Lou Carnesecca Radiated Joy and Humor During His Hall of Fame Coaching Career
Lou Carnesecca, who passed away on Saturday November 30 at the age of 99, spent his entire Hall of Fame coaching career in New York City. Carnesecca had a 526-200 record in 24 seasons as St. John's coach, leading the Johnnies to postseason play each year--including winning the 1989 NIT title and reaching the 1985 NCAA Final Four. He tried his hand at the professional level for three seasons, leading the ABA's New York Nets to a 114-138 record before returning to St. John's.
Carnesecca was a great coach, but he knew how to put competition in proper perspective: "Victories, defeats, they'll soon be forgotten, but the relationships
that you build with the people you come into contact with will last a
lifetime. So, it’s important we remember that. The
game is important, but it's only a small part of your life."
He downplayed his considerable role in the success that his teams consistently enjoyed: "I don't do anything. If I could coach, I would coach my guy to score
a basket every time. That would be my strategy. When you're young, you think you're a genius. You think you
know everything about coaching basketball. Hey, let me tell you something about basketball. I'm coaching the
Nets, see. I got Rick Barry and he takes us to the ABA championship
[series]. The next year, I got the same players, same plays, only I
don't got Rick Barry. And we lose [54] games."
Carnesecca's coaching mentor was Joe Lapchick, who posted a 326-247 record from 1947-56 with the New York Knicks, reaching the playoffs in each of his first eight seasons before resigning midway through his ninth season. Lapchick coached St. John's from 1936-47 and 1956-65, finishing with a 334-130 record that included four NIT titles. Carnesecca worked as an assistant coach for Lapchick before succeeding him in 1965, and the successful program built by Lapchick did not miss a beat.
Like many college coaches before and after him, Carnesecca followed the siren call--and the money--of pro basketball, jumping to the Nets in 1970. Carnesecca, who believed that pro teams should not draft college players who still had eligibility, refused to sign Julius Erving when Erving was an underclassman at the University of Massachusetts, and he then coached against Erving when the Nets defeated Erving's Virginia Squires 4-3 in the 1972 Eastern Division Finals. Rookie Erving averaged 30.7 ppg and 21.0 rpg in that series, prompting Carnesecca to say of Erving, "He's the most exciting pro ever. He creates. It just flows out of him.
He has great imagination on the court. You can talk about this guy like a
poet. He's a poet, an artist."
Carnesecca will forever be associated with the Big East Conference, which is an interesting historical twist considering that he opposed the conference's creation because he thought that it would force St. John's to tread a tougher path to the NCAA Tournament. The three-time Big East Coach of the Year (1983, 1985-86) led St. John's to five Big East regular season titles (1980, 1983, 1985-86, 1992). The Big East was arguably the toughest conference in the country in the mid-1980s, and Carnesecca more than held his own while competing against Hall of Fame coaches leading teams stacked with Hall of Fame players.
If you followed basketball at any time from the 1960s through the 1990s, you will never forget Carnesecca's demonstrative sideline demeanor, his garish sweaters, and how consistently good his teams were. He was a colorful character, but his charisma should not obscure the fact that he was a highly successful coach for a long time.
Labels: Big East, Joe Lapchick, Julius Erving, Lou Carnesecca, New York Nets, Rick Barry, St. John's
posted by David Friedman @ 10:46 PM
The Power of Negative Thinking: Bob Knight Explains His Coaching Philosophy
Hall of Fame basketball coach Bob Knight has been called many names but "Pollyanna" is not one of them. Knight's new book
The Power of Negative Thinking (co-written with Bob Hammel) takes a contrarian view of Norman Vincent Peale's
The Power of Positive Thinking. Knight explains that there is "a large helping of my version of humor in the title chosen for this book" and adds, "I am
not arguing for being a strict negativist, for walking around with a sour look, for always seeing the dark side, always expecting failure. That's not my intent at all. Quite the opposite."
Knight's thesis is that instead of blindly believing/hoping that an endeavor is going to be successful, "being alert to the possible negatives in any situation is the best way to bring about positive results." Knight believes "Planning beats repairing" because "There are so many unintended consequences in any important action that we need to at least consider, like the best chess player, how our next move could produce an unexpected chain reaction down the line."
Knight observes, "
most basketball games are
not won, they are
lost," so therefore Knight constantly reminded his players, "Victory favors the team making the fewest mistakes." Considering his confrontational reputation, it is not surprising that Knight also put a twist on a famous advertising slogan when he declared to his teams, "This ain't Burger King. We'll do it
my way."
"Negative thinking" in Knight's parlance is analogous to what the great chess player/theoretician/writer Aron Nimzovich called "prophylaxis," which in chess means overprotecting a strategically important square, thus ensuring the overall safety of the position and also providing for smooth, harmonious deployment of one's forces. Knight cites many examples from military history and he is particularly fond of the philosophies of Sun Tzu, who believed that a wise general patiently waits until he can fight a battle on his terms on the terrain of his choosing and in a manner that favors the strengths of his forces while maximizing the deficiencies of the opposing forces. Along those lines, Knight advises, "Insecurity can have intangible benefits. Being able to self-analyze and be self-critical is very important...Realizing your shortcomings takes an awareness." A general, a coach or a business executive must figure out not only the reasons that he could be successful in the next battle, game or deal but also the reasons that the next endeavor could fail. Knight suggests, "Always worry. If you can't think of a thing to be worried about, worry about being overconfident."
Hall of Fame coach
Pete Newell told Knight that coaches who rely on simplicity and execution have more long term success than coaches who rely on surprises and changes. Think of Vince Lombardi's Green Bay Packers running their famous sweep to perfection and Red Auerbach's Boston Celtics that reportedly only had seven plays (although each play had multiple options); dynasties are not built on trickery and gimmicks but rather on a solid foundation of fundamentals executed precisely. During Knight's coaching career, his winning formula relied on drilling his players to make as few mistakes as possible, to play tough defense without fouling and to patiently pass the ball until a player had an open shot that he could make at least half of the time. Another factor that Knight considers to be critically important is to make more free throws than the opposing team attempts; he describes "the hidden values of drawing fouls": free throws not only add to your scoring total but foul trouble restricts the minutes of opposing players.
Knight decries drinking to excess, smoking and gambling; one of his treasured possessions is a scrapbook given to him by the widow of Hall of Fame coach Joe Lapchick: the scrapbook contains newspaper clippings detailing the fallout from the gambling scandals that almost destroyed college basketball in the 1950s. Lapchick showed those articles to his players to warn them about how a bad decision could ruin their lives.
Lapchick's mild-mannered demeanor is completely different from Knight's but
Gus Alfieri, author of Lapchick: The Life of a Legendary Player and Coach in the Glory Days of Basketball, told me that Knight "was a very strong disciple of Lapchick, probably the biggest name person who
Lapchick mentored; Lou Carnesecca also benefited, but Knight more so. When I interviewed Knight, he made a statement that I put in the book: 'You could put all the technical basketball that Joe Lapchick knew on the back of a postcard but it would take encyclopedias to contain all the knowledge that he had of basketball.' Lapchick was an intuitive type of coach who could feel what was going on. Knight told me that Coach Lapchick taught him a rule that he still uses to this day. The rule, kind of simplified, was this: if a player does anything to embarrass the school, the team or me, he has to answer to
me…He didn't make specific rules and neither does Bobby Knight to this day. He claims that he got that from Lapchick."
Knight alludes to this way of thinking in his book, stating that even though he had a reputation as a dictatorial personality he actually tried to have as few rules as possible and he would let his players decide many things by a vote; one time he allowed the team to skip practice entirely because the players were very fatigued from a tough win--but Knight admits that he always selected the team captains and the team MVPs because he felt that those choices would have a direct impact on current and future success. While it may be true that Knight followed Lapchick's example to not have rules about frivolous, unimportant things, the "Burger King" quote probably provides a more accurate depiction of day to day life in Knight's program than the story about his players voting not to have a practice, which must have been the exception rather than the norm.
There is an inescapable irony surrounding Knight's career. He achieved great success both on the court and off the court while emphasizing the importance of discipline, which he defines as "recognizing what has to be done, doing it as well as you can do it, and doing it that way all the time"--yet Knight often displayed
horrific lack of personal discipline/self control in many infamous incidents; Indiana University fired Knight in 2000 after he repeatedly violated a code of conduct put in place to curb his verbal abusiveness and physical violence. Knight never directly addresses his temper in the book and his only reference to the end of his career at Indiana University is the suggestion that he should have left years earlier when it became apparent (in his opinion) that the school's administration no longer supported him. Knight would never accept that kind of lack of personal accountability from one of his players on the court, in the classroom or anywhere else, so even though Knight is indisputably a great coaching strategist and even though his book contains much wisdom it is undeniably hypocritical for Knight to ask other people to be disciplined, to think negatively (in terms of assessing the possible consequences of a course of action) and to uphold a high moral standard.
