Malcolm Gladwell discusses his Full Court Press article with Bill Simmons

Last week, Malcolm Gladwell's piece from the New Yorker on the Full Court Press became a college hoops blog sensation. For the most part, the reaction to his thinking was overwhelmingly negative (including ours).

Gladwell defended his piece in an email exchange with Bill Simmons, saying the following:

There are two other things here that fascinate me. After my piece ran in The New Yorker, one of the most common responses I got was people saying, well, the reason more people don't use the press is that it can be beaten with a well-coached team and a good point guard. That is (A) absolutely true and (B) beside the point. The press doesn't guarantee victory. It simply represents the underdog's best chance of victory. It raises their odds from zero to maybe 50-50. I think, in fact, that you can argue that a pressing team is always going to have real difficulty against a truly elite team. But so what? Everyone, regardless of how they play, is going to have real difficulty against truly elite teams. It's not a strategy for being the best. It's a strategy for being better. I never thought Louisville -- or, for that matter, Missouri -- had a realistic shot at winning it all in the NCAAs this year. But if neither of those teams pressed, they wouldn't have been there in the first place. I wonder if there isn't something particularly American in the preference for "best" over "better" strategies. I might be pushing things here. But both the U.S. health-care system and the U.S. educational system are exclusively "best" strategies: They excel at furthering the opportunities of those at the very top end. But they aren't nearly as interested in moving people from the middle of the pack to somewhere nearer the front.

The other, related question is whether you can ever truly run the press with elite players. Pitino did it once, with that stacked 1996 Kentucky team. But I think even he realizes that was a once-in-a-lifetime achievement. Think about it: He got Antoine Walker to play defense for 94 feet. And John Wooden used the press a lot with some of his great teams at UCLA. But he was John Wooden, and that was another era. Realistically, could you convince a couple of McDonald's All-Americans, who have been coddled and indulged their whole lives, to play that way today? When we were talking, Pitino called over Samardo Samuels, who is, of course, Jamaican -- his point being that this was his ideal kind of player, someone who substituted for a lack of experience with a lot of hunger. There is something weird, isn't there -- and also strangely beautiful -- about a coach who deliberately seeks out players who aren't the most talented? I know you have very, um, complicated feelings about Pitino. I love the man.

Basically, what Gladwell says is that the central point of the article is that often times it is in the best interest of a less talented team to press because it raises their chances of winning. He mentions two teams, specifically - Missouri and Louisville - that strictly ran a press. For the Tigers, I happen to agree. The make up of their team was, essentially, a bunch of fantastic athletes that were not quite as talented (i.e. not as many great shooters, ball-handlers, etc.) as many of their opponents this year.

But Louisville? They won the Big East this year. They were the #1 overall seed in the tournament. Two of their players (Terrence Williams and Earl Clark) are first-round picks with a shot at getting into the lottery. Two more (Samardo Samuels and Terrence Jennings) could develop into first-rounders down the road. This was not exactly a team devoid of talent.

And unless he has some critical insight that no other college basketball analyst had this year, Louisville was one of the favorites to win it all heading into the dance.

There is one major flaw in his logic - in order to be successful running a full court press, you have to have the more athletic team. You have to have guys that are quicker, longer, and more aggressive than your opponent. In some cases, it makes more sense to sit back in a zone and allow the other team to try and beat you via the jump shot (think Providence's upset of then #1 Pitt this season). But in some cases, it is better for the less talented team to press (could Missouri have come back against Kansas this year had they played a zone and not pressed?).

As with all things sports, it is a case-by-case basis. And that is where his argument falls apart.

Continue reading...

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. Continue reading...

Full Court Press: Memphis Basketball has a Reality TV Show

Rivals has started a 10 episode series chronicling John Calipari and the Memphis Tigers as they begin to prepare for the 2008-2009 season. A new episode will debut every Friday from now until December 17th. Check out the part about Pierre Niles. If he can actually get down to 280 lb (he signed a contract with Coach Cal that said he couldn't practice until he went from 349 lb to 300 lb, and couldn't get into a game until he hit 280), he could be another Glen Davis. I love that haircut he's rocking, too.

In other news - Minnesota's forward Damian Johnson is out for 4-6 weeks after fracturing his left hand; Georgia Tech's DeAndre Bell will miss the season as a result of spinal stenosis, the same injury that forced TJ Ford to miss a season a few years ago; Clemson's 7'2" freshman Catalin Baciu was suspended for 5 games by the NCAA for playing on a professional team in his native Romania when he was 15; former (can you be former if you never put on the jersey) UConn Husky Nate Miles has landed at the College of Southern Idaho; Greg Anthony has been hired by CBS as a college basketball analyst to replace Clark Kellogg, who replaced Billy Packer. Continue reading...