Detailed Balancing/Placement Process

Rockets Basketball Coaching Resources:

The Balancing/Placement Process

The overall goal is to make sure players are in a position to contribute, grow, and have a great season of basketball. The below process uses U12 Boys as an example group for reference but is interchangeable among any gender/group. 

Pre-Assessment Group Assignments 

Initial groupings are created based on what division and age group players played the previous year. These rough groupings were created by looking at where players historically tend to end up in their first year of U12 based on where they were in U10 and are not intended to be exact final groups. These groupings help ensure that new to basketball athletes are not grouped in with Division 1 athletes during their first session and create a bad experience for them, as well as to save time in the alignment process by beginning with players grouped with former teammates under the assumption that they are similarly skilled and will be close to the group we start them in on average. Consider a situation in which there were 10 Rockets U10 and 10 Rockets U12 teams the previous season. Initial groups may be broken up as follows:

 In situations where group sizes are not equal using this method, players may move a group away from their former teammates based on knowledge of performance from the previous season or from spring/summer sessions. In situations where players played for a different club in the previous season, they should be matched based on their previous division as best possible. Groups D/E should aim to have equal numbers of new players so that both groups have reference points with known athletes from the previous season. During the assessments, players will be moved up or down to other groups with the intention that at the end of the 3-4 sessions, each group will have players that are as like skilled and or experienced, and Evaluators and Coaches and divide teams within each group as much as possible. At times, players in the top group may get moved downward for a session in order to allow room for others on the fringe an opportunity to play with that group to see how they perform, as well as how players on the lower end of one group, perform being as possibly on the higher end of the group below. 

Assessments and Player Evaluation Process

Athletes should bring shoes, water bottles, and if possible a reversible numbered jersey. If they do not have a jersey a numbered pinnie will be given to them to hold on to and wear throughout the entire assessment process. When athletes arrive for their first assessment session, they should be at the gym 10-15 minutes early so that coaches can fill out evaluation forms with jersey numbers and hand out numbered pinnies as required. For the first session evaluation forms will be ordered alphabetically by first name, but for all subsequent sessions they should be sorted by jersey number to make it quicker for coaches to find players and make notes during the assessment session.

Assessment sheets consist only of a player's name, jersey number, a section for any notes or comments regarding their performance or skill set, and a column to note a ranking or tier. This ranking is relative to players within the session, not across all assessment groups, such that the strongest and weakest players in each individual group can be identified. Assessors should aim to break the players into 3 or 5 tiers in the early sessions, with tiers containing similar numbers of athletes (in order to prevent for example two-thirds of the group being placed into tier 2 of 3 and allow athletes to be more easily separated). It should be clear and consistent between assessors the order of ranks  (Consider using symbols such as ?? / ? / - / ? / ??  for tiers instead of numbers to prevent confusion on whether 1 is high or low)  Rubrics are not used both due to the time spent filling out the sheet preventing proper assessment of athletes, and because all coaches value different skills at different priorities (which prevents any weighted score from being unbiased or objective). All athletes present must be ranked by all assessors by the end of the session (the only exception being that coaches will not assess their own kids).

Shorthand comments are recommended to minimize time writing, noting things like size/speed/attitude along with skills such as layups/shooting/dribbling/defense (strong/average/weak for the group at the particular skill) and any other observations that may impact player's ranking. When looking at skills and performance we are generally looking at some of the following (though these will depend on the skill/age level of the group):

