Pros and Cons of AAU ball and "travel" teams..

[23jumpboy]

How effective are these types of teams on helping players develop and what are some downers about it?

 

[yoshukai]

I'd say most are not as fundamentally sound . JMO

 

[mj2k10]

Generally a positive, as it never hurts to play a lot against better competition. Elite talent gets spotlighted, and recruit rankings are far more accurate now than they used to be. Given the highly select group of players that UK recruits, it makes things easy. You just have to scout a small set of players and decide which ones you want to really go after hard.

The downside is that it minimizes the importance of the team element of the game, and the importance of coaching. You get these huge talents who have never really been coached, and never had to learn all the little things that are so important to winning basketball games (which I believe is a big part of Skal's struggles).

But for those who like to hate on it (of whom there are many), a question: what's a better alternative? High schools can't run year-round programs, and even if they did, the coaching at many high schools is actually worse than on elite AAU teams. In terms of player development, it's hard to see how it's a bad thing that guys spend so much time competing against talented opponents.

 

[tank2009]

I would play aau or travel ball, but i would be sure that as an individual i would spend a 4 to 1 ratio of time on individual work in the summer versus playing games.

You need both repitition and competition to develop. Get in the gym by yourself and work on a specific plan to improve ball handling and shooting every day of the week and then on weekends play games. The better you develop ball skills then can incorporate it into game settings you will be headed in the right direction.

 

[maysvilleky]

AAU is primarily for exposure at the Elite levels. At the lower levels of "travel team" ball, it's still a lot about kid development and team play. So overall it's good. But I will say that it's gotten to be a big business. Many teams (at all levels) have gone to luring the better players away from the mediocre teams to improve their own teams and many kids that started with a team originally wind up getting cut or pushed to the end of the bench and leave.

 

[St.PatterSoN-54-]

Cal spends the first two months of practice teaching freshman that they don't play again that afternoon if they lose....

 

[AnarchoNeoLuddite]

Towns didnt play his SR year, helped his game hurt his hype. Kobe among others hates AAU so there are some folks that know their shiiat know its potentialy detrimental.

 

[trinity45]

How effective are these types of teams on helping players develop and what are some downers about it?

With the exception of a few coaches, most are nothing but glorified pick up games. You get a coach who is basically recruiting the best talent he can find because he has an agenda of his own. Then he literally rolls out a basketball and lets them play. Nobody is teaching these kids anything, the form bad habits and get big egos.

 

[AnarchoNeoLuddite]

That is a complete generalization, true in some instances but in no way universal.

 

[Drcatfan]

I think there is a huge difference in the lower levels (Middle School) and small tournaments versus the higher levels (High School) and national tournaments. I think it is a good thing at the lower levels as a way to get kids game time. It is a good opportunity to learn to break a press, learn to run a play, work on a defense or press, etc in real game action when the results really mean nothing. I have not been involved at the higher level, but it looks like it becomes much more about exposure and making money at that level.