Tired Legs Myth and Player Development

[oldrunner]

There has been some discussion about players getting too many minutes and other players not getting the game experience that might help them develop. This is my thinking on this whole discussion.

First off, Game experience can only be had in games. I think what we are really saying that it helps to have game experience in tense situations. For example, on the FT line in an intense game, having the game experience might help you to settle in and concentrate on the task at hand. I think we can all agree that having game experience is helpful. However, playing in games and developing skills are not so closely related.

IMHO, almost no skill development takes place during the season. I feel that the majority of skill development takes place in the 7 months of off season. Players make themselves better physically and skill wise during that time. Some skill development takes place between practice starting and the first game, but after that, it's all about game preparation and games. By that time players are being rewarded for their development and hard work with starter's minutes. Starters are made in the off season. Take a lesson from Karl Malone and put the time/effort into the off season.

Next up is this idea that players are getting burned out physically and mentally by playing too many minutes in games. There might actually be some merit to this idea if we are talking about an 82 game season with 35 year old players. In a 35 game season, with a 2 game per week average, and 20 year old players, I don't feel that it is really a thing. Maybe mentally, but certainly not a physical thing. Games are just a small part of the year over activities of these young athletes. I estimate that a player puts in 30 minutes per day in weight training, another 30 to 40 minutes in aerobic training, and another 30 minutes in skill development. They do that 4 to 6 days per week. When the games actually start they are practicing 90 minutes, 3 to 5 days per week, and playing 40 minute games 1 to 3 days per week. The difference between playing 25 minutes of a game or 40 minutes is negligible and the recovery is easier than the practices and summer workouts. The mental/emotional aspects of the season can be mitigated with coaching.

I agree with coaches rewarding hard working players with starter minutes. The competition for minutes is a 12 to 48 month ordeal.

 

[baller]

Olds, you probably already realize that I am not a fan of Rahe's coaching abilities. However, what you wrote about players not getting tired out because of playing time goes against everything that Rahe has claimed. When I wrote about too much time for 4 players I was basing my comments on what Rahe has preached as an excuse for why they have not done well in the Big Sky playoffs. I agree with you. So that means that both of us think that we know more about this subject than Rahe does. Maybe we do or maybe we don't but one thing is for certain. Rahe is a better than average recruiter and a lousy coach (especially in-game coach). And now it seems that you may not be as big a fan of Rahe as your post here indicate.

 

[oldrunner]

I was just giving my opinion on the subject. I wasn't trying to support or break down what our coaches are doing.

On your other complaint, Randy Rahe has always said that he is not an Xs & Os coach. He makes system changes and PT decisions based on analytics and the analytics come from film breakdown of practices and games. One thing I have noticed is that our Xs and Os have changed over the years that this staff has been here. Sometimes for the better and sometimes not. I have also seen improvements in the area of in-game adjustments. A prime example was up at ISU Monday night. In the last few minutes of the game, ISU went into a trapping full court press, It gave us trouble for a couple of possessions, Randy called a time out, changed our attack, and we proceeded to get dunks off of their press. We pushed the lead back out to 17.

My feelings are that coaches develop over time, just as players do. Our coaching staff has evolved, over time, and they are better now than they were in the past. It also helps to have better players, who can run the system you put them in.

I've known every WSU coach since Dick Matta. They have all had their strengths and weaknesses'. What I have found is the uselessness of harping on any sort of weakness. They are usually quite aware of their own deficiencies and work to improve. I try to celebrate the strengths and not get too frustrated with the weaknesses'. I try to do that with everyone. It's not always easy.

 

[AlumniWSU]

I was just giving my opinion on the subject. I wasn't trying to support or break down what our coaches are doing.

On your other complaint, Randy Rahe has always said that he is not an Xs & Os coach. He makes system changes and PT decisions based on analytics and the analytics come from film breakdown of practices and games. One thing I have noticed is that our Xs and Os have changed over the years that this staff has been here. Sometimes for the better and sometimes not. I have also seen improvements in the area of in-game adjustments. A prime example was up at ISU Monday night. In the last few minutes of the game, ISU went into a trapping full court press, It gave us trouble for a couple of possessions, Randy called a time out, changed our attack, and we proceeded to get dunks off of their press. We pushed the lead back out to 17.

My feelings are that coaches develop over time, just as players do. Our coaching staff has evolved, over time, and they are better now than they were in the past. It also helps to have better players, who can run the system you put them in.

I've known every WSU coach since Dick Matta. They have all had their strengths and weaknesses'. What I have found is the uselessness of harping on any sort of weakness. They are usually quite aware of their own deficiencies and work to improve. I try to celebrate the strengths and not get too frustrated with the weaknesses'. I try to do that with everyone. It's not always easy.

