Fundamenatlly Sound Team vs Athletic Team. What would You choose?

[Guest bleed orange]

What does athletic mean? If you do not have fundamental skills "athletic" means nothing. I will take a team that is fundamentally sound over a team that is athletic any day. History is on my side and it does not matter what sport I am talking about.

[hjhawks]

An athlete is an athlete....

By athletic, do you mean physically gifted, but undisciplined?  vs. physically inferior but well disciplined and fundamentally sound...

Speed is speed...

You can take a physically inferior player and train them to be "more athletic" but it is much easier to take a gifted athlete and teach him discipline... (ie: Newton football!)

There are too many "what if's"  I am sure the Buna teams of the 50's were extremely fundamentally sound but the 70's or 80's teams out of Lincoln that were athletic, but maybe undisciplined would wipe the floor with them....

[Master T]

I take Athletic becasue you can do a lot more with them

[Bucof2010]

I think it comes down to coaching. If you take a highly athletic team vs. fundamentally sound team with the same caliber of coaching then the athletes are going to win.

Take a great coach with a fundamentally sound team and play an athletic team with an average coach and I think the team with the better coach will win.

Of course there's a million variables within this.

If I had to choose 5 guys to coach I'd take the most athletic %100 of the time because skill can be coached athleticism can not.

[Guest bleed orange]

An athlete is an athlete....

By athletic, do you mean physically gifted, but undisciplined?  vs. physically inferior but well disciplined and fundamentally sound...

Speed is speed...

You can take a physically inferior player and train them to be "more athletic" but it is much easier to take a gifted athlete and teach him discipline... (ie: Newton football!)

There are too many "what if's"  I am sure the Buna teams of the 50's were extremely fundamentally sound but the 70's or 80's teams out of Lincoln that were athletic, but maybe undisciplined would wipe the floor with them....

You cannot compare the teams of the 50's (Buna) with the team from Lincoln ( 70's or 80's). Different times and classification of course. Back then the kids were discipline because coaches were allowed to coach with out parent interference. I am talking about the Lincoln teams of the 70's and 80's by the way. It did not matter what school you went to. I am talking about "NOW". I understand your logic. Sure you need athlete's. Let me re phase the question, If you had a athletic fundamentally team vs just an athletic team whom would you choose?  See I hear the term "Athletic" all the time. Sometimes the most "Athletic" team does not always win.  You can be an athlete without being "athletic".

[Bucof2010]

An athlete is an athlete....

By athletic, do you mean physically gifted, but undisciplined?  vs. physically inferior but well disciplined and fundamentally sound...

Speed is speed...

You can take a physically inferior player and train them to be "more athletic" but it is much easier to take a gifted athlete and teach him discipline... (ie: Newton football!)

There are too many "what if's"  I am sure the Buna teams of the 50's were extremely fundamentally sound but the 70's or 80's teams out of Lincoln that were athletic, but maybe undisciplined would wipe the floor with them....

You cannot compare the teams of the 50's (Buna) with the team from Lincoln ( 70's or 80's). Different times and classification of course. Back then the kids were discipline because coaches were allowed to coach with out parent interference. I am talking about the Lincoln teams of the 70's and 80's by the way. It did not matter what school you went to. I am talking about "NOW". I understand your logic. Sure you need athlete's. Let me re phase the question, If you had a athletic fundamentally team vs just an athletic team whom would you choose?  See I hear the term "Athletic" all the time. Sometimes the most "Athletic" team does not always win.  You can be an athlete without being "athletic".

I'd say it more along the lines of "you can be a basketball (or football or whatevr else) player without being athletic" an athlete is an athlete though.

[jr1979]

I'M WITH YOU BLEED. I'VE WITNESSED THIS MANY TIMES, WITH THE FUNDAMENTAL TEAM COMING OUT VICTORIOUS EVERY TIME. ALSO MOST OF THE TIME THESE FUNDAMENTAL TEAMS ARE VERY WELL COACHED.  :-X  ;D

[Guest bleed orange]

I'M WITH YOU BLEED. I'VE WITNESSED THIS MANY TIMES, WITH THE FUNDAMENTAL TEAM COMING OUT VICTORIOUS EVERY TIME. ALSO MOST OF THE TIME THESE FUNDAMENTAL TEAMS ARE VERY WELL COACHED.  :-X  ;D

Good post Jr1979.  Teams that are fundamentally sound are well coched and have "Athletes" also.  Bucof2010 you are correct also, it does come down to coaching. But let me ask you this, What coaches in this day in time are really allowed to coach? Not many.

