The Fundamental Problem with the NBA

Across the Internet, people criticize NBA players. Despite the NBA's popularity, more and more people condemn NBA players' fundamental basketball skills, especially, it seems, high school basketball coaches. These critics often underestimate the speed, size and strength of NBA players, which greatly reduces the decision-making time to perform a skill. NBA players do not have the luxury of time afforded to high school players, which sometimes makes it impossible to perform a skill as a high school player might perform it. However, which is a greater demonstration of skill: the "unfundamental" NBA version or the "fundamental" high school version?

I admit I am a frequent critic of the NBA. I have high expectations for NBA players and believe the NBA can change some of its business practices to improve the league, the product and the overall development system, like investing in grassroots' programs, eliminating the age limit, emphasizing regular season success and changing some rules.

Despite my criticisms, I believe NBA players are basketball's best. Some high school coaches appear unsure. In a recent argument, when I used NBA players as an example to support a concept I teach which differs from the traditional method used by most high school coaches, a coach said NBA players are a horrible example of fundamentals and completely dismissed my premise. Other coaches supported his conclusion. Somehow the conclusion that NBA players completely lack fundamentals is widely accepted and not often refuted, especially by coaches.

Basketball is a hierarchy. Millions play at the grassroots level and a couple hundred play in the NBA. The basketball development system is a survival of the fittest. Therefore, NBA players are the best players produced by the United States basketball development system, which includes high school coaches. Criticizing the NBA, then, is a reflection of the entire basketball development system, not just the NBA, which is the purpose of my criticism, as I believe the grassroots basketball system is flawed, if not broken altogether. If NBA players lack fundamentals, when did they fail to develop them?

NBA players do not regress when they reach the NBA. NBA teams have five assistant coaches monitoring every play and spend countless hours breaking down video tape in case they miss something. They have strength and conditioning coaches, player development coaches, shooting coaches and even free throw coaches, in some cases. In the off-season, NBA players hire player development specialists and train several hours a day, often playing against other NBA players. Through this effort, I do not believe these players get worse as NBA players. They may not improve greatly, in terms of visible improvement, since the competition is so much better than in high school and college and their skills are at an autonomous stage, but they certainly do not regress in terms of actual skill performance.

Therefore, to criticize the NBA is to criticize youth, AAU, high school and college basketball. The high school coaches rant about the NBA as if they are above reproach as the lone purveyors of fundamental basketball. However, when should players develop the most? When they are 23-years-old and have played 15 years of basketball, or as high school players? High school basketball is the developmental stage, not NBA basketball.

The NBA is a league for professionals. An NBA coach's job is not to develop his players' skills, but to manage a diverse group of individuals, motivate players behind a common vision, prepare the team for games and produce a winning season. The NBA started the NBDL as an outlet for those players unprepared for the NBA level. High school and college are the levels where an NBA player develops his skills and athleticism which allows him to perform in the NBA.

The NBA has its problems, but it represents the best of the best. And, if the best is no longer good enough, and the media, fans and coaches want to criticize the players and coaches, one must first look at the development system that produces these players. If the NBA game has faults, they start early and manifest themselves in the League. The lack of fundamentals, if any, described by the high school coaches start early with youth coaches more concerned with winning than developing skills. If we must lay blame, it starts early, and developmental coaches must accept some of the responsibility.

Some European teams play an appealing style of basketball, but the NBA is the most advanced league with the best players. For a high school coach to suggest that NBA players are unfundamental and rely solely on athleticism discredits the importance of fundamentals. If NBA players are the best players, and they lack fundamentals, why should anyone bother with fundamentals? If that is the argument, maybe fundamentals are not as important as high school coaches believe. If that is the case, why argue over which method is the best teaching method, since it does not matter anyway?

Hilary Clinton famously said that it takes a village to raise a child. The same is true of developing an NBA basketball player. The development of an NBA player is a process started early and continued through the player's career. If high school coaches are no longer pleased with the basketball played in NBA games, they are the ones positioned to make the changes and develop the skills which cause their acrimony. To place the blame wholly on the players and the NBA coaches absolves the high school coaches' role in the development system and undermines the power of the high school coach to make a difference in the development of his players.