:lol: Nor should it be easy on a platform like this. You should have left it at "just giving my opinion on the subject". You tend to communicate your irritation by saying "uselessness" "knuckleheads like us", etc. That will get you deserved pushback. Without mentioning "those of you with early onset dementia", just leave it as "it is what it is". It's enjoyable to read different opinions, it makes the forum interesting & lively. :thumb:

And, once again, try to get the name spelling right...it's Coach Dick MOTTA, etc, etc. :

 

[oldrunner]

I was just giving my opinion on the subject. I wasn't trying to support or break down what our coaches are doing.

On your other complaint, Randy Rahe has always said that he is not an Xs & Os coach. He makes system changes and PT decisions based on analytics and the analytics come from film breakdown of practices and games. One thing I have noticed is that our Xs and Os have changed over the years that this staff has been here. Sometimes for the better and sometimes not. I have also seen improvements in the area of in-game adjustments. A prime example was up at ISU Monday night. In the last few minutes of the game, ISU went into a trapping full court press, It gave us trouble for a couple of possessions, Randy called a time out, changed our attack, and we proceeded to get dunks off of their press. We pushed the lead back out to 17.

My feelings are that coaches develop over time, just as players do. Our coaching staff has evolved, over time, and they are better now than they were in the past. It also helps to have better players, who can run the system you put them in.

I've known every WSU coach since Dick Matta. They have all had their strengths and weaknesses'. What I have found is the uselessness of harping on any sort of weakness. They are usually quite aware of their own deficiencies and work to improve. I try to celebrate the strengths and not get too frustrated with the weaknesses'. I try to do that with everyone. It's not always easy.

:lol: Nor should it be easy on a platform like this. You should have left it at "just giving my opinion on the subject". You tend to communicate your irritation by saying "uselessness" "knuckleheads like us", etc. That will get you deserved pushback. Without mentioning "those of you with early onset dementia", just leave it as "it is what it is". It's enjoyable to read different opinions, it makes the forum interesting & lively. :thumb:

And, once again, try to get the name spelling right...it's Coach Dick MOTTA, etc, etc. :

I try hard not to call out any individual, unless it is for praise or to agree. My intent was to make general statements. I did not aim anything at you or anyone else. I'm truly sorry that you took it personally. I can see that those things hit too close to home for you. I will not use such terms in the future. Please accept my apology.

I'm really sorry for misspelling coach Motta's name. I've seen it spelled both ways. Spelling is one of my weaknesses. Thanks for reminding me. Although, I can't say it won't happen in the future.

 

[AlumniWSU]

No problem, thanks for the unneeded apology. You are better at controlling your frustrations than I am, that's one of my weaknesses, admittedly thin-skinned too. Figured my rants are ignored anyway. :lol:

I have no doubts (Wildcat fan) posters here have a love for all things Weber State & want the best success for our athletic teams in competition, we just express it in different ways. Some of us tend to vent more on it, can't promise that'll stop. Just do not like any replies that I feel dismiss certain posts that are maybe complaints or maybe "not all positive". I personally like the contrary opinions on fan forums, it adds to interest & lively discussions. Agreed, It shouldn't be about insulting or degrading any individual. Any coaches likely don't read here, if so, understand it's a part of their business & S/B thick-skinned.

Most posters, probably not acquainted with Coach Motta, couldn't care less about the spelling. The "old-er" ones, like me, it's no big deal, just wanted to correct the reference & get a jab in, couldn't resist. :x

Keep on lovin' Weber State athletics as you do, Oldrunner.

 

[weberwildcat]

as of jan 28...

minutes played, big sky

1. marin, suu, 33.9
2. nau
3. unc
4. unc
5. jones, wsu, 33.3
6. jawara, wsu, 33.1
7. msu
8. mcewen, wsu, 33.0
9. ewu
10. knight III, suu, 32.5

 

[weberwildcat]

As of Feb 1:

minutes played, overall (from big sky site)

1. marin, suu, 34.2
2. unc
3. nau
4. jones, wsu, 33.6
4. jawara, wsu, 33.6
6. unc
7. mcewen, wsu, 33.3
8. msu
9. sac
10. ewu, 32.5


minutes played, big sky only (from big sky site)

1. marin, suu, 37.9
2. msu
3. unc
4. unc
5. jawara, wsu, 35.3
6. jones, wsu, 35.0
7. sac
8. mcewen, wsu, 34.1
9. knight III, suu 33.9
10. ewu, 33.8


WSU starting 5 (from espn):
1. jawara 33.5
2. mcewen 33.4
3. overton 28.8
4. jones 33.6
5. bassett 16.6

bassett as a starter (the last 7 games so far): 20.6

bench:
porter 17.1
koehler 16.5

does any of this really even matter like olds says? it is like counting pitches for starting pitchers?

 

[weberwildcat]

Feb 18

minutes played, big sky only

1. msu, bishop, 36.5
2. unc
3. wsu, jones, 35.4
4. wsu, jawara, 35.3
5. nau
6. wsu, koby 34.9
7. sac
8. unc
9. ewu
10. nau