Video is "the truth machine." When assessing players, what is the hierarchy of tools available, from lowest to highest, realizing overlap and oversimplification? Everything matters.
1) Raw statistics. "There are three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain Statistics show a lot but not all.
2) Highlights. Highlights compile good plays from players.
3) Full game tape. Full games show "warts and all" the performance of players.
4) Direct observation. Coaches see a player's skill but also their energy, interaction with teammates, coaches, and officials. How does the player respond to success and failure? College coaches have plenty of headaches; they don't need another prima donna or 'head case'.
5) Site visits. Coaches can 'work out' a player with their prospective team and teammates. How does she 'fit in'? Do potential teammates like her and enjoy spending time with her.
Coaches also talk with your coaches about your academics, level of commitment, discipline, leadership, coachability, and other 'intangibles'.
Coaches also provide "comps" or comparables. That's harder for volleyball than for some other sports because our intellectual databases differ. Even if someone asks for comparison with another front or back row player, that presents problems as an excellent player may have "unicorn" features (imagine a Kristaps Porzingis) that make comparison difficult. MVB 24 has multiple excellent players who are not 'strictly comparable' with past Melrose successful players.
Lagniappe. Enormous emotion and suffering enters the ascent of the mountain.
No comments:
Post a Comment