Friday, September 15, 2006

Is there an Advantage in Road Trips?

I try to leave rules out of my discussions, but there are a few which I have strong opinions on. Today is a day to get another rule off my chest - traveling.

So, my peeve with travel is the following. There are actually two things with traveling that I have problems with. My first belief is that travel should only be called when the thrower gains an advantage. What I mean here is that a travel call on an open sided throw with no chance for a hand block should not be called a travel. Maybe in the case when you are broken or you get a backhand huck off on you then a travel call is valid. Additionally, if you didn't think you were going to get the hand block than I also think you shouldn't call travel.

My second issue with traveling is the intricacies of the call. My biggest problem is that someone needs to watch your feet to identify a travel. Sure many of us are taught to use feet position as an indication of where to mark as fundamental , but I still have a hard time believing people just watch other people's feet to call travels. If anyone calls the travel it should be a non-marking player, but how do they know how significant the travel was.

As a coach I recommend standing behind your players as they throw and telling them when they are traveling. This will eliminate much of the problems as described above. In general, though the game will only benefit from a more appropriate use of the travel. We don't need to go to the extremes of the NBA, but we need to make an adjustment.



Tom said...

I think often a player doesn't gain an obvious advantage by traveling (the throw wouldn't have been blocked anyway) but they gain an advantage because they may have better balance or be able to fake more aggressively because they're not worried about traveling. For instance, I travel like mad sometimes, not on the throw, but while faking. It doesn't help me get around my thrower, but allowing myself a little sloppiness allows me to pivot more aggressively, which makes the eventual throw easier. If I'm not called on this, it is unfair to the player who has the discipline and balance to pivot and fake effectively without shifting their pivot foot.

Anonymous said...

how about this situation. defense is playing zone. o handler is aggressively faking and moving his pivot foot in the process. not huge movements, but enough to make his fakes easier to preform and more likely to get a defensive player to bite. a non-marking cup member would be far enough away to see the o players whole body without foot watching. i think this would be a very legitmate travel call. any opinions???

Jeters said...

The travel that helps make the fake better. Never considered this one, but I've probably never caught someone doing it.

The good thing here is that someone else is watching fro the travel, and if it's a legitimate move that gets an unfair advantage for the O, then yes I'm happy with this call.


n said...

My first belief is that travel should only be called when the thrower gains an advantage.

Sure - but it's pretty easy to gain an advantage - even unmarked. I can throw a backhand huck further with a bowling alley kick than I can without. At what point am i gaining an advantage?

Jeters said...

To n ... good point, but I guess I was going within reason. Of course taking three steps or using the travel to generate distance to throw are travels.

The decision factor in my mind for a marked man, is would I have got the block or stopped the throw if the person hadn't of travelled.