BBIQ ( was RE: Will Powe Go?)

[asterix ninetynine]

Darn it Ubiquitous -  You've stolen my follow-up ;)
   
  I thank all of you for your definitions.  In many case, you chose a Hall of Famer and member of the 50 greatest players ever to illustrate what it means to have good or great BBIQ ( although my friend Ravi Potter Stewart's "I know it when I see it" made me wonder if he ought not be scouting).
   
  So what does that mean when the term gets applied to young'un like Brandon Wallace or Al Jefferson?  Does it mean that they are Hall of Fame material or candidates for Ravi's all-BBIQ Rotisserie team?
   
  I like the idea that it is a player with solid fundamentals who knows when and how to use them.  It doesn't have to be a star or HOFer.  Brian Scalabrine, Adrian Griffin, Rick Fox, Ed Pinckney, and Danny Ainge all fit that bill.
   
  

Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Kim,

That's a great definition, thank you. My question is
how can one objectively determine a basketball
player's BBIQ? There are so many factors to take into
account, including the player's health, experience,
mental strength, the opponent on any given day,
teammates, coaching, offensive and defensive system,
the officiating, that seem to influence the perception
of basketball IQ and one's ability, as you said, to
"see the court/game as a whole and understand the game
in the broadest sense." Case in point, Tony Allen
looks a hell of a lot smarter when he's completely
healthy, because the crazy shit he tries to pull off
on the basketball court has a much better chance of
happening when he's healthy. Likewise, Paul Pierce is
going to look a whole hell of lot smarter on the court
this year because he's going to be playing with a
bunch of great veterans. There are obviously players
that 'get it' just like there are players that don't,
but my question would pertain to the ones in the
middle (since that's where most reside). How much of
BBIQ is system and situation and how much is inborn
and unchanging? For the greats, it doesn't seem to
matter, they can succeed in any system. But what
about everyone else? 

Ryan
--- Kim Malo wrote:

> At 12:24 PM 10/12/2007, asterix ninetynine wrote:
> >The lexicon of basketball intelligentsia continues
> to amaze (and 
> >somewhat perplex) me. "Long" players with
> tremendous "Upside"? And 
> >now we can add the term "BBIQ".
> >
> > What exactly is basketball I.Q. and what does it
> describe? I 
> > presume it means that a player exhibits solid
> fundamentals, but I 
> > would appreciate hearing how others define this
> term.
> 
> Not so much just having or even exhibiting
> fundamentals. Exhibiting 
> them can just be because you're well trained and
> mindless enough for 
> that to be remarkably effective, while BBIQ doesn't
> just involve 
> fundamentals anyway. And you can have BBIQ but not
> be able to execute 
> - Scal will often clearly understand the right thing
> to do but can't 
> do it. Hell, I'm much better at understanding the
> game than I ever 
> was as a player, where I mostly took advantage of
> smarts, 
> ruthlessness, persistence, a solid frame... and
> getting my growth 
> spurt several years before the boys I was playing
> against . Of 
> course amongst the local girls I was da man...
> (hmmm, something wrong 
> with that statement)
> 
> The key word here is understanding - it's being able
> to see the court 
> / game as a whole and understand the game in the
> broadest sense, 
> along with what you're seeing now, to know what the
> most appropriate 
> thing to do is in basketball terms, to take best
> advantage of what 
> you see and minimize the disadvantages. Which may
> involve exhibiting 
> the fundamentally sound thing but may also mean
> doing something 
> outrageous but perfect, as Bird so often did. And he
> had one of the 
> highest BBIQ in action I've ever seen. As did Russ.
> His shot blocking 
> was fundamentally sound, his deciding to block it so
> as to start a 
> break for his teammates vs out of bounds (where it
> couldn't be 
> rebounded or tapped back in but if you were the last
> one to touch it, 
> it might well lead to an easy basket anyway on the
> inbound), when no 
> one else did it that way, was high BBIQ. Your
> understanding of the 
> game certainly involves fundamentals, but if it
> never moves beyond 
> having them, I don't think it's a high BBIQ any more
> than doing well 
> on spelling tests because of a photographic memory
> or teacher who is 
> very good at drill means being a brilliant creative
> thinker.
> 
> Someone mentioned Gomes. BBIQ might tell you that
> the best thing for 
> you to do in a given situation is nothing direct,
> simply move without 
> the ball NOW because you see 3 defenders taking the
> first step to 
> close in on the guy with the ball, which means
> there's going to be a 
> lot of open space somewhere and an urgent need to
> get the ball to 
> someone else before he gets trapped. Vs. simply
> standing and watching 
> or moving to the open space, but too late because
> you waited for it 
> to already be there with the trap locked down and
> couldn't think 
> beyond oh, there's an open space, maybe someone will
> pass it to me if 
> I go there. Or, in a related situation (and this is
> a MAJOR pet peeve 
> because it is so easy and so basic and so obvious
> and we are SO bad 
> about it) going enough to the ball when someone is
> trapped or about 
> to be, to give them a visible and safe outlet
> target, even if it's 
> just for a moment before passing the ball right
> back. And even if 
> it's not part of the original play call (following a
> script doesn't 
> take BBIQ). It's making a bounce pass not just
> because it's more 
> appropriate for the part of the court, who you're
> passing to and the 
> overall situation than a chest high bullet, but
> understanding why 
> that's true, not just doing so on instinct and
> training. You could 
> see Jefferson starting to raise his, at least on
> offense, last season 
> when he was making his moves more situationally
> appropriate vs acting 
> wholly on instinct and raw talent and a prayer.
> 
> Kim 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 




____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/ 

_______________________________________________
The Boston Celtics Mailing List
celtics at igtc.com
http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


       
---------------------------------
 Check out  the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos.