I know this has definitely come up SEVERAL times on this forum before. But can some of you super successful coaches chime in?

What are the first 3 things you consider when choosing your tempo for the game? I know the obvious answers...

(My current team is deep. The 2nd stringers are all good. Uptempo is working like a charm against less talented teams because it pulls their chums off the bench and they can't keep up. BUT when I'm facing a team that has good SP/ATH I haven't wanted to use uptempo. They're using slowdown on me and it's been very effective for them.)

I used slowdown once this season and after analyzing the boxscore decided that was a mistake for my team. Unfortunately, when I played against the same team again the coach also switched from slowown to normal tempo. So props to him. That strategy plan was cancelled out.

What are all y'all's tempo tips?

Simple rules:

1. If four team is better, go up tempo.
2. If you can get his team in foul trouble, go up tempo.
3. If there is a huge difference between starters and your reserves, go slow down.
4. If the other team is better. Go slow down.
5.if you are worried about getting into foul trojble , go slow Down.

stick with normal tempo unless you have a compelling reason to do otherwise - like some of those suggestions of TJs. just make sure they are meaningful enough to justify going away from normal, which is generally the best option.

Just curious, why is normal the best option?  

I hate being beat with slowdown. I feel like when someone uses slowdown on me it's because my team is the better team.... and then when I lose the damn game I want to punch a puppy.

Am I more likely to beat slowdown with normal tempo or uptempo?

Posted by craigaltonw on 5/1/2014 10:33:00 PM (view original):
I hate being beat with slowdown. I feel like when someone uses slowdown on me it's because my team is the better team.... and then when I lose the damn game I want to punch a puppy.

Am I more likely to beat slowdown with normal tempo or uptempo?

Alot of times youre more likely to beat slowdown with slowdown.

I do not like uptempo because it leads to more fouls and turnovers. I do not think there is a consensus on this next point, but I've seen enough evidence to lead me to conclude that slower tempo leads to better FG%. For these reasons, I prefer normal or slowdown (choosing slowdown for a tough road game or against the press).

The problem with running uptempo is that your better players will tire quicker, but have no effect on the opposing players. Unless your bench is nearly as good as your starters it is not worth it, unless you can create foul trouble for the opposing team, especially on their best players.

IMO running uptempo should affect the defense some unless they are running slowdown to negate it. Also, it should create more foul opportunities.

My decision for tempo type used on a game by game basis is based largely on lessons learned from vet's posts in the forums. However, there is one additional factor that I use, which I don't see come up a great deal in the forums; and that is the idea of IQs, which is often the tipping point for my decision on tempo.

The increased possessions only have value if they can be meaningful (no duh, right?) I guess my point is: I concern myself with thinking about TOs/fouls generated via tempo, which I believe to be primarily influenced by IQ.

I find that I rest on using normal most of the time anyways, as gill suggests to, it's only in small cases will I use slowdown and even more exetreme cases do I use uptempo.

Posted by poncho0091 on 5/2/2014 8:20:00 PM (view original):
The problem with running uptempo is that your better players will tire quicker, but have no effect on the opposing players. Unless your bench is nearly as good as your starters it is not worth it, unless you can create foul trouble for the opposing team, especially on their best players.

IMO running uptempo should affect the defense some unless they are running slowdown to negate it. Also, it should create more foul opportunities.

I thought that in a different thread we'd concluded that uptempo just has MORE effect on your tempo than your opponent?

"The problem with running uptempo is that your better players will tire quicker, but have no effect on the opposing players. Unless your bench is nearly as good as your starters it is not worth it, unless you can create foul trouble for the opposing team, especially on their best players."


Couple comments here:

1. They may play less minutes but they get more POSSESSIONS. I don't know off the top of my head how much more but if I had to guess it's probably 15% more running uptempo from normal.

2. You really do need to have solid backups to run uptempo. I do it with my teams when my best scorer comes off the bench, when the other factors call for it.

Posted by wildcat98 on 5/3/2014 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 5/2/2014 8:20:00 PM (view original):
The problem with running uptempo is that your better players will tire quicker, but have no effect on the opposing players. Unless your bench is nearly as good as your starters it is not worth it, unless you can create foul trouble for the opposing team, especially on their best players.

IMO running uptempo should affect the defense some unless they are running slowdown to negate it. Also, it should create more foul opportunities.

I thought that in a different thread we'd concluded that uptempo just has MORE effect on your tempo than your opponent?

Uptempo impacts the team that runs it more than the opponent. You should not run uptempo to try to fatigue the other team as it will not work.