Partizan Basketball Fans

The number of people present doesn’t always equal the intensity of the crowd. The most unusual basketball game I’ve watched, when it comes to the fans, could have been the late eighties match-up between Partizan and Maccabi (Tel Aviv), played in Belgrade. It was one of the loudest, too. I had to show up an hour early because having the ticket didn’t guaranty that I would get in. There was no such thing as my own seat, in stark contrast with my first NBA experience in the Garden in Boston. As soon as I found a decent spot, a good angle to see the game from, I saw a group of maybe 300 rabid Partizan fans who chanted with a very strong accent. Their head gear wasn’t much different from the hats and scarves regular Partizan fans wore. As a visitor to the city, not too familiar with the Grobari rituals (“grave diggers” is what Partizan fans call themselves), I asked the guy next to me who they were and he said: “These are Palestinian students, they come every time we play against an Israeli club.”

Basketball means different things to different people. For those young people it was a venue to express their opinion and to vent their frustration. I watched them more closely than the game itself. At first, they chanted something in the language I couldn’t understand. I am sure the chants were similar to the ones which preceded the bloody break-up of Yugoslavia. (It didn’t take long before the fans took the guns in Belgrade.) But I’ll leave that analysis to an observer of a different kind.

Their chants soon became understandable to me, they were less and less contra-Israel, and more and more pro-Partizan. Play by play, these young men got sucked into the game. By the middle of the second half nobody was sitting any more, they trembled with every pass and jumped to every three made by the boys in the black-and-white. When Pecarski, an obscure player who had just been signed by the club, dunked the ball on the first alley-oop I’ve ever seen live, the Palestinian uproar merged with the eruption of the rest of 7,700 fans. For a very brief moment, Miroslav Pecarski might have been bigger than Yasser Arafat.

If you water-boarded me I couldn’t tell you who won that game, and I bet those Palestinians can’t remember either. I could easily find out if I checked one of the many European basketball websites. Although tempted, I will not do it, therefore I will never know. And does it really matter? Bobby Knight once said: “You don’t play against opponents. You play against the game of basketball.” I am still struggling to understand what exactly he meant. Along the same lines, though, maybe that night in Belgrade neither opponent won, maybe the winner that night was the game of basketball. And that’s a possibility which will never be recorded in the official books.

Related posts:

1. Partizan, Cibona in 2009
2. The Outlook of the Season

March 3, 2010 - The debate has been going on for a while at the online edition of the Belmont Citizen-Herald, under the article written after the Belmont – Dracut game.

[Full Disclosure: My son, Luka Ladan, plays for the Belmont Marauders. I've never coached basketball on any level.]

“Winning is like deodorant – it comes up and a lot of things don’t stink.” – Doc Rivers, The Celtics Coach

Belmont @ Watertown, Game I

Not long ago, the Belmont Marauders basketball team was undefeated, 15 and 0. But, they lost two of their last three games, first to Reading, then last night to Watertown. Both these teams are considered serious rivals and getting the wins was extremely important to the team. The game against the Watertown Raiders was particularly important because the team wanted to go into the post season on the wings of a decisive win against a great rival. It all looked possible as Belmont thoroughly outplayed Watertown (watch full game here ) in their first game of the season. This time, the final score was Watertown 57 – Belmont 53.

In my article from January 13th, 2010, titled Big win for Belmont against undefeated Reading, I highlighted what Belmont needed to do differently to get more decisive wins and to prevail in tough situations. When the article came out some people expressed their consternation that I was too pessimistic while the team was winning. I wanted the team not to be oblivious to the “deodorant effect,” to look at their performances objectively, and start fixing problems while there was still time.

Let’s revisit briefly what I said in January (more details here). The Belmont Marauders needed to:

• Find their defense
• Have four players score in double digits
• Promote good passing and have everybody touch the ball on offense
• Move the ball inside out
• Play pick-and-roll basketball
• Take only smart (good) shots
• Dispel the idea of a big three
• Fast break a lot more
• Keep working on team spirit

Belmont @ Watertown, Game I

I can tell with full confidence that in Belmont’s first game against Watertown (watch full game here ) the team followed these guidelines to the letter. They didn’t do it because they read my article, of course, they did it because they know instinctively how to play basketball, and the coach didn’t interfere. In their second game, last night, they failed on 8 out of the 9 points. The coach tried to force them do things his way by imposing the most confused substitution patterns that I’ve seen this season. Of course, the experiment was bound to fail. (By this I don’t mean playing mostly seniors in the first half on the Senior Night, because I think that was a noble idea and I fully supported it.)

So, what happened last night? Belmont got outplayed and thoroughly outcoached once again. The team played man defense in the first half, then switched to some sort of zone diamond with one player shadowing Marco Coppola, Watertown’s best player. It worked poorly in the first half, and it didn’t work at all in the second. When Belmont had the players in the game who could play zone, the team played man defense. When they had players who could match up, they played this weird combo-zone. The players looked like they played the diamond scheme for the first time in their lives, and it was easily broken down by the Watertown offense. When shots didn’t go in, the Watertown offense penetrated and scored inside.

Coach Adam Pritchard with the Belmont Marauders

What was most revealing about the team dynamics was the way the Belmont team did, or to be more accurate didn’t, respond to their coach. Their body language reveals deficiency of trust. They clearly don’t have respect for their coach and they show resistance to his decisions – visible in the way players react to his substitutions and speeches during timeouts. Unfortunately, I do not believe that this trust can be established before the post-season. Respect is not something you can shove down your players’ throats in 3+ hr practices after a loss for which you have nobody else to blame but yourself. Opportunities to gain the players’ respect were missed long ago.

Great coach John Wooden believed in practices in which every minute was used for a purpose. He had minute-by-minute schedules and he never let anything distract him from following through with his practice plan. He never extended his practice beyond the attention-holding boundary. If you can’t get your message heard in 1.5 hrs you are unlikely to get it heard in 3 hrs. And don’t blame the recipient, blame the messenger.

Watertown, on the other hand, played a great game. When played the right way, basketball is like music performed by a good symphony orchestra. When you have players in full harmony with their coach they are his extended hand  on the court, materialization of his coaching philosophy. The coach needs to have a good feel for his players; he needs to understand when it is better to let their talent take off and when there is a need to provide guidance, but a good coach never interferes with his players’ talent. He never puts himself in front of or above his players. I enjoyed watching Watertown last night. I enjoyed watching a great coach and enthusiastic players who responded to him throughout the game. At times, although still rooting for Belmont, I caught myself admiring Watertown’s execution of their coach’s game plan, the patience with which they passed the ball until they got the shot they wanted.

Marco Coppola, Watertown

In the game of basketball, there are good scorers, good defenders, good rebounders, good shot blockers… There are  few born winners, and even fewer true leaders. Marco Coppola played like a true leader last night. He scored when the team needed it, he ran without the ball tirelessly, he passed when his teammates needed to be engaged. He showed a great feel for the rhythm of the game. He did not take a single bad shot. The last fast-break attack was supreme evidence of his leadership. In a two-on-one play, most MVP-caliber players would take it upon themselves to score and win the game, but he chose to pass instead. Why? Because it was the right thing to do, the right way to play the game. It increased the odds.  That’s why Marco Coppola should be considered a serious candidate in the race for the Middlesex League MVP. He lead a team without much depth to a winning record by making everybody around him better. And coach Harrington should be the front-runner for the Coach of the Year.

Belmont Marauders

Where does this leave us? The Belmont players will continue winning in the post season. They will do it because they have too much talent and pride to stop now. Will they go all the way? That, I don’t know. I do know one thing, though, if they win the state championship it will happen not because of their coach. It will happen because of the camaraderie on the court, not because of the long speeches in the locker room. They will win by following the guidelines from the beginning of this article because it is a common-sense approach to basketball. They will win because they will find a way to put their egos aside and forge the kind of unity needed whenever a group of people wants to achieve something great.

From the Editor: Please note that comments must use appropriate language or they will not be approved. Also, we believe that it’s fair to ask the commentators to identify themselves (real name, real email). The author expressed his opinion openly and under full disclosure.

Related posts:

1. Big win for Belmont against undefeated Reading
2. Four players in double digits
3. Basketball IQ

Basically for every minute of the season we look at who is on the court and how the score of the game changes. After adjusting for who you play with and against, we come up with an Adjusted +/- Rating for a player. For example, currently we rate LeBron James as a +21 Points Rating, +19 Offense Rating, and -2 Defense Rating. This means that if LeBron replaced an average NBA player for 48 minutes we estimate that his team would perform 21 points better. If LeBron replaced an average offensive player his team would score 19 points more per game, and if LeBron replaced an average NBA defender his team would give up 2 fewer points per game.