[baller001]

i would have to go with the athletes its easier to go into a game with a solid group of athletes who know the game rather than a group of basketball players who really know the game and are just get by on the athletic part of the game

[Guest scottpellegrin93]

i would have to go with Fundamenatlly sound cause Athletic they will start to ball hog

[Bucof2010]

i would have to go with Fundamenatlly sound cause Athletic they will start to ball hog

I've never noticed Kountze Ozen or Central to be ballhogs.

[Guest bleed orange]

i would have to go with the athletes its easier to go into a game with a solid group of athletes who know the game rather than a group of basketball players who really know the game and are just get by on the athletic part of the game

Wrong, if they don't have fundamentals then they really don't know the game. Scoring is 1/4 of the game. There is defense, assist, rebounds, steals and blocks and much more.

[baller001]

i would have to go with the athletes its easier to go into a game with a solid group of athletes who know the game rather than a group of basketball players who really know the game and are just get by on the athletic part of the game

Wrong, if they don't have fundamentals then they really don't know the game. Scoring is 1/4 of the game. There is defense, assist, rebounds, steals and blocks and much more.

ok so you are tryin to tell me that fundamental teams will be able to apply better ball presure, jump higher, be quick enough to steal the ball, and block shot better than athletes i disagree with you very strongly..you dont have to look out of our area to find my proof dominate teams Ozen, Silsbee, Kountze, HJ, Newton (all athletic teams almost every year) how come they win and the fundamental teams dont??? so no im not wrong which by the way an opionon cant be wrong

[BLUEDOVE3]

Ozen is an athletic team, disciplined, plus fundamentally sound. Thats a good strong combination to have in an arsenal..

[hjhawks]

Here is my ranking

1.Athletic & Disciplined

2.Athletic and partially disciplined

3.Kind of Athletic and disciplined

4. (tie)not athletic and very disciplined

4. (tie)very athletic and no discipline

[PoppaBearstarr]

Unfortunately it's not always like that.

[Wildcatter]

There are really not any real good fundamentally sound boys teams around in this area so it is hard to say.  A good fundamental team can easily break a a good press, they also know how to set good screens, defend the pick and roll etc.  If i can do these things I can get you out of your press stop second shots and control the tempo that I want.  So, if you take a team that is athletic and a team that is not fundamentally sound it will win everytime.

[CATMAN]

There are really not any real good fundamentally sound boys teams around in this area so it is hard to say.  A good fundamental team can easily break a a good press, they also know how to set good screens, defend the pick and roll etc.  If i can do these things I can get you out of your press stop second shots and control the tempo that I want.  So, if you take a team that is athletic and a team that is not fundamentally sound it will win everytime.

Take a look @ Clear Lake @ how many times they went to state.They were not very athletic,but very fundamentally sound.

[shorttexas1]

Give a good coach the athletes and he will use their undiscipline ways for good... i.e. Wheatly!  Fundamently sound teams will get you far in the lower classes but it is an entire other animal in the large classes.  Only one team in recent history that wasn't extremely athletic made it to the 5A or 4A championship...  Last years Dulles team was just that!  But without the athletes they could not seal the deal....

But whose to say that the athletic  team has no disciplin?

[Guest spinks]

Great topic.  I think it depends on matchups and game types.  Athletic teams in the playoffs scare the hell out of fundamentally sound teams because the blood gets pumping and those athletes forget that they cannot shoot the ball.  I watched what was probably the most fundamentally sound team in Southeast Texas History in the 1992 Hardin Jefferson Hawks(led the nation in scoring part of the season) and they were absolutely dismantled in the regional final by a Groesbeck team that was as athletic a team as I have ever seen in 3 or 4A basketball to this day.  This team was full of D1 football players and because the atmosphere was so intense they were making shots from everywhere and dunking from everywhere.  The athletes won that game! So it truly depends.

[CATMAN]

Great topic.  I think it depends on matchups and game types.  Athletic teams in the playoffs scare the heck out of fundamentally sound teams because the blood gets pumping and those athletes forget that they cannot shoot the ball.  I watched what was probably the most fundamentally sound team in Southeast Texas History in the 1992 Hardin Jefferson Hawks(led the nation in scoring part of the season) and they were absolutely dismantled in the regional final by a Groesbeck team that was as athletic a team as I have ever seen in 3 or 4A basketball to this day.  This team was full of D1 football players and because the atmosphere was so intense they were making shots from everywhere and dunking from everywhere.  The athletes won that game! So it truly depends.