There is certainly a place in sports, business and life in general for the specific kind of "negative thinking" that Knight recommends; it makes sense to assess what could go wrong and then try to prevent those scenarios from happening but I wonder if a philosophy based on "negative thinking" can be presented in a positive manner or if "negative thinking" is instead more useful as one particular technique that is incorporated within a larger, more holistic philosophy. Nimzovich's prophylaxis is a very important chess technique but it is just one aspect of chess mastery; after a chess player properly deploys his forces and limits his opponent's options he still must come up with a winning plan.
In
Stillpower: Your Inner Source of Excellence in Sports, Garret Kramer contends that the best approach to life is based on Stillpower, which he defines as "The clarity of mind to live with freedom and ease; the inner source of excellence; the opposite of willpower." He further explains the difference between Stillpower and willpower:
Forcing effort, judging behavior, or trying to mold players potentially thwarts creativity and, ultimately,
stifles free will. What all children (and adults, too) are looking for is an unbounded environment where they are permitted to follow their
passions, express themselves fully, and compete in the absence of the fear of failure.
Kramer believes that coaching should be rooted in love:
"love for your players, the game or life itself." Knight would undoubtedly consider that to be a "Pollyanna" approach that is doomed to failure but I think that one can have a Stillpower mindset in terms of being a calm person with a positive outlook and yet still engage in prophylactic (or "negative") thinking regarding specific life and/or game strategies. In other words, I think that Knight did not have to throw chairs, physically assault people and act abusively in order to prepare his players to minimize their mistakes and maximize their strengths; those worthy ends do not justify all of Knight's means.
In
The Power of Positive Coaching, David Bornstein defines the cornerstone principles of the
Positive Coaching Alliance (PCA) as developed by PCA founder Jim Thompson, a teacher who once directed the Public Management Program at Stanford Business School: "He came up with the 'ELM Tree of Mastery' to help coaches remember that
the feedback that most helps young athletes develop their potential is
not praise for good performance or criticism for bad performance. What
works best is helping children understand that they control three key variables: their level of Effort, whether they Learn from experiences,
and how they respond to Mistakes." Larry Brown, Phil Jackson and Dean Smith are three Hall of Fame coaches who are members of the PCA's National Advisory Board.
Knight's
The Power of Negative Thinking communicates a worthwhile message and the specific examples he cites--including several detailed anecdotes from his championship seasons--are very interesting and apropos but there are some striking similarities between Knight and
Bobby Fischer, the chess champion who often lashed out at those around him; Fischer did not reach the top because of those outbursts but rather in spite of them and he might have enjoyed even more success both personally and professionally if he had been less confrontational. Fischer perceived every legitimate critique of his conduct as a personal attack, much like Knight has defended his actions by citing his proven track record of success both on and off the court. It would be refreshing if Knight at some point develops the self-awareness to admit that he crossed the line on many occasions; Knight undoubtedly believes that everything he did was in service of a larger good but that still does not excuse his conduct and it is sad that someone who did so many things the right way is unable to acknowledge his own shortcomings. If Knight were capable of this kind of introspection then he would have finished his coaching career as an Indiana hero instead of being consigned to the relative wilderness of Texas Tech, much like Fischer ended up in the chess wilderness as opposed to enjoying a long reign as World Champion.
Labels: Bob Knight, Bobby Fischer, Garret Kramer, Gus Alfieri, Joe Lapchick, Pete Newell
posted by David Friedman @ 8:34 AM
Garret Kramer's Stillpower Provides a Fresh Perspective About Coaching, Competition and Life
Luke Skywalker: "But how am I to know the good side from the bad?"
Yoda: "You will know...when you are calm, at peace, passive."--Dialogue from "The Empire Strikes Back"
"In war, as in life, there is a wrong way and a right way to compete.
Avoid danger and greed. Embrace concentration and awareness. And when
it becomes inevitable--let go."--Kwai Chang Caine, "Kung Fu: The Legend Continues"
"Colors blind; Sound deafens; Beauty beguiles; the enemy of stillness is
desire. Eliminate desire, and the truth will become clear."--Kwai Chang Caine, "Kung Fu: The Legend Continues"
Champions are often praised for their will to win, their ability to overcome mental, psychological and physical challenges through sheer determination. Garret Kramer, the author of
Stillpower: Your Inner Source of Excellence in Sports--and Life, argues that willpower is not nearly as important as "stillpower," which he defines as "The clarity of mind to live with freedom and ease; the inner source of excellence; the opposite of willpower."
