I'm not really sure what your point is.
Need I point out that thanks to the magic of game film, actually playing in an NBA game doesn't have to take away from the experience of observing other professionals playing in a game?
Since when did film capture things in the way a live human eye can? Film is better at some things, but worse at others.
Film is actually better, because you aren't watching it from your limited view on the bench, you can rewind, forward, dissect it with others, etc...
Yes, those would be among the "some things" that film is better at.
This is going to stretch you, but I'm going to ask you to post something of actual substance:
What advantages can you gain from watching on the bench that you can't otherwise get by observing from film?
The only reason that the Jazz refused to give The Four any real responsibility that makes sense to me is that the organization knew how bad they'd be if they stunted their growth,
Based on your posting history, you understanding something of substance would be a greater stretch.
Eyes are more active than a camera. They can change focus more quickly, follow side effects better, your head and eyes can make small adjustments in perspective, etc. The other senses keep you more involved in the moment as well; you have the echos of each squeak coming at you from all sides, instead just from the speakers.
Putting this another way, how many fans feel watching a game on TV is just like being there in the stadium? Why would it be different for a player?
Willful ignorance + low intelligence + condescension = The Norm...you're special, dude.lol
All other things being equal, I wonder who's going to end up better off - Player A who watches the same game film over and over and actually playing a lot more, or Player B who watches from the bench more and doesn't play as much. It doesn't take much intelligence to go with Player A, but I guess that's why you're going with Player B.
Otherwise, I have no idea why they didn't try to dump Jefferson right after getting swept or right before the All-Star break.
Millsap would improve this team immensely but I know that's not really the point.
To reply more directly to the topic, I think that's fair to say. That, or Corbin just isn't very good at player development.
lol
All other things being equal, I wonder who's going to end up better off - Player A who watches the same game film over and over and actually playing a lot more, or Player B who watches from the bench more and doesn't play as much. It doesn't take much intelligence to go with Player A, but I guess that's why you're going with Player B.
Willful ignorance + low intelligence + condescension = The Norm...you're special, dude.
They've already been mentioned in this thread. Putting players in a position to succeed helps a player build confidence AND learn to play the right way. Throwing a player into situations that he's not ready for may hurt his confidence and reinforce bad habits (especially if high minutes are guaranteed). Further, you can't possibly get a good feel for the pace or emotion of a game from film. Teaching moments in real time are invaluable.You're one to call anybody out on any of those things - especially condescension. But humor me - in what world is Player B better?
Kanter would have been ruined had Corbin not brought him along at a pace commensurate with his growing abilities. Look how timid he is this season and imagine how much worse he would have been two season ago.
Your playing time concept is fools gold.
Kanter would have been ruined had Corbin not brought him along at a pace commensurate with his growing abilities. Look how timid he is this season and imagine how much worse he would have been two season ago.
Your playing time concept is fools gold.
They've already been mentioned in this thread. Putting players in a position to succeed helps a player build confidence AND learn to play the right way. Throwing a player into situations that he's not ready for may hurt his confidence and reinforce bad habits (especially if high minutes are guaranteed). Further, you can't possibly get a good feel for the pace or emotion of a game from film. Teaching moments in real time are invaluable.
lol
All other things being equal, I wonder who's going to end up better off - Player A who watches the same game film over and over and actually playing a lot more, or Player B who watches from the bench more and doesn't play as much.
It doesn't take much intelligence to go with Player A, but I guess that's why you're going with Player B.
You hit on the whole point of this topic. Kanter's in his 3rd NBA season and still timid as hell. All that sitting on the bench didn't do much to shake that out of him.