1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ultimate Fastbreak Basketball

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Chef2, Mar 4, 2010.

  1. Chef2

    Chef2 Well-Known Member

    OK; ESPN Classic just replayed the game where Hank Gathers broke the NCAA scoring record.

    If the 89-90 Loyola Marymount basketball squad could play the team from Grinnell, Iowa who is putting up similar numbers, who would win?

    For the record; I absolutely love watching this brand of basketball; Get it, go, shoot;
  2. Den1983

    Den1983 Active Member

    Not sure who would win, but, man, do I loathe the run-and-gun schemes...all style, little substance.

    I prefer the way teams like the Jazz or Spurs play, or, collegiately, Wisconsin and Michigan State.
  3. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    You mean the Michigan State team that runs a fast break play after every made basket allowed?

    The Lakers of the 80s would also like a word with you.
  4. Den1983

    Den1983 Active Member

    I know they like to get easy baskets now and then, but my point is you wouldn't classify them "run and gun." Izzo prides himself on defense and rebounding more than any coach.

    And I didn't say teams like that don't win - although they are few and far between. I just said I don't care for watching them. Teams like the Suns, Warriors, the ol' Nash-Nowitzki Mavs ... I don't care much for teams who just want to outscore you and don't prioritize stops or rebounding.

    I'm sure I'm not in the majority.
  5. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Unfortunately, the cult of Norman Dale has completely hijacked the whole sport of basketball.

    And that's probably a good way to describe it: the most hardcore zealots believe (and endlessly foghorn) that "playing the right way" (i.e., their way) is more noble, admirable, courageous, hardworking, virtuous, morally superior, etc etc etc.

    Amusingly enough, "the right way to play" they now endlessly trumpet is largely built on clutch-and-grabbing, body-slamming, the creativity and decision-making ability of everybody on the roster being surrendered to one person (the Armani God on the sideline) and the ultimate goal of the entire game plan distilled down to playing as little actual basketball as you possibly can within the confines of the shot clock (i.e., burning as much time as possible on every possession).

    It would be insanity if every team played like Loyola Marymount. But it would be fun as hell, and great for the game at every level, if, say, 25% of the teams did.

    Instead, 98.887% of all teams everywhere play, with rare and minor exceptions, the sludgeball of the Bad Boy Pistons and Pat Riley's brassknuckle Knicks (now with the added inanity of clock-milking and chucking up 3's as the shot clock runs out). Some teams play better than others, and they win. Other teams play worse, and they lose. But everyone basically plays the same way.
  6. Den1983

    Den1983 Active Member

    I'm not necessarily condoning sludgeball. I'm just talking about sharp passing, strong screening, getting the best shot available, and then making defense (particularly) transition a priority. I'm no fan of teams who have to bully and push and pull because they don't know how to play the game. But I'm no fan of teams who just carelessly chuck away and have no respect for defense, teamwork or passing.
  7. sgreenwell

    sgreenwell Well-Known Member

    I agree with this completely. I'm also wondering if any high school teams employ the Grinnell method. If you're from a historically poor basketball school - say a school with a low enrollment that never competes - then why not give an extreme strategy like that a chance? At best, maybe you catch the rest of the league off-guard and finish near or above .500. At worst, well, the track and cross country coaches will thank you a lot in the fall and spring...
  8. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    We had one around here a couple years ago. They averaged 80 ppg (equivalent to 100 ppg in college and 120 in NBA), and finished a little above .500.

    Some of the parents thought they should have done better, and they got the coach fired. (Primarily the parents of the 'stars' of the team, who were pissed off that the coach played a 12-deep lineup, which cut into the PT of their little NBA superstars-in-making).

    They brought in a guy who preached "fundamentals," the "right way to play," and made sure to drop some snarky comments, "you won't see us running down court and firing up jump shots" and "we're going to pick our best 6 or 7 players, and those will be the guys who play."

    He's been there a couple years now. The team averages about 50 ppg, and is now several games UNDER .500. Little Jimmy Superstar-In-Waiting's PT went from about 18 minutes a game to about 28, his scoring average went from 16 to 19 ppg his senior year, and got a partial scholie to a D-II school.
  9. bumpy mcgee

    bumpy mcgee Well-Known Member

    At an old shop, I covered a prep GIRLS team that played the Grinnell style. The coach was the XC and track coach and that's the style he had always coached.
    The team was dreadful to watch for a couple years, but once they figured out the system and they had the athletes/shooters, the team made it to state. Not a lot of small school Iowa teams have the athletes or numbers to play at that pace.
  10. dreunc1542

    dreunc1542 Active Member

    I'm going to ignore the usual run-and-gun vs. slow-down basketball discussion going on.

    Did you really just ask if a Division 1 team, which made it to the Elite Eight without Gathers could beat a D-3 team? That's so incredibly insane, I don't even know where to start.
  11. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Well I suppose TODAY'S Grinnell team could probably run the 38-42 year-olds from the 1990 LMU team off the court if they played today, but it's insane no matter how you parse it.

    In reality, the Grinnell/LMU "System" favors the team with more outstanding athletes, so the teams that would REALLY benefit from using it would be the really good, deep teams.

    The idea that a tradionally-weak program could become a powerhouse by using it MIGHT work, if they had a lot of real good athletes who were not superstar basketball players.

    The sludgeball system puts tremendous focus on each team having one or two great basketball players. It shortens the game and focuses the offensive opportunities into a very limited number of players. A fullcourt pressure/running system puts focus on having a bunch of good athletes and several decent-to-good basketball players.
  12. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    Get rid of the three-point shot, or move it back 5-7 feet, and you will see the game change.

    The easiest way to score used to be the fastbreak layup or scoring off of a backcourt turnover. Now the easiest way to score is to hit 40% of your threes.

    Bring back the press.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page