When you apply this method, you realize that Marc Gasol is better than his elder brother Pau. You also find out the following:

Carmelo Anthony is overrated and Nene is underrated. Being a top scorer does not make you an all star. Denver has played great in Melo’s absence. Nene’s +10 Points rating shows that Nene is a major contributor to the Nugget’s success.

You may disagree with this approach, but it is certainly better than approach which selects Allen Iverson as a starter and T-Mac as a serious candidate for the All-Star game.

Related posts:

1. What’s Wrong with the NBA All-Star Concept

We all know that the the only way for players to excel is to be none else but themselves. You’d think that this is a simple formula, but when you watch any basketball game (high school, college, pros) you see players trying to be something they are not. Players make adjustments over the years, they improve their free-throw shooting, or work on their post-up game (to name but a few), but they reach their true potential only when they realize who they really are on the basketball court, which is really an extension of their ordinary life personality. A true transformation happens when a go-to guy realizes that he’s really just a very good second fiddle. He can still drop thirty points on a given night, but forcing the ball through his hands on every possession alienates him from his true nature and minimizes his potential and reach. If somebody likes deferring, or simply enjoys passing (I believe a good pass can give you the same thrill as ripping it through the net from the three-point line) asking him to shoot a lot, even if he has a terrific shot, makes that player uncomfortable in his role, and minimizes the positive impact he could have on the team.

Phil Jackson knows all this. I believe what he’s trying to accomplish with his book recommendations is to reach his players in the manner that a simple practice talk or coach’s one-on-one with a player cannot achieve. He wants them to dig deep into themselves in order to find who they really are, and he understands that all human beings need time to get there. The ritual of the book reading, the time and patience it takes to reach the back cover, provide the structure for this inner exploration.

The blogger who often calls himself Bethlehem Shoals wrote an article about this for his blog Free Darko. He mentioned that two nights ago, Phil’s girlfriend and the Lakers executive, Jeanie Buss put this year’s picks on Twitter. She says that some players simply won’t read, but that doesn’t make Phil stop. Free Darko provided an interesting insight about the books and why he thinks Phil matched these particular books with these exact players.

Note: Bethlehem Shoals wrote “The Macrophenomenal Pro Basketball Almanac “, in which he explains the styles, stats, and stars in today’s game. This is a somewhat psychedelic, but very well written book.

Here are some excerpts from the article.

Player: Kobe Bryant
Book: Montana 1948 by Larry Watson
Synopsis: A small-town sheriff finds out that his brother has raped and murdered numerous Native-American women. He finds himself torn between his dual loyalties to family and the law.
Meaning: Wow, Phil doesn’t screw around, eh? Forget for a minute the connections to Kobe’s legal troubles and consider that the reader is meant to identify with the sheriff. The common perception of Kobe is that he’s torn between his need to score and his desire to win as part of the larger team. Often, he appears to toggle between each pole, unable to find a happy medium. What Montana 1948 teaches us is that no matter which option you choose, you must live with the consequences and emotions of forgoing the other choice. It’s about living in the gray area, something Kobe must embrace to realize his full potential as a teammate and star.

Player: Ron Artest
Book: Sacred Hoops by Phil Jackson
Synopsis: A coaching legend details his philosophy of basketball as the ultimate in spiritual communication among teammates.
Meaning: This is one of the few choices Buss explained: apparently Phil likes to give new players an introduction to his approach to basketball. Sorry, but I don’t buy it. The more likely explanation is that Phil knows Artest is borderline insane, tried to think of a suitable book, couldn’t come up with anything, and just picked up one of the copies of Sacred Hoops he had around the house. The good news is that Ron-Ron is so sincere that he’ll undoubtedly take every message in the book to heart. It’s just unclear what it’ll all mean to him.

An interesting coincidence for me is Roberto Bolano’s book (recommended to Pao Gasol). I find it interesting, because I’ve become recently intrigued by this author and I was toying with an idea of translating his “Los detectives salvajes” (“The Savage Detectives”) into Croatian/Serbian/Bosnian.

No related posts.

Here’s a brief article (more a sentence really), from the Boston Globe about the game.

The final score was Belmont 84 – Stoneham 45. Would this kind of game always work? Passing wouldn’t be that easy in some games, of course, but I will only re-state what I said earlier: Belmont wins in double-digits against any team in the Middlesex League when they pass the ball well and have four players in double digits.

Related posts:

1. Big win for Belmont against undefeated Reading
2. Watertown runs a basketball clinic at Belmont’s expense