You are right.Look what happen in the spurger and yuga game last year in the reg111 @S.F.Austin.Yuga was more athletes than spuger.Yuga lost.Yuga could not make there free throw.

[Guest bleed orange]

Good points everyone. This is just a question so don't get upset. You always hear the term "Stereotype". Do you think we stereotype some teams? If a predominately black team is good, they are labeled as "Athletic". If a predominately white team is good they are labled "Fundamentally Sound". You never hear a predominately all white team call " athletic" and you never hear a predominately all black team called "fundamentally sound". They are all "athletes". Why can't we just say they are a " Very talented Team" and leave at that. Just curious about some of your thoughts. I am not trying to start anything. Just stir up good conversation. I don't know maybe I am seeing something that is simply not there. But I have never heard both terms mentioned in the same breath about any team.

[AggiesAreWe]

I think the term "athletic" gets stereotyped a lot. But this comparison of "athletic" and "fundamentally sound" teams is kind of splitting hairs. You can have an athletic team with great fundamentals. You can also have a fundamentally sound basketball team that can't run fast or jump high. I'll take the former, rather than the latter. ;D

I'll always believe that coaching is what sets the great teams from the very good ones. I always go back to this example:

I have been going to the state tourney every year since 1972, I have seen my fair share of great basketball teams. The one team that sticks in my mind about coaching, or the lack of, is the 1983 Houston Yates team. This team had 4-5 Div.1 signees. Their starting 5 was '6"3, '6"3, '6"6, '6"7,'6"8. Two of these players were great players that actually played some NBA, Ricky Winslow(U of H Phi Slamma Jamma fame) and Carvin Holcomb (Baylor). They came in to the tourney ranked #1 in the state and in the top 10 nationally. They played a Ft.Worth Paschal team in the semis that had no player over '6"3. To make a long story short, Paschal was very well coached and beat this all-world team by double digits. Both these teams were all black, so the stereotype is out the window on this one. But the Yates coach in my opinion did no coaching. The Paschal coach was phenomenal in that game.

In all the years of my state tournament experience, I have never seen such an overwhelming amount of talent lose to such a lesser talented team. It was pure and simple, coaching.

[CATMAN]

I think the term "athletic" gets stereotyped a lot. But this comparison of "athletic" and "fundamentally sound" teams is kind of splitting hairs. You can have an athletic team with great fundamentals. You can also have a fundamentally sound basketball team that can't run fast or jump high. I'll take the former, rather than the latter. ;D

I'll always believe that coaching is what sets the great teams from the very good ones. I always go back to this example:

I have been going to the state tourney every year since 1972, I have seen my fair share of great basketball teams. The one team that sticks in my mind about coaching, or the lack of, is the 1983 Houston Yates team. This team had 4-5 Div.1 signees. Their starting 5 was '6"3, '6"3, '6"6, '6"7,'6"8. Two of these players were great players that actually played some NBA, Ricky Winslow(U of H Phi Slamma Jamma fame) and Carvin Holcomb (Baylor). They came in to the tourney ranked #1 in the state and in the top 10 nationally. They played a Ft.Worth Paschal team in the semis that had no player over '6"3. To make a long story short, Paschal was very well coached and beat this all-world team by double digits. Both these teams were all black, so the stereotype is out the window on this one. But the Yates coach in my opinion did no coaching. The Paschal coach was phenomenal in that game.

In all the years of my state tournament experience, I have never seen such an overwhelming amount of talent lose to such a lesser talented team. It was pure and simple, coaching.

Good point aaw

[Guest hoops12]

Good points everyone. This is just a question so don't get upset. You always hear the term "Stereotype". Do you think we stereotype some teams? If a predominately black team is good, they are labeled as "Athletic". If a predominately white team is good they are labled "Fundamentally Sound". You never hear a predominately all white team call " athletic" and you never hear a predominately all black team called "fundamentally sound". They are all "athletes". Why can't we just say they are a " Very talented Team" and leave at that. Just curious about some of your thoughts. I am not trying to start anything. Just stir up good conversation. I don't know maybe I am seeing something that is simply not there. But I have never heard both terms mentioned in the same breath about any team.

Very good point...