Kramer--a former high school and collegiate hockey player who also qualified for four USGA golf championships--suggests that, as paradoxical as this might seem, the harder one tries to be successful the more likely it is that a person will fall short of his expectations and goals; Kramer believes that instead of trying to use willpower to overcome any and all obstacles it is better to clear one's mind and strive for a sense of calm. His mentor Sydney Banks said, "Happiness is only
one thought away--but you must find, for yourself, that one thought" (emphasis in the original).
Kramer says that while "pop" psychology contends that "an athlete's life experience, or his performance on the field, is the source of his state of mind" the truth is that "just the opposite is the case--an athlete's state of mind is the source of his life experience, and thus his performance." Kramer declares, "Forcing effort, judging behavior, or trying to mold players potentially thwarts creativity and, ultimately, stifles free will. What all children (and adults, too) are looking for is an unbounded environment where they are permitted to follow their passions, express themselves fully, and compete in the absence of the fear of failure." Kramer says that the best coaching is rooted in love: "love for your players, the game or life itself."
Kramer's ideas and philosophy are very similar to the approach taken by Phil Jackson, who has been called the Zen Master of NBA coaches. Jackson encouraged his players to meditate, to be calm and to find their own solutions on the court; Jackson wanted his players to, in Kramer's words, "follow their passions, express themselves fully, and compete in the absence of the fear of failure." If Jackson's teams were not performing well, he usually did not try to will them to victory by calling a timeout and demanding that his players run a specific play or make a particular adjustment; he had already done his teaching and coaching during practice and he believed that, left to their own devices, his players could solve their problems on their own. This instilled confidence in his players and created a bond among teammates as they worked together toward a common goal. Similarly, Red Auerbach did not just dictate to his players but rather he encouraged them to offer suggestions and ideas. This is also reminiscent of the coaching style of Joe Lapchick, as described by
Gus Alfieri; Lapchick coached by feel and he inspired tremendous loyalty from his players because they could sense his love for them and his love for basketball.
Shifting gears from coaching to playing/performing, Kramer says that the key to athletic success--and success in general--is to separate life situations from life. One example of a life situation is a shot that you are about to take; the outcome of that shot--make or miss--should not affect your life because "your life is a constant," Kramer writes. "While most of us think that external circumstances actually happen to us, in truth they don't. They're just happening. All life situations are just happening. Granted, we play a role in the outcome of whatever it is we face, but regardless of our role or whether we're happy or disappointed, the nature of all circumstances or results in life is unbiased. This basic understanding is essential to your quest for success." Kramer uses a dramatic analogy to drive this point home. While working with a pro hockey player who was in a slump, Kramer asked what would happen if he put 10 pucks at center ice and asked the player to hit the first nine into an open net. Naturally, the player confidently answered that he would make all nine shots. Then Kramer asked what would happen on the 10th shot if he put a gun to the player's head and said that he would pull the trigger if the player missed. At first the player replied that he would make the shot but then he admitted that he probably would miss. Kramer concludes, "What does this illustration show? Performing any task or activity while believing the outcome will somehow be indicative of your self-worth (not neutral), or believing the activity can somehow regulate your life (a gun to your head), is a surefire way to lower your consciousness and shrink the perceptual field."
LeBron James' transformation during the 2011-12 season, culminating in his tremendous 2012 postseason performance, was breathtaking to watch. The difference between LeBron James'
failure in the 2011 NBA Finals and his
success in the 2012 NBA Finals was not that James improved physically or from a skill set standpoint; James changed his mindset, improved his focus and calmed himself down: after the 2012 NBA Finals, James publicly admitted that in 2011 he had been "immature" and he explained how he turned things around: "I just looked at myself in the mirror and said, 'You need to be better, both on and off the floor.'" Instead of trying to prove anything to others or even to himself, James rediscovered the joy of the game and he embraced the responsibility of being the best player on the court without allowing himself to feel so crushed by the pressure of being the best player that he literally would run away from the ball (which is what he did in the 2011 NBA Finals and also in
the 2010 playoffs versus the Boston Celtics). Instead of playing like he had a metaphorical gun to his head, James relaxed and this enabled his talents to shine.
