AAU versus high school

Thankfully it isn't one versus the other (although how many assistant coaches make it up to Fortuna High -- 250 miles above San Francisco -- to catch Nate Ambrosini during the season? They should, got to get that plug in there, but it's not likely.) So what are the positives and negatives of evaluating talent during high school play versus that of club team action?

Yes, the lame stereotypes are present and accounted for: no defense is an AAU prerequisite, as is three games in three different gyms in one day. On the flip side, the high school coaches roboticize their players and freelancing is verboten.

But if you are a college recruiter, it's important to see prospects in both elements.

On one hand, high school ball presents real rivalries, multiple games of meaning and it's important to witness who rises and who sinks to the occasion. The likelihood of viewing defensive rotations, let alone full out effort at that end, is much more affirmative here. Double and even triple teaming shows up so seeing how a target handles such both physically and mentally is critical to note. The use of actual offensive plays is visible so the learning process of when to be at which spot (as well as where your teammates will be on the court) and the decision about what is the best next movement is a must have skill for succeeding at the next level.

But talent levels can vary dramatically and thus there can be multiple games of no real physical or skills challenge for a prospect. A player who will be a backcourter in college might be stationed in the paint due to his team's lack of size, thereby limiting what can be evaluated. Travelling a couple of hundred miles and then finding out Prospect A isn't playing because he has the flu is a maddening winter season phenomenon.

+++++

On the other hand, talent levels in club team matchups are usually enormously higher so the individual challenge is greater. This is important in determining who rises and who shrinks when finally challenged. The effort supplied in that third game of the day is something to watch for -- is someone going at 75%, or less, because they are tired or does the competitive fire stay constant in each contest? A scorer whose game is primarily dribble-drive penetration can finally be challenged via a 6-foot-10 shotblocker standing between him and the basket so is there adaptability displayed?

However, the importance of winning is lessened because there is always another game to play. Cohesion is often absent as a small percentage of the teams actually ever practice together and that limits guys who benefit from performing in a true team concept. Plus, you get to see a "coach" living large, adorned with sunglasses and Bluetooth while barking out in-game desecrations of his players and their shortcomings.