."

Your way too new school for me.

Ten years of teaching experience will do that, but I'm still a lot more hard-nosed than most.

I don't care if you have to dump an entire group of people to send the right message.

But that's not his job. He's not running a basketball prep camp or a serious college program or even (for these purposes) an NBA team. This is one little eight-game tournament. Hell, in terms of time on the court, it's hardly any longer than the NCAA championship playoffs! Imagine if a new coach took over a team at the beginning of the NCAA tournament and said, "Okay, none of you guys know crap from crapola, it's time for me to fix it all before you get embarrassed." How well do you think that would work?

Brown is swept up in his own delusions of grandeur. He thinks this Olympic engagement is about the future of American basketball, a pivotal moment in history, a chance to chart a decisive new path for the future, forever after. It isn't. It's one eight-game tournament with a bunch of random guys who aren't very experienced. Yes, it would be nice if they learned something about their games and themselves while they're doing it. But it's not that likely.

If players don't see his knowledge as beneficial, Larry just lets them go on their merry way. He isn't demanding respect, or telling the world he's a genius. He's just a coach that is willing to teach if your willing to learn.

Sorry, but that's just not true. He isn't letting the bad apples go on their merry way -- he's continuing to harp on them to the media, dragging down the entire team in the process. And if you don't think he's telling the world that he's a genius, well, hmm, all I can say is that I don't think you're listening very closely.

If he were just a "willing" coach, he'd be singing a much different song. He'd say,

"I'm having a great time working with these players. This is a tough competition and there are ways in which we aren't playing our best. It's difficult to take twelve stars and get them all to assume different roles on the same team. But they are great athletes and they love the game, and I'm trying to help them with some of what I know.

"I think no matter what happens in this tournament, we're going to feel that there is a lot of unfinished business, a lot of ways in which we could have been better prepared. But they came here for the same reason I did: to represent our country and to try to win a gold medal.

"We're going to keep getting better, keep working on our weaknesses, keep growing accustomed to one another. No matter what happens, I want them to leave this experience with a different perspective on what team basketball is and how it can be played. For me, that would be the greatest reward."

But no. Instead he comes to the press conference with his hang-dog look and pathetically mumbles into his chest about how he isn't reaching people and they aren't listening and the process is flawed and everything sucks. That's not a willing teacher. That's a coach whose players have tuned him out and who is deserting the ship before it completely goes under.