Stillpower concludes with an appendix containing a 10 point "game plan for the future." Point number eight powerfully summarizes the book's overall message:
"
8. The opportunity always exists to move through any situation successfully, no matter how challenging it might appear.
Everything that occurs in your life is meant to show you the way, not get in your way. When you are thinking clearly and your state of mind is high, life's purpose becomes obvious no matter what you face. Embrace the challenges by keeping this understanding in mind. The obstacles will make sense to you in no time."
Labels: Garret Kramer, Joe Lapchick, LeBron James, Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, stillpower, willpower
posted by David Friedman @ 4:59 PM
Satch Sanders: Unsung Celtic Hero
Tom "Satch" Sanders entered the NBA nearly a decade before the league began selecting All-Defensive Teams, but he deserves to be considered one of the premier defensive forwards of his time. Here is a link to my HoopsHype.com article about Sanders (10/7/15 edit: the links to HoopsHype.com no longer work, so I have posted the original article below):
The Boston Celtics had won three championships in four years when they selected Tom "Satch" Sanders of New York University with the 8th overall pick in the 1960 draft. The Celtics' roster contained seven future Hall of Famers, so the team was not looking for another star; Boston needed a player who would be willing to sacrifice his ego, not score a lot of points and be able to guard high scoring forwards like Elgin Baylor and Jack Twyman.
Gus Alfieri, author of
Lapchick: The Life of a Legendary Player and Coach in the Glory Days of Basketball, says that Lapchick, then the coach at St. John's, was among the first to fully appreciate Sanders' game. "In the book I mention that one time Red Auerbach came over to Lapchick--Auerbach was always looking to pick the right players and he made a lot of smart choices--and asked him who he liked in New York," Alfieri explains. "Lapchick told him to draft Satch Sanders; he said that he won't be ready in the first year but he'll be an excellent pro because he played great defense and he was a team player."
Lapchick's words proved to be prophetic. Sanders only played 15.9 mpg as a rookie for the talent-laden Celtics in 1960-61. But in his second year with the team, his minutes nearly doubled (29.1 mpg) and he finished second on the team with 9.5 rpg. Sanders' contributions could not really be adequately defined by numbers, though. In his 13-year career, all spent with Boston, he never averaged more than 12.6 ppg in a season. He never made the All-Star team or the All-NBA team. He finished with modest career averages of 9.6 ppg and 6.3 rpg, but he played tremendous defense against some of the greatest forwards in NBA history. Baylor has said that Sanders was the toughest player he ever faced.
The only individual honor that Sanders earned during his NBA career was his selection to the 1969 All-Defensive Second Team. That was the first year that the league had an All-Defensive Team and the last year that Sanders played at least 2,000 minutes in a season. Sanders won eight championship rings, but those titles are not foremost in his mind when he reflects back on his career. "The first thing that I think about when I think about the Celtics is all of my teammates," Sanders says. "They were such a bunch of great guys and with the great guys I have to include our coach, Red Auerbach. It was a fantastic organization of people. When I think back, it is not the games that come to mind, although we certainly accomplished a lot basketball-wise, but it is really the guys."
Auerbach, like most successful coaches, did most of his work before the games, preparing the team in practice for what might happen during the game, but he also had the ability to make adjustments when needed. "It can’t be done on the fly," says Sanders, who had a brief stint as Celtics coach in 1978-79. "Strategically, looking at the entire game, the coaching has already been done (before the game starts). You've got the team playing the way that they are supposed to play and doing what they do best. However, circumstances change on the court. Suppose that the team that you are playing against tries to do something different that was not on the scouting report. Then you have to change your approach, perhaps, on the fly. Does your team have the ability to respond on the fly? The teams that can (do that), do well. Most teams can't change and then you've got a problem."
Bill Russell and Bob Cousy are probably the most famous names from those great championship teams but the contributions of Sam Jones should not be forgotten. "Sam Jones was, in my estimation, the best shooter in basketball during the time we played," Sanders declares. "Of course, as far as I am concerned, he could shoot with anyone in any era. Sam Jones was special: off the backboard, without the glass, two hand set shot--you name it, Sam Jones could score that way, and on anyone. He was always in control of the game; he was that kind of guy. A special talent, no question about it."
The Celtics went 9-0 in game sevens during Jones' career and he averaged 27.1 ppg in those contests, including a 47 point outburst against Oscar Robertson’s Cincinnati Royals.
