T to new Lead

[BigT]

I have this questions for HS 2 man and 3 man. Also college 3 man.

Can you vets tell me or agree on some concepts of ..

If in this transition from T to new Lead when I run down to the lane line extended or go wider, etc to receive the fast break. And at what point do I know I am beat and hang back for the best angles to see layup fouls.

Thanks in advance,

[bob jenkins]

1) Start wider and "cut the corner" when / if the ball is in the center of the court or on the opposite side

2) Only you can answer that and it depends on the specific play

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BigT

"at what point do I . . . hang back for the best angles to see layup fouls."

The phrases you chose to use prompt a couple of thoughts that might be worthy of consideration.

" . . . hang back . . ." -- "Hanging back" can get the new L in trouble if, by doing so, it results in him getting straightlined (stacked) after the play passed him by. There's a difference between letting the play pass you up then settling for officiating it from behind (bad) and allowing the play to advance somewhat beyond you as you hustle downcourt in transition, yet maintaining an optimum position from the side (okay, as necessary). Then again, sprinting to the end line to let the play advance head-on isn't much better when that results in the same straightlined outcome.

" . . . do I . . ." -- Perhaps a better way of thinking about it isn't primarily what YOU do, but what the players do and then how you chose to position yourself in transition in relation to that. Always strive to maintain "the slot", able to see the space between defense and offense. With a focus on the defender, illegal contact, if any, should be routine to detect. But every transition play is going to be different. So don't go looking for that one magic spot to get to or route to follow.

I'm sure others can put some better advice into better words, but those are two things I thought might foster some thought on the topic.

[JRutledge]

I think first of all we really need to get away from the thougth process that whT happens at different levels is so drastic from another. What I do at the college level is almost identical to the high school level in 3 person. The differences are minor at best and usually personal in nature rather then a huge change in mechanics or philosophy.

If you get beat bad on like a very quick steal and you know you will have a play on the other basket, then it is fine to "button hook" in as we used to call it and wait to see the play standing still rather then running (where our vision and focus can be obsecured sometimes) on a play near the basket. Otherwise get to the basket quickly and recieve the play. And usually this is a lot easier if there are fewer players with you. More players you might want to get to the end line quicker so that you are not in the way. Honestly this is really a "feel" for the game you have to have and when to do this as opposed to getting to the end line.

Peace

[Raymond]

In 2-man I'm pulling up if I have to.

Based on instruction I got in camp this summer in 3-man I'm always going to bust my a$$ to get to the baseline and expect that the C is busting his a$$ also to see the backside of the play.

[tomegun]

I'm not going to "cut the corner", I am taking a direct line to the close down position of the ball is on that side of the court. This is what I have been taught: anything else is extra steps.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In 2-man I'm pulling up if I have to.

Based on instruction I got in camp this summer in 3-man I'm always going to bust my a$$ to get to the baseline and expect that the C is busting his a$$ also to see the backside of the play.

Yep.

Trust your C to get something that needs to be called back there.

Also, the new T should be hustling up court also and might be able to help if something really ugly gets missed on the backside.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If you get beat bad on like a very quick steal and you know you will have a play on the other basket, then it is fine to "button hook" in as we used to call it and wait to see the play standing still rather then running (where our vision and focus can be obscured sometimes) on a play near the basket.

Agree. Here in my little corner of Connecticut, The Land That Time Forgot, we still call it a button hook maneuver, in fact we still use button hooks to tie our shoes. Also agree with standing still versus moving. We teach our new guys that it's better to stand still and get a good look the whole play rather than moving with "bouncing eyeballs".

Back when I started thirty-two years ago, I was fast enough to get to the endline on almost every single play. Since then, I've added a few pounds, a lot of gray hairs, and I'm not the speedy BillyMac that I used to be. Now, on a quick turnover, if I know that I won't be able to get to the endline, I'm always looking to get a good angle to see the whole play, and not get straightlined.

[RookieDude]

I can't remember the last time I ever stopped "busting my A$$" to the endline, regarding this conversation.

Bouncing eyeballs or not...I'm making a call, if need be, or trusting my partners to help an old man.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I'm not going to "cut the corner", I am taking a direct line to the close down position of the ball is on that side of the court. This is what I have been taught: anything else is extra steps.

I learned a long time ago (in an NBA camp) that the expectation was to get to the endline....no excuses !!!!

Tome - was your instruction from an NBA school of thought ????? And are you originally a Brd #12 guy ( DC)......

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

I learned a long time ago (in an NBA camp) that the expectation was to get to the endline....no excuses !!!!

Tome - was your instruction from an NBA school of thought ????? And are you originally a Brd #12 guy ( DC)......

Former MACBOA brethren.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I'm not going to "cut the corner", I am taking a direct line to the close down position of the ball is on that side of the court. This is what I have been taught: anything else is extra steps.

I'm not sure of the difference, here.

Get to the close down as quickly as you can. Don't get run over in the process.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

I learned a long time ago (in an NBA camp) that the expectation was to get to the endline....no excuses !!!!

I'm sure this information is accurate for 3 person mechanics.

However, in watching NBA classics, when NBA crews use to be 2 man, the new Lead official would often stop and let the play pass him so he could get a great angle from the rear.

I only bring this up because the original post asked for both 2 and 3 man.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

I learned a long time ago (in an NBA camp) that the expectation was to get to the endline....no excuses !!!!

Tome - was your instruction from an NBA school of thought ????? And are you originally a Brd #12 guy ( DC)......

I guess the answer would be yes it is from a NBA school of thought, but it makes sense. A direct path to the best position is the most efficient.

As far as board 12...that is an interesting story and something I was vilified for. Yes, I was on board 12 and 134.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I'm not sure of the difference, here.

Get to the close down as quickly as you can. Don't get run over in the process.

Direct line = straight line (as quickly as you can)
Anything else = not a straight line (not as quickly as you can)

Now, I'm not saying anyone should get ran over, but the odds are that if someone has the thought process that taking a direct line can get them ran over they will always think that way and not take a direct line even when they can. I am always of the mindset to adjust to less than perfect situations instead of planning for them.

[Freddy]

Tell me if I'm on the right track with this:

Yes, new L has gotta bust his butt to get to the endline. Careful, however, not to accept the play head-on and end up in a straightlined, stacked situation. When that occurs and a call is made, it's usually based on an assumption that illegal contact has occurred, not that it actually happened.

The vital key to this transition is really the C. He's gotta be just as aggressive getting down court to get a good look at the transition drive to the hoop when challenged by the defense.

Sometimes L will be stacked, other times C will be stacked, depending on angle of challenge by the defender. Whichever of the two, having hustled in transition not necessarily to a standard spot but to cover the play, who has the best look at the slot needs to make the call/no call.

Reviewing dozens and dozens of similar plays on video this summer, the chief problem I see isn't with L, with sufficient speed, getting to the endline, it's when there's a lazy C just lolly-gagging down court, assuming this is L's play regardless--L ends up straightlined and the proper call/no call doesn't occur.

For 2-person, the demand to pull this off consistently is simply that much more challenging and the L needs to get to a position to get the slot more than he needs to always get to the close down position.

Am I on the right track with this? I respect and will gain from those whose opinions differ.