• Dribbling: Keeping eyes up, maintaining control of the ball, ability to change pace/direction effectively, ability to complete dribble moves, ambidextrousness
• Layups: Proper 2-step footwork, ambidextrousness, soft touch on the shot, proper use of backboard, speed, and control of finish
• Shooting: Proper shooting form and follow through, shooting range, speed of release, proper footwork and balance, not forcing shots in scrimmages
• Passing: Accuracy and speed of passes, ability to complete chest/bounce/step around/overhead passes, frequency of passes in scrimmages, ability to complete lead passes to players in stride
• Rebounding: Boxing out, being aggressive and hustling for long rebounds/loose balls, catching rebounds at peak of jump, ability to complete putbacks off of offensive rebounds.
• Defense: Staying with the player on defense between man and basket, hustling back in transition, ball denial, proper help defense positioning, communication with teammates, recovery/closeouts on the ball, preventing ballhandlers from blowing by
• General: Maintaining proper spacing on offense, setting screens for teammates, cutting to the basket or otherwise moving on offense, slowing or pushing the pace as needed
• Attitude/Teamwork: Listening to coaches and following instructions, encouraging teammates, sharing the ball, putting full effort into drills, showing sportsmanship to opponents in scrimmages

At the end of the session, all assessment sheets are turned in to the division coordinator. If time allows, coaches may choose to discuss players that need to move to a new group, or any other observations in a huddle after the session. Otherwise, the division coordinator will use the notes and rankings to create new groups for the next week that will be communicated to other assessors in advance for any adjustments or feedback before being updated in the app. For the final session, there may be groups at the competitive level that assessors may find useful to rank from 1 to 20, such that fringe players between top-level teams can be more easily identified, and team lists can be directly compared between assessors to see which players are consensus for a team or have differing opinions. 

When moving players between groups the goal is to ensure that similarly skilled players are grouped while maintaining roughly equal group sizes. This means that to move a player up from group C to B, another player will likely need to drop from B to C. At times players (particularly new athletes to the club) may jump more drastically from group D/E to group A or B. While groups D and E start mixed to spread out the new players, after the first session they should aim to be separated so that groups D and E are separate skill levels entirely. This ensures that most beginner players in the club can have sessions together that can be used to balance 2 or more equal teams.

Here is a visual of the process, by the time the 3rd session is over (or if a 4th is required) the groups should be very close, and the top groups should be in a very competitive tryout for the top teams. 

Using a bit of historical data in the beginning keeps the core grouping close, and allows evaluators a better shot of getting an athlete in the right group earlier in the process. Overall - everyone is trying out for every team, there are fewer big swings where strong athletes beat up on less experienced, the middle is always fluid and some of the perceived top athletes get moved around and have to earn their spots. This entire process is the fairest to provide a level playing field for all athletes without introducing competitive tryouts for additional fees to members while providing the most transparent process possible. 

Challanges: 

Some athletes can swing one or two divisions based on their skill and at times it is difficult to place those athletes without external data or some strategy. 

For Example - if an age group has a nice even 10 teams, all evenly distributed between divisions 1 through 10 - many athletes can be on 3 teams. 

• They could be the 10th player on the 3rd team (as an example)
• The 5/6/7 player on the 4th team
• The 1/2/3 player on the 5th team.

What is the correct spot for that athlete? That is always a difficult decision.

• Will they develop better as the leader on the 5th team (in most cases, Club President Robin will argue yes).
• Or - Do they seem to lack the leadership skills to be the number 1 guy on a team, but should be a contributor somewhere on a team - and maybe that 4th team will create the right fit where the athlete can be in the middle of the pack - contribute at times but are not leading in scoring, shots or defending the other teams best player like they would on Team #5?
• Or are they someone who is a bit of a follower and a great practice player with parents demanding they are on the top team possible? Then maybe the last player on the 3rd team will be in the right spot. 

If there was a perfect answer for every player this would be an easy job. But there is not, and our evaluators will do our best to do what is best for the athlete and family based on what we know at the time of evals. We as a club in 2024 will attempt to survey families a week prior to placements to get a better understanding of family expectations. We will never promise anything to any athlete - but at times that data can help in situations where a player could go either way. 

Typically the above scenario are the families that take exception to where their children have been placed and are the most upset and verbal about their child not making a top team when they had the talent to be there. If we have not done our due diligence to understand the expectations of the family and communicate to them what our opinion is - we can mitigate placement issues before teams are announced. Something that is not possible in all cases, but if we are aware of the families' expectations - and know what we are going in a way that differs - it allows the club to communicate that as early as possible 

Other challenges are position-based during the process. 

