The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-13-2017 09:39 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

BJ and Branden seem to get a little more leeway, I hate to say (and don't know if) it's because they are the Asst. Coach's kids, but it does look a bit like nepotism.

Here are the guys that get the most shots (per 100 poss) with their respective efficiency:

Talley 29.7........45%
BJ 25.4.............41%
Haynes 22.5......35%
Kay 20.9...........68%
Porter 20.7........51%
Caver 20.7........45%
Brandan 18.9.....50%

Brandan and POrter were virtually identical in production this year and neither played as many minutes per game as Taylor.

Im not sure who BJ gets favored over? He should have played far more minutes in place of Baker and Haynes isn't even close to BJ.

(03-13-2017 09:46 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:45 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:42 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:33 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

Do you think Jones allows a longer string to someone like BJ that can actually make shots? Haynes made 27% on 2 point jumpers, 45% on layups, and 26% on 3 pointers. Maybe he should be pulled for shooting period.

Or maybe the difference in BJ and Haynes is the extra confidence that BJ gained from getting more leeway.

Im sure that what it is. Just confidence. Haynes shoots so often because he doesn't believe he can make them.

You REALLY don't get the human side of sports at all.

If Haynes doesn't have confidence, explain why he shoots so often.

(03-13-2017 09:45 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:42 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:33 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

Do you think Jones allows a longer string to someone like BJ that can actually make shots? Haynes made 27% on 2 point jumpers, 45% on layups, and 26% on 3 pointers. Maybe he should be pulled for shooting period.

Or maybe the difference in BJ and Haynes is the extra confidence that BJ gained from getting more leeway.

Im sure that what it is. Just confidence. Haynes shoots so often because he doesn't believe he can make them.

Seriously? That makes no sense.

(03-13-2017 09:54 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:45 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:42 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:33 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

Do you think Jones allows a longer string to someone like BJ that can actually make shots? Haynes made 27% on 2 point jumpers, 45% on layups, and 26% on 3 pointers. Maybe he should be pulled for shooting period.

Or maybe the difference in BJ and Haynes is the extra confidence that BJ gained from getting more leeway.

Im sure that what it is. Just confidence. Haynes shoots so often because he doesn't believe he can make them.

Seriously? That makes no sense.

Well, yeah. No kidding.

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:33 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  Please provide supporting evidence. Is Coach K on record saying he doesn't mind kids taking bad shots?

He has said that he doesn't believe in benching kids for making a mistake, and if you watched games you would see that nobody EVER gets yanked for taking a bad shot.

Cal also said yesterday or Saturday after his game the he only pulls players out of games for not supporting their teammates. Things like not diving on the floor for a ball, or not giving effort on defense, but very rarely for a mistake because mistakes are part of the process.

You coach that kind of stuff in practice and film review, not during games. In order to preserve the confidence of your players, you do not punish kids for making a mistake during games. It is completely self defeating. You can point out a mistake, but punishment should always be reserved for practice.

When you have coached high level athletes you can begin to understand those sorts of things.

From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

(03-13-2017 09:52 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:39 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

BJ and Branden seem to get a little more leeway, I hate to say (and don't know if) it's because they are the Asst. Coach's kids, but it does look a bit like nepotism.

Here are the guys that get the most shots (per 100 poss) with their respective efficiency:

Talley 29.7........45%
BJ 25.4.............41%
Haynes 22.5......35%
Kay 20.9...........68%
Porter 20.7........51%
Caver 20.7........45%
Brandan 18.9.....50%

Brandan and POrter were virtually identical in production this year and neither played as many minutes per game as Taylor.

Im not sure who BJ gets favored over? He should have played far more minutes in place of Baker and Haynes isn't even close to BJ.

I don't think that any of these numbers mean spit to coach Jones.

(03-13-2017 10:07 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:33 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  Please provide supporting evidence. Is Coach K on record saying he doesn't mind kids taking bad shots?

He has said that he doesn't believe in benching kids for making a mistake, and if you watched games you would see that nobody EVER gets yanked for taking a bad shot.

Cal also said yesterday or Saturday after his game the he only pulls players out of games for not supporting their teammates. Things like not diving on the floor for a ball, or not giving effort on defense, but very rarely for a mistake because mistakes are part of the process.

You coach that kind of stuff in practice and film review, not during games. In order to preserve the confidence of your players, you do not punish kids for making a mistake during games. It is completely self defeating. You can point out a mistake, but punishment should always be reserved for practice.

When you have coached high level athletes you can begin to understand those sorts of things.

From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

All shots that put points on the scoreboard were 'good shots'.

(03-13-2017 10:14 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:07 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  He has said that he doesn't believe in benching kids for making a mistake, and if you watched games you would see that nobody EVER gets yanked for taking a bad shot.

