Basketball Plays, Tricks and Gimmicks

Copyright © 2010 by Wm. J. Coste.

Library of Congress Control Number:   2010911597

ISBN:   Hardcover        978-1-4535-5340-4

            Softcover         978-1-4535-5339-8

            eBook                978-1-4535-5341-1

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Rev. date: 05/08/2017

Xlibris

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

587819

Contents

Foreword

Chapter 1 Building A Program

Chapter 2 Travel

Chapter 3 Practice Tips And Hints

Chapter 4 Soft Presses

Chapter 5 Zone Defenses And Man-To-Man Defenses

Chapter 6 Offensive Quick Hitters And Shooting Tips

Chapter 7 Slow Hitters

Chapter 8 Tactics

Chapter 9 Managing The Game

Chapter 10 Gimmick Plays And Tricks

Foreword

My first exposure to basketball was at a high school game in Bothell, Washington. I didn’t take to it immediately. I was in the first grade. A first grader’s initial focus at a basketball game is the gym’s bleachers and what they had to offer for climbing on. However, minutes into the pregame warm-ups, my eyes become riveted on the game not because of its action or colorful uniforms but because of one Bothell High School player. He captivated my attention. My interest was fascinated with this player because of the lack of an ear—an unfortunate early childhood accident caused by the explosion of an oil stove. He was an all-league player. Fortunate for me because at first, that is not what won my attention. I suppose for a five—or six-year-old, the exposed hole in the side of another one’s head would be unashamedly alluring and natural to fixate on. My full undivided attention of his malady was the indirect cause of my acquaintance with basketball. It wasn’t until later in the game that I took notice of his extraordinary basketball talents in comparison to the other players. The game became mysteriously fun to watch. I became hooked. Thank you Bothell mystery guard, wherever you are. You changed my life.

My early understanding of this game, which was before Converse All-Stars went to white low cuts, was that it was won by the team that made the most baskets. Seemed simple. Even as a grade school student, I immediately grasped the idea. I thought I did. As I neared high school and began thinking about my future, my interest leaned toward this simple game. I had other sports interests: I was a big Fighting Irish fan and a loyal Yankee fan. Back then, the success of the Irish and the Bronx Bombers made it easy and rewarding to follow them. They won a lot, which made them seem very faithful to me, although my passion was playing hoops and I planned to continue to play it as long as I could. I figured that once my hops were gone, I would still continue being a part of the game. Maybe I should coach it. This would permit me to retain an interest so dear and be compensated for it. Perfect! How hard could it be?

I was not naive to the system. I knew that job longevity and pay was going to be connected with my coaching success. Success in high school and college basketball is, by the most part, defined by winning. How could my teams win more than they lost? The answer seemed simple: my teams would outshoot the other teams. So how could I guarantee my team would score more baskets than my opponents? I would coach players to become excellent shooters. I would begin shooting clinics at the grade school for developing those myriad young LeBron copycats. This seemed to be the first logical step necessary for guaranteeing my rise within the coaching ranks. I wondered if all coaches took this route. Too simple—they would all be winning. What was I overlooking? I would still begin with developing hot shooting players. My teams would outscore their opponents.

However, at a basketball clinic, I heard a speaker state that you could assist shooters to become better shooters but you could not develop pure shooters—scorers maybe, but not pure shooters. Many in the audience nodded their heads with reconciliatory moans of agreement much like newly indoctrinated cult members. If the speaker was correct, and I am sure he was by the audience response, my task for success seemed to waver a might. Outscore your opponents not by outshooting them but by stopping them from scoring. An interesting idea: winning by defense? Still a simple game—just outscore your opponent by making more baskets. This idea seemed even simpler than my earlier plan: you didn’t even need a ball. Intersperse coaching fierce defense with making better shooters. Surely others have thought this through—how could I make a difference? Tall players would probably help. Very tall players would be better.

I wanted good compensation and job security. I also wanted to be successful and to be loved. The simple game of basketball seemed to be the avenue for my wishes. Unfortunately, no one could give me a concrete formula for generating success by developing those strange defensive priorities with my shooters. And how was I to develop very tall players? That’s a genetic thing!

In my early research, I read where many of the greatest coaches in the country attributed outscoring opponents to playing great defense. However, nothing ever seems so simple than it appears to be. While I was in high school, John Wooden was beginning his dynasty and total control of the NCAA basketball program. It appeared simple to attribute somewhat of his coaching success to his players and their offensive skills. Alcindor, Bibby, Allen, Walton, Wicks, Rowe, Wilkes—they toted hall of fame names before they played the game. On and on, his teams were inundated by All-Americans. Then I listened to Coach Wooden talk about his high-post offense, his 221 press, and his carefully formulated Pyramid of Success. And I realized there was much more to his basketball success than the players he recruited. His situation caused my consternation over the argument of the importance of players versus coaches. Anyone could win with good players? Good players could overcome a bad coach? Which is more important, I thought, a good coach or good players?

If we begin by looking at the players, are we looking at offensive players or defenders? Adding to the confusion of offensive personnel, we hear about shooters and scorers, play makers, finishers, leaders, height and quickness and ball savvy. No simple offensive standard and method of formulating are the same. Players who specialized in defense spoke of defending the dribble, the pass, the shot, the zone. Defensive jargon was completely foreign to me. Defense is not taught on the playgrounds of America. Perry Mason, the television attorney, was adept at nonsustained defensive moves. I understood those defensive actions. Popular girls in my high school probably knew more about defensive moves than I did. The simpleness of finding success in coaching basketball was beginning to elude me. The unified theory of encompassing special relativity with quantum physics is probably more difficult, because no one has figured it out. An ex-German theoretical physics science professor at Princeton was still working on it on his death bed, on his home court.

When evaluating other coaches, my assistant and I used to discuss problems with certain coaches’ respective X’s & O’s or their inability to pass on their thoughts to create what was in their minds, their inability to set a motivating environment or their inability to make able and effectual adjustments, their inability to recruit and to retain players. We recognized those coaches that did have the abilities, but it was hard to understand why. I listen to fellow coaches who have considerable knowledge and understanding of the game’s intricacies and wonder over their inability to win games. On the other hand, I listen to other coaches who seem to lack the inner knowledge of the game but continue to succeed. Add in the intangibles of player experience, coaching experience, home game schedules, friendly gyms, injuries, team numbers and/or depth, thigh-high game shorts, and the difficulty in beating a team three times causes wonder. Simple has now become difficult, incomprehensible, and sometimes impossible.

So is there a concrete formula for coaching success? Not to oversimplify, but my experience leans toward a coach who lives for the game and can pass on his knowledge; these coaches have a good start toward success. Add to this coach a team roster of players composed of quick and tall athletes, then you are on the road to the complex answer on how to outscore your opponents. However, all things being equal but quite the opposite, numerous coaches must play with a lesser balanced assembly of personnel. Many coaches must deal with stacked decks, such as teams that have to hide certain players. Some are coaching teams so young that many of their players would have a hard time entering an R-rated movie or they are coaching teams with players too short for riding carnival rides. Unfortunately, to make things worse, these disadvantaged teams do not generate added pay for their coaches. They should, but they don’t.

To win with teams lacking in talent or teams who do not dream of miracles is difficult and emotionally draining. A career as a theoretical physics scientist might be more involved and more difficult than coaching basketball, but I wager the scientist sleeps better. Classroom teachers seem to look at their colleagues that are coaching with an inferior perspective because of the time off and for the interruptive trips but most of all because of the importance that students place on their sport. I have often thought that to be the ultimate teacher of a high school classroom, it should be filled with parents and classroom fans. The lessons taught should be reviewed by testing against other schools twice a week. Every other test should be on the road. Those tests should be held in front of the parents and fans. The press should be invited. There should be interviews after the tests with the press so teachers are held accountable for their class scores. They should be shown on television. I’m sure if this expanded, if Socrates’ teaching method was adopted by the school districts, that teachers would certainly appreciate more what coaches endure. More important, this dog and pony show would probably improve learning and gravitate educators toward sager pedagogical techniques. Piaget would have to include a new developmental stage.

It is to be hoped that this book of basketball tricks and gimmicks will somewhat supplement your team deficiencies and help form some helpful steps for your personal success. I have included numerous forms and letters for the neophyte coaches. Hopefully, this will save time and research for those new to coaching basketball. Coaches are always looking for an edge, and when all things are equal, a book of gimmicks and tricks should be inviting. It is also my wish that this book will help guide you and relieve what fears you may have about coaching.

I remember, as a young coach, as I was approaching my first high school contest: Two nights before the game, at a Nike basketball clinic, I thought I overheard coaches mentioning a fake TO. A fake time-out? What was a fake time-out? I did not know. Would I even recognize one if it was used against my team? Was I really ready to coach? Had I prepared my team adequately? I thought I had. Crap! I remember thinking that I would not sleep that night. Does a team hide during a fake time-out? If so, why? As I was entering the gym on the eve of that first contest, still pondering on my readiness, it hit me. A fake TO. Turnover! Not a time-out. A fake turnover. Talk about a dose of instant catharsis; but what was a fake turnover? I did not know. Was I ready to coach this game? Crap again! Would my players recognize another team’s fake turnover? I wondered, Could my team execute a fake turnover? If so, would they know why? That night, I think I called out three times for a fake turnover. This order was purely for the crowd’s amazement and my opponent’s amusement, for I just wanted to appear to be knowledgeable and in control. I think we converted on two, I don’t know, that whole contest is now a blur. The third one, which I thought should have iced the game for us, wasn’t used. My team captain misunderstood and thought I had called for a fake time-out… No, the game is far from outscoring your opponents by making more baskets. It involves using tricks and gimmicks.

Chapter 1

BUILDING A PROGRAM

Building a program takes time. It takes enthusiasm and exertion. Your work ethics will be challenged with the connecting of correct personnel with their applicable X’s and O’s. You should be further encumbered by the challenge of injecting the correct motivational environment. It takes much self-confidence. It takes constant research and self-study. You must have an unwavering mental tenacity for sticking to it. Setbacks occur, but your willingness to learn and attune to these speed bumps increase your strengths. This adaptiveness, you must believe, will be an ally, not a weakness. Above all, it takes relentless positive energy, always attacking. If you are lacking in this type of energy, your early focus toward coaching should be assisting another.

To develop winners, you must first get them to believe in you and then your program. You do this first by your actions. Your positive beliefs and your Spartan work ethics must be visual and real. To try once, to try twice, is not enough, suffice it to say, to sacrifice at any price will be enough. For the want of this is the main reason that so many coaches fail. One afternoon, while catching crawdads with Dr. Dale Thomas, Hall of Fame wrestling coach, he said, You can’t be a successful coach without thinking about coaching every day.

Elgin Baylor said, Coaching is easy, winning is the hard part.

Your equal concerns over your players’ wants and needs have to be sincere. Your goals and their early goals must be attainable. Pie-in-the-sky type of goals can be devastating to a team. Your goals at first must be simple and rewarding types of goals. Team goals need to be attained first. They can be sophisticated goals designed by a diverse team committee, or they can be simple, chartable types of goals composed by your players and agreed upon by the team. It is necessary that all personnel, players, managers, trainers, statisticians, all people connected with the team have a say in your goals. Keep these goals realistic and attainable. My 1996 team brainstormed, and then the team captains synthesized those ideas from the meeting. A lengthy and thoughtful pyramid using the team mascot materialized. (See pages 165-166.)

Assemble some chartable goals. A few examples are, at every practice, continue shooting until your team eventually hits twenty lay-ins without a miss or, by the first game—as a team—be averaging a free-throw success rate of 70 percent or, by the fifth practice, have a goal that everyone can run ten ODs (an alternating offensive-defensive running drill) under sixty seconds. A more lofty goal might be, by winter break, your overall team grade point average shows a 10 percent increase. Practical goals such as by the first game, every different defensive trap can be demonstrated and executed by each player without any mistakes. Contest goals such as keeping uncontested turnovers under four in your first game and competing well in your first game. Common contest goals are winning the league. You win the last game your play: a very substantial goal, if you think about it. The goal to win lacks substance but it’s better than a goal to play harder than the opponent, which is subjective and hard to measure.

Start recruiting in the fall for bench assistants, managers, game-book recorders, statisticians, video recorder, and trainer/taper. These assistants can make your coaching duties less complicated. Be careful of your selections; do not let them be influenced out of desperation. It is important to select them early and have that process completed before the season nears. Your choices can be a season-long blessing or a season-long curse, so be prudent in your decision-making process. A look at these candidates’ academic standing would