For example, we may have a very competitive race for the top team. But that team lacks size, so some very capable smaller players may get bumped to the second team to balance the personnel and round out the team positionally. This makes sense in all cases, but can also cause stress among families whose children are on the Fringe between both groups and end up being the ones who get bumped down when they have the talent to make the top team and do not. 

There is no magic bullet for this scenario to make everyone happy. We have to do what's best for the athletes, and at times having a very competitive team that has nine point guards would cause that to lose games they should be competing in, and have just as much of a negative effect on the overall team compared to having to move a few of those players to a lower team during the placement process to accommodate good roster balance. In those cases, those players moved down typically end up being big contributors on the team below and end up having a great season. But parents and friends can get hung up on "my kid is just as good as the other kids on team 1, why are we on team 2" - and I believe them to be correct in those thoughts and empathize with them - however it's the right move for the teams vs the individuals. 

This scenario happens every year, with good players and great families, and typically is a source of stress. Early communication and transparency of process and plan can help us through these tough decisions, along with some parent data through surveys. 

Balancing Lower Division Teams 

Taking 30 athletes at the lower end of a large division, and 'stack' ranking them while putting the bottom 10 athletes on one team and sending them off for the season does not work. We always want to avoid that at all costs. There has to be some evaluation, thought, and strategy based on the inventory of players that could differ year over year. 

First - you do not want to create a "last team", those athletes are typically all new to basketball and need some players to play up to in practice or in games. In the past, our club had done that, and those athletes rarely return and the coach will not return either. For lower divisions, you have to assess athletes and build out the teams. Taking a group of 30, and making 3 teams close to each other is a much better solution for the athletes. 

With a group of 30 athletes, assessors should aim to create 4-5 tiers based on skill level that can be evenly distributed across the teams to ensure roughly even teams are made. For smaller groups with only 20 players to balance, 3 tiers may be sufficient. This also ensures one team does not end up with a much higher percentage of athletes who are new to basketball or organized sports which may prevent them from being competitive even in the lowest division of the age group. Further considerations should be made when assigning players within these tiers to teams for things such as height, ball handling, scoring or other skill sets that need to be balanced across teams. 

Evaluators need to identify those athletes that are new to basketball or low on the skill spectrum, and as a group, we can blend those athletes into the teams to allow them to play up to their teammates and does not cause a coach a situation where they have a lineup they can not compete with. 

In the example below players were assigned to tiers 1-5 with 1 being the strongest within the group of 30 athletes and 5 being the most beginner players in the club. Because there may be skill gaps that prevent equal divisions of players, the aim should be for the average tier in each group to be roughly equal and to avoid one team being too top/bottom heavy in said process. Not all balanced teams need to end up in the same division, but the goal is to ensure that if all 2-3 balanced teams (depending on assessment group size) end up in the bottom division, they should all be capable of success in MBA games. There is no worse scenario than having a group of 'new to basketball' athletes on a team, that can not compete and lose the majority of their games - in those scenarios as mentioned above -  we find those athletes do not return, attendance during the season dwindles and the coach has high stress trying to bring everything together.

We also do not want a scenario where teams win every game - on the surface, it seems great to players and parents, but the big lessons in sport are learned in a loss, not a win - so having a balance of the two is important in youth development. So we want to strategically build out these teams to compete while allowing athletes to contribute and grow.  Below is a visual of the concept. 

In the above scenario, after seeding - we may find that Team X has great chemistry - better than we anticipated and they could bump up a division leaving Team Y and Team Z in the same division, one level lower. And that scenario is very likely and happens a lot. At times the opposite happens - Team Z could have bad chemistry - or an athlete gets injured or has poor attendance and it could push them down a division. 

In no scenario is an evaluator and division coordinator's job to be perfect. We are trying to do our best with what information and data we have. At times the season will settle the team and they have the chance to grow quickly and get seeded higher - or they do not grow as fast as others and get seeded a division lower. 

The above process will typically give our teams an initial seeding with MBAns within +/- 1 Division of where they will spend the rest of the season.