Cal also said yesterday or Saturday after his game the he only pulls players out of games for not supporting their teammates. Things like not diving on the floor for a ball, or not giving effort on defense, but very rarely for a mistake because mistakes are part of the process.

You coach that kind of stuff in practice and film review, not during games. In order to preserve the confidence of your players, you do not punish kids for making a mistake during games. It is completely self defeating. You can point out a mistake, but punishment should always be reserved for practice.

When you have coached high level athletes you can begin to understand those sorts of things.

From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

All shots that put points on the scoreboard were 'good shots'.

Does that mean that all shots that don't put points on the board were "bad shots?"

(03-13-2017 09:52 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:39 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

BJ and Branden seem to get a little more leeway, I hate to say (and don't know if) it's because they are the Asst. Coach's kids, but it does look a bit like nepotism.

Here are the guys that get the most shots (per 100 poss) with their respective efficiency:

Talley 29.7........45%
BJ 25.4.............41%
Haynes 22.5......35%
Kay 20.9...........68%
Porter 20.7........51%
Caver 20.7........45%
Brandan 18.9.....50%

Brandan and POrter were virtually identical in production this year and neither played as many minutes per game as Taylor.

Im not sure who BJ gets favored over? He should have played far more minutes in place of Baker and Haynes isn't even close to BJ.

Funny how you switch stats depending on which side of the argument that you are making. Porter's per 100 numbers were a bit better than Brandan's

(03-13-2017 10:07 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:33 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  Please provide supporting evidence. Is Coach K on record saying he doesn't mind kids taking bad shots?

He has said that he doesn't believe in benching kids for making a mistake, and if you watched games you would see that nobody EVER gets yanked for taking a bad shot.

Cal also said yesterday or Saturday after his game the he only pulls players out of games for not supporting their teammates. Things like not diving on the floor for a ball, or not giving effort on defense, but very rarely for a mistake because mistakes are part of the process.

You coach that kind of stuff in practice and film review, not during games. In order to preserve the confidence of your players, you do not punish kids for making a mistake during games. It is completely self defeating. You can point out a mistake, but punishment should always be reserved for practice.

When you have coached high level athletes you can begin to understand those sorts of things.

From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

Getting more comfortable on the court will help him figure it out. And you will notice that the best coaches pull a kid that has been struggling after he makes a great play, because that gives them the opportunity to leave the court feeling good about themselves. When you bench a kid after they make a mistake, you just reinforce the negativity that the kid is already feeling for failing, thus perpetuating the cycle of low confidence and poor decisions.

Again, I am not saying that there are not consequences for poor decision making, just that those consequences are not handed out during the game by the coach throwing a temper tantrum and yanking them off the court.

(03-13-2017 10:49 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:52 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:39 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

BJ and Branden seem to get a little more leeway, I hate to say (and don't know if) it's because they are the Asst. Coach's kids, but it does look a bit like nepotism.

Here are the guys that get the most shots (per 100 poss) with their respective efficiency:

Talley 29.7........45%
BJ 25.4.............41%
Haynes 22.5......35%
Kay 20.9...........68%
Porter 20.7........51%
Caver 20.7........45%
Brandan 18.9.....50%

Brandan and POrter were virtually identical in production this year and neither played as many minutes per game as Taylor.

Im not sure who BJ gets favored over? He should have played far more minutes in place of Baker and Haynes isn't even close to BJ.

Funny how you switch stats depending on which side of the argument that you are making. Porter's per 100 numbers were a bit better than Brandan's

Porter averaged 28/21 with an ORating of 109.5 and a Drating of 88.
Stith averaged 26/17 with an ORating of 112.9 and a Drating of 91.

Their efficiency numbers were virtually identical. Porter was a better rebounder and shot blocker. Stith was a better passer, individual defensive player, and turned the ball over less. As i said, they are pretty much identical in production this year. .196 to .191 win shares per 40 mins.

(03-13-2017 11:01 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:49 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:52 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:39 AM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:28 AM)mac Wrote:  Green should know whats expected, he's been here a year, practiced with the team everyday. Heuitt, seems to be a lights out guy. I'm hopeful he's a difference maker. Let's see what happens. BJ Stith he sure didn't get pulled every time he launched a shot. And I wouldn't call him the best defensive player either. Kah, that's a flipping mystery although it's been said he couldn't follow/pick up the play book . Must be it since he looked damned good to me!

BJ and Branden seem to get a little more leeway, I hate to say (and don't know if) it's because they are the Asst. Coach's kids, but it does look a bit like nepotism.

Here are the guys that get the most shots (per 100 poss) with their respective efficiency:

Talley 29.7........45%
BJ 25.4.............41%
Haynes 22.5......35%
Kay 20.9...........68%
Porter 20.7........51%
Caver 20.7........45%
Brandan 18.9.....50%

Brandan and POrter were virtually identical in production this year and neither played as many minutes per game as Taylor.

Im not sure who BJ gets favored over? He should have played far more minutes in place of Baker and Haynes isn't even close to BJ.

Funny how you switch stats depending on which side of the argument that you are making. Porter's per 100 numbers were a bit better than Brandan's

Porter averaged 28/21 with an ORating of 109.5 and a Drating of 88.
Stith averaged 26/17 with an ORating of 112.9 and a Drating of 91.

Their efficiency numbers were virtually identical. Porter was a better rebounder and shot blocker. Stith was a better passer, defensive player, and turned the ball over less. As i said, they are pretty much identical in production this year. .196 to .191 win shares per 40 mins.

I'm sorry but WTF are you talking about?

Giles- do you enjoy baseball?

(03-13-2017 10:55 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:07 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  He has said that he doesn't believe in benching kids for making a mistake, and if you watched games you would see that nobody EVER gets yanked for taking a bad shot.

Cal also said yesterday or Saturday after his game the he only pulls players out of games for not supporting their teammates. Things like not diving on the floor for a ball, or not giving effort on defense, but very rarely for a mistake because mistakes are part of the process.

You coach that kind of stuff in practice and film review, not during games. In order to preserve the confidence of your players, you do not punish kids for making a mistake during games. It is completely self defeating. You can point out a mistake, but punishment should always be reserved for practice.

When you have coached high level athletes you can begin to understand those sorts of things.

From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

Getting more comfortable on the court will help him figure it out. And you will notice that the best coaches pull a kid that has been struggling after he makes a great play, because that gives them the opportunity to leave the court feeling good about themselves. When you bench a kid after they make a mistake, you just reinforce the negativity that the kid is already feeling for failing, thus perpetuating the cycle of low confidence and poor decisions.

Again, I am not saying that there are not consequences for poor decision making, just that those consequences are not handed out during the game by the coach throwing a temper tantrum and yanking them off the court.

Pulling a kid after he does something good is called 'behavior momentum.' Question: How long do you keep a kid in the game if he doesn't do anything good? Some kids are out there to get past the jitters, but they aren't really ready to make a positive impact on the game. More than likely you're going to end up pulling them after they make a mistake rather than make a good play...or else, you're going to be forced to leave them in the entire game.

I'm sorry but WTF are you talking about?

POST OF THE DECADE!

(03-13-2017 10:16 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:14 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:07 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

All shots that put points on the scoreboard were 'good shots'.

Does that mean that all shots that don't put points on the board were "bad shots?"

According to your stats they are.

(03-13-2017 12:24 PM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:55 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 10:07 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:41 AM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-13-2017 09:32 AM)T-Mac Wrote:  From a behavior modification standpoint (my profession), rewarding kids with more playing time for repeatedly making bad decisions does not decrease unwanted behaviors. Positive punishment (talking to them in film study) must be less desirable than the positive reinforcement (continued playing time) for kids to modify their behavior. Some kids may respond to that approach. But to assume that ALL kids will respond to that approach is not accurate. A good coach will understand how to modify each individual's behavior with various reinforcers and punishers.

I didn't say give them more playing time. I said don't yank them every time they make a mistake. If you truly are a behavior expert, you should understand that if a guy has to think about whether or not the shot he is about to take is considered a good one, it will negatively effect his performance.

Trying to change behavior or mechanics in the heat of a game, is never going to give you optimal performance. This is why you don't see pitching coaches yelling at pitchers when they come out to the mound, or golf caddies yelling at golfers. There are a few things in sports that require the highest level of confidence, and shooting a basketball well is one of them.

Self esteem and confidence come from success--not repeatedly failing (in this case repeatedly taking and presumably missing bad shots). A good coach should not leave a kid in the game to "figure it out on his own" if figuring it out on his own during the game will lead to more failure.

Getting more comfortable on the court will help him figure it out. And you will notice that the best coaches pull a kid that has been struggling after he makes a great play, because that gives them the opportunity to leave the court feeling good about themselves. When you bench a kid after they make a mistake, you just reinforce the negativity that the kid is already feeling for failing, thus perpetuating the cycle of low confidence and poor decisions.

Again, I am not saying that there are not consequences for poor decision making, just that those consequences are not handed out during the game by the coach throwing a temper tantrum and yanking them off the court.

Pulling a kid after he does something good is called 'behavior momentum.' Question: How long do you keep a kid in the game if he doesn't do anything good? Some kids are out there to get past the jitters, but they aren't really ready to make a positive impact on the game. More than likely you're going to end up pulling them after they make a mistake rather than make a good play...or else, you're going to be forced to leave them in the entire game.

If they are so not ready to be on the floor that they can only make bad plays, they shouldn't be on the floor. The coach should recognize that and they shouldn't play until they are ready.

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk