West Remy
Honneur des Samouraïs
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2005
- Messages
- 1,157
- Reaction score
- 63
- Points
- 48
From boxing to tennis to basketball, coaches and scouts alike compare a person's style to his or her personality. Let's examine a tennis player. Imagine he is 6'4, hits a big serve upwards of 130 mph, has solid hands at net and is a good athlete. Logically, we would expect and even encourage that player to develop into a serve-and-volley player. Hit the bomb of a serve, charge the net and end the point quickly. But every now and then, you have people not always consciously rebelling against textbook logic in an openly defiant type of manner; such as saying, "I'm going to do the opposite just because I feel like it." You have to realize style is a personal thing. Playing style is often a reflection of personality. What if that same 6'4 tennis player developed into an all-courter? Yeah he charges the net, but he's a far cry from the serve-and-volley player you hoped for and often hangs back on the baseline, becoming a retreiver and baseliner - i.e., not always exploiting his size or power. Is that player a failure? A disappointment? Not necessarily. Theory in any sport is good because it gives us a frame of reference in which to expect, predict and organize strategy, talent and events. Tying my example to basketball, suppose you have a diamond in the rough player. He's like LeBron or Kevin. He does a little bit of everything well. Do you plug this talent into a system of defined play and roles? Is a player of that all-around skill set a "type" of player, or more simply a "player" without definition? Suppose LeBron James goes to the paint. Thus LeBron neglects the perimeter aspect of the game which he so loves. Is LeBron a great back-to-the-basket player? Not really. He can score down there occasionally but to become a full-time post player, major work would be needed to polish his low post moves. Guys like LeBron remind me of guys I see in boxing, tennis and basketball. You simply are going to have to live with it. LeBron is high, middle and low; he's everywhere on the court. Telling him to focus on any ONE place of the court (arc, paint, high post) would run the risk of breaking his focus and making him become mentally stale. LeBron's game is about freedom, any restriction on that freedom risks significant mental impact. In closing, much like Dirk Nowitzki or Kevin Garnett, LeBron's game flows with theory yet clashes with theory at the same time. While I am normally all for theory and staying inbounds, if any player is ever going to change general basketball theory, it'd be a player of the talent and skill set of LeBron James. That said, I believe LeBron should be able to continue exploring his style of play for the time being. I have this argument with my grandfather all the time (yes, he's a big sports fan). He believes in the status quo of intellectual and sports thinking - textbook rules and all things following theory. As for me, when it comes to those who are exceptional and may be the exception to the rule, I'm all for that person being able to honestly express his talent/game. LeBron shooting perimeter jumpshots is not the problem to me. He only needs to occasionally pick and choose his spots better. If my grandfather saw this thread, he'd probably agree because he thinks there is only one way of doing things and one way to the truth. As for me, I think you have infinite ways to play effective basketball inside and outside of modern theory. It reminds me of the Phoenix Suns. People would said before last year, "That style only works in Europe and won't work here." I just wish people would sometimes expand their minds and give things a chance. Maybe in the long run, 5 years from now, if this thread could still be found, bump it and say "West Remy, you were wrong. LBJ should have become a post player." But honestly right now, I can say with all my heart that LeBron is an all-courter. And he needs to polish and continue to improve but we should embrace his game for what it is and what it isn't and not try to will/force it into what it's not.
Last edited: