Malcolm Gladwell on the full court press

One of the articles making the rounds on the blogosphere this week is Malcolm Gladwell's piece on David's vs. Goliath's, and why utilizing the full court press is great for less talented teams looking to score an upset.

The long and short of it is that he says the great equalizer in any battle is for the "David" to attack the "Goliath" at the "Goliath's" weakest point - an inbounds pass in the back court - and that in the long run, the team that exerts more effort will defeat the team with more talent.

As with any Gladwell article, it is extremely well written and thoroughly researched. It is loaded with historical anecdotes and stories that are just plain fun to read (you will have a whole new level of respect for Lawrence of Arabia, I'll tell you that much).

While I enjoyed reading about how David's have beaten Goliath's throughout history, I think his argument regarding the full court press is inherently flawed. For starters, the basis of his entire argument is a 12 year old girls basketball team.

There is one, simple reason why a team of 12 year old girls that runs a press will be successful - their oppponent's are simply not going to have the skill, coordination, or an adequate understanding of a "press break" to be able to handle that style of defense.

Gladwell also uses Rick Pitino and the pressure system he runs as evidence of why the full court press is so effective. For readers without a backround in basketball, it is a great, convincing read.

I have two problems with how Gladwell incorporates Pitino into his argument, however. First of all, he mentions how, off of the 1996 Kentucky title team, only one player managed to make an NBA all-star team (Antoine Walker). What he doesn't mention is that nine guys off of that team reached the NBA, either getting drafted or signed, after UK. It is also considered by many, even those outside Big Blue Nation, to be one of the most talented teams in the history of college basketball.

I get the point he was trying to make by mentioning Pitino's success with just one future all-star - that the press can be effective with lesser talent. What he fails to realize is that team was loaded with guys that were stars in college. And if you can star at a big time school in college, and you reach the NBA, you are an exceptionally talented individual.

There are two basic kinds of presses you can run. The first is one where the goal is to force a turnover in the backcourt (think Clemson and Missouri) by trapping the first pass and gambling in the passing lanes. The other, which Pitino's system is a variation of, is more of a three-quarter court press, with the goal being to get a team out of rhythm, take time off the shot clock, and possibly pick off a lazy pass or force a 10 second violation.

But regardless of which press you run, it can be beaten with good guard play and an effective game plan. Pitino can attest to that, as his Goliath Louisville Cardinals lost to the Michigan State Spartans in the Elite 8 this past season thanks to a fantastic bit of coaching by Tom Izzo.

More than anything, I disagree that a team is at its weakest when they are inbounding the ball after a basket. I would argue that a team is at their weakest when transitioning back to defense. Fast breaks, 2-on-1's, 4-on-2's, and even when a team has numbers back on defense, they are still at an extreme disadvantage. Not only is it difficult to locate and defend the scorers, often times players will end up with a mismatch (i.e. a guard being checked by a power forward).

And have you ever tried to slow down a player with a full head of steam while you are back pedaling?

So while the article is well-written and interesting, don't expect to see Gladwell on College Gameday any time soon.