Heres another article I recently wrote.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Real Meaning of TeamComing together, sharing together, working together, succeeding together ... that?s the real meaning of team. When you think of a team, whether it is basketball, football, or baseball, what do you think of? A bunch of players traded, signed, or drafted together that play against other teams, right? Wrong. Wearing the same jerseys does not make you a team.Most teams in the NBA don?t have team players. Most NBA players play for one thing: their paychecks. It?s all about contract years and signing longer extensions worth more money. The important thing to remember, however, is that if you don?t think about the other players on your team, and what is best for the core group, then you will probably never win a championship. Phil Jackson once said: ?The strength of the team is each individual member...the strength of each member is the team.? The team depends on each member of it to put forth their best effort and do their part while on the court. -That?s why teams with slackers (like the players on the TrailBlazers) don?t win. Players, who slack off, play for themselves instead of playing team basketball.The basis of team basketball is making the extra pass, never letting up on defense, and hustling for the full 48 minutes. I remember once hearing this quote: ?A team is defined as a collection of people who rely on group collaboration such that each of its members experiences an optimum of success level reaching of both personal and team based goals.? This expresses the need for teamwork and total effort from all the team members.Success in any team environment is a challenge. A great man once said, ?Because team members have different behaviors and thinking styles, this leads to conflict. Poor handling of conflict leads to disunity, quarrels, jealousy, and reduced morale. The process of team building investigates the personal characteristics of team members.?One quote I've heard many times is by Robert Yates: ?It is amazing how much you can accomplish when it doesn't matter who gets the credit.? This is very true because no player concerned with his own stats ends up playing to the best of their abilities that way. Teamwork: Is simply less ?me? and more ?we?. Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.</div>
Incredible article. Really good. I am going to have to show this to my coach so he can show it to the other players on the team. :shifty2:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MagicManEvan @ Oct 11 2006, 10:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Heres another article I recently wrote.</div>That sounds like the story of the 2004 Detroit Pistons.
I simply love that robert yates quote. so true.pretty good article, but like BCB said, common sense mostly.
<span style="font-family:Book Antiqua">I think anyone could have thought of this. It's nothing special. However, it's still a good article. Worthy or re-reading, I suppose.</span>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pistonfan11 @ Oct 11 2006, 10:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That sounds like the story of the 2004 Detroit Pistons.</div>Actually I daresay it sounds more like the 2005 San Antonio Spurs. Often the Pistons are looked to as the best example of 'team' merely because of a lack of a clearcut superstar. The fact is they had 5 above average starters who played well together.I daresay the Spurs because even though there was a clear pecking order, none challenged it because it WAS team focused. Why did Tim Duncan, Ginobli, and Parker take the focus? Because they wanted the TEAM to win. Why did the other players defer to the more talented superstars? Because they wanted the TEAM to win. Duncan isn't a guy who demands the ball because he's great. He uses his talents not out of selfish ambition to up his stats but to make his team better.Sounds like an ideal team player.And you wanna know why I say the 2004 Pistons aren't the best example? Because in a true basketball 'team' you cannot exclude coaching and support staff. And Larry Brown is one of the least TEAM based coaches I've seen, as shown by his handling of leaving the Pistons.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (falconman1130 @ Oct 11 2006, 11:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Actually I daresay it sounds more like the 2005 San Antonio Spurs. Often the Pistons are looked to as the best example of 'team' merely because of a lack of a clearcut superstar. The fact is they had 5 above average starters who played well together.I daresay the Spurs because even though there was a clear pecking order, none challenged it because it WAS team focused. Why did Tim Duncan, Ginobli, and Parker take the focus? Because they wanted the TEAM to win. Why did the other players defer to the more talented superstars? Because they wanted the TEAM to win. Duncan isn't a guy who demands the ball because he's great. He uses his talents not out of selfish ambition to up his stats but to make his team better.Sounds like an ideal team player.And you wanna know why I say the 2004 Pistons aren't the best example? Because in a true basketball 'team' you cannot exclude coaching and support staff. And Larry Brown is one of the least TEAM based coaches I've seen, as shown by his handling of leaving the Pistons.</div>Hmmmmmm, I agree.
As I learned in composition class not a month ago (and I quote):"Generally, the best SAT - Essay scores are those that come from basic papers that get the point across."In essence, that is exactly what your article did here. It got the point across in solid fashion. Tips from myself, a guy who has taken seriously to writing: try and add some more complicated vocabulary and examples. (EX: All people care about is their paychecks. Look at Stephen Jackson...)<span style="color:#009900">Overall Grade: B</span>Solid read my friend. Nothing incredible, but definately not medicore.