Sanders was listed at 6-6, 210, roughly the same size as Kobe Bryant. How would Satch try to slow down the man who scored 81 points in one game? "Everyone talks about Kobe, but when you are talking about trying to contain a ballplayer the principles are always the same for good defensive players," Sanders explains. "You try to keep them from getting the ball where they want it. Or you try to deny them from getting the ball, period. That's the best you can do. Of course, the (great) offensive player is going to get the ball, but you just try to limit the amount of times. That's the best you can do."
A good defensive player does a lot of work before his man gets the ball. "If not, you're in trouble," Sanders adds. "Once he gets it, the initiative is all his."
Sanders believes that too much emphasis is placed on what individual players do. "Understand--everyone talks about Kobe but this is not (just) about Kobe. Kobe has a team with four players around him. Did Kobe get 50 rebounds? Did he have 25 assists? If I remember looking at those things (in the boxscore), I saw that amount of rebounds and that amount of assists (by the team). Somebody else had to get those stats so that Kobe could get the ball. I've never looked at the game from that particular angle. It's always been easier to think in terms of playing against a team--what we were going to do, how we were going to strategize to beat a team. We had the most prolific scorer in the world as our opposition--Wilt Chamberlain. When you talk about Kobe and you talk about Wilt, there is a whole world of difference. Wilt had those kinds of capabilities every night. So when I think about how we had to gang up on Wilt to try and contain him or try to stop his teammates--we're talking about trying to win games, not necessarily trying to stop him, because that kind of individual, if he is hot, can really score and do very well for himself, but who is going to win the game? Our plan was always to win the game."
That certainly sounds like a veiled shot at Chamberlain, who scored a lot of points against the Celtics but only beat them in one playoff series. I ask Sanders point blank if he was talking about Chamberlain's teams. "Not at all. Not at all," Sanders replies with conviction. "It happens on all teams. Those things happen on any team on which all the role players don't get a chance to play their roles--all teams, bar none. Go through history. Every single team, (even) our team. I'll give you a quick example. I decided that I wanted to make the All-Star team and I averaged 16-18 points a game for the first 12-14 games of one season. Up to that point, I had been averaging maybe 8 or 9 points per game. Somehow, I threw the machine off kilter. We were still winning, but we were winning by four or six points instead of winning by double digits. It was clear to me after about 14 or 15 games that I was scoring enough to maybe make the All-Star team--or be considered for the All-Star team--but we were not the same Boston Celtics. As soon as I realized that and went in to talk to Red Auerbach, he just said, 'It's about time. I wondered when you were going to see that you were making a mistake. I was hoping that I wasn't going to have to tell you.' What you recognize is that there are parts that we have to play. And if all the people on the team are not playing their parts, the balance is off and you are not going to do well. All that I am saying is that this is true on all teams. Teams that are doing well, guess what? All the role players know their roles and are taking care of business and they've figured things out."
Just like it would have been detrimental to the Celtics for Sanders to try to score 16-18 ppg, it might not have been in the interest of some of Chamberlain's teams (or Bryant’s teams) to have role players taking too many shots. Each team has to find its own balance, its own equilibrium. Michael Jordan's Chicago Bulls won championships not only because he was able to score so many points, but because the other players accepted and thrived in roles that did not involve a lot of scoring. Allen Iverson and the 76ers used a similar formula to make it all the way to the 2001 NBA Finals.
The winning plan when facing a team that has a dominant scorer could involve a lot of different aspects. "You know that that player may need 20-25 shots to score his normal amount of points, his average," Sanders says. "The first thing that you are going to do is limit the amount of times he gets the ball. You limit the amount of times that the player who passes the ball gets to his side of the court. There are so many other parts of the game that a lot of people don't talk about that make all the difference in the world in terms of whether or not you are going to win. At the defensive end, you are going to force him to do some things all game long that he may not want to do. There are a lot of things that play a part in whether or not that player will be able to maximize his scoring."
Clearly, Sanders still follows the NBA: "I just enjoy the entire game. Like everything else, the game of basketball has certainly evolved. The game, as some people like to think and say, is different, but the difference is very little. The guys work hard."
Labels: Bill Russell, Boston Celtics, Gus Alfieri, Joe Lapchick, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, Sam Jones, Satch Sanders, Wilt Chamberlain
posted by David Friedman @ 12:38 AM
