🇨🇳🇬🇧 This is a bilingual weekly newsletter.

👇 Scroll to bottom for ENGLISH VERSION

「這裡沒人把你當一回事。」

挑戰傳統，往往比提出新方法更難。

最近有位朋友向我推薦了一本書：Alex Sarama 所著的《Transforming Basketball: Changing How We Think About Basketball Performance》。去年7月，他受聘為 NBA 克利夫蘭騎士隊的球員發展總監，今年夏天正式升為球隊的助理教練。

我隨手翻開幾頁便被吸引住了。書中許多概念完全顛覆了我們長期以來在亞洲球館裡反覆操作的訓練方式。讀得越多，我就越覺得必須把這些想法分享給大家。

一個挑戰傳統的框架

Sarama 並不是全盤否定傳統。他承認老派教練與舊的方法在他們的那個年代具有劃時代的價值。但他同時也提出一個發人深省的觀點：在今日這個研究與方法論都在不斷精進的時代，墨守成規，本身就是一種風險。

這讓我想起林書豪的訓練師 Josh Fan 曾對我說過的話。他總是鼓勵教練與球員去問：「是否有更好的方法？」，而不是一味地重複：「我們以前都是這樣做的。」

核心理念：超越還原主義

這本書的核心是三個概念：生態動力學、非線性教學，以及限制導向法（CLA）。

傳統訓練習慣把動作拆解成零件：繞錐、空氣防守、定點投籃，甚至雙球運球。看起來整齊，也容易掌控，但卻無法讓球員真正面對比賽的不可預測。
生態動力學認為，技能是「在情境中生成」的。技能不是腦海裡儲存的檔案，而是在球員、任務與環境的交互作用下即時湧現。
非線性教學強調變異性。與其重複同一個動作 20 次，不如改變場地、時間、規則與壓力，讓球員在不斷適應中學會應變。
CLA （Constraints-Led Approach）則意味著教練不是直接告訴球員「正確動作」，而是設計情境，讓最佳解決方案自然浮現。

Sarama 用了一個很美的比喻：籃球不是依譜演奏的古典樂，而是即興演出的爵士樂。

現實的考驗

然而，當我把這些想法分享給朋友時，他只淡淡回了一句： 「這裡沒有人把你當一回事。」

接著又補上一句：「如果上層不相信，基層也不會相信。」

這句話刺痛了我，但也很真實。問題不僅僅是方法，而是文化與權威。在我們的環境裡，若領導者不認同新的方式，基層也不敢冒險採用。即便有再多的研究佐證，新的想法依然難以落地。

馬來西亞的現況

在馬來西亞，不同層級的籃球往往各自為政。教練、球會、組織之間缺乏共同語言。大家普遍偏向追求短期成果，基層只能不斷複製熟悉的東西，而不是探索更有效的方法。

我不會斷言其他國家的情況，但在我們自己的環境裡，這些文化與結構的阻力確實存在。這也解釋了為什麼像 CLA 這樣的框架，即使有證據支持並且在國外越來越普遍，在這裡依舊難以被廣泛採納。

選擇去實驗

Sarama 在書中也鼓勵大家批判性地吸收、在地化，並勇於實驗。不要盲目複製，而是建立一個循環：理論 → 實作 → 理論 → 實作。唯有如此，進化才能持續。

也許這才是真正的重點。我們不需要一開始就讓所有人都同意。只要有人願意開始實驗，證明「確實有另一種可能」，就已經足夠。

因為沒錯，或許一開始真的沒有人會認真聽。但如果我們誰都不去嘗試，那這句話就會永遠成立。

如果我們選擇測試那些陌生的事物呢？如果我們勇敢去問那個令人不舒服的問題：是否存在更好的方法？

如果這篇文章讓你重新思考我們該如何推動籃球，請點擊訂閱。我每個星期天都會分享一篇像這樣的文章。

— Jordan

“No one gonna take you seriously here” — Transforming Basketball and the Weight of Culture

Challenging tradition is often harder than proposing new ideas.

A friend recently recommended a book to me: “Transforming Basketball: Changing How We Think About Basketball Performance” by Alex Sarama, who was appointed Director of Player Development with the Cleveland Cavaliers in July 2024 and promoted to Assistant Coach this summer.

I opened the first few pages and was immediately hooked. Many of the concepts go against everything we’ve been taught and repeated for years. The more I read, the more I felt compelled to share them.

A Framework That Challenges Tradition

Sarama doesn’t dismiss tradition outright. He acknowledges that the great coaches and methods of the past were revolutionary in their time.

But he also points out something uncomfortable: in today’s world — with access to research, technology, and advanced methodology — sticking to the old ways has become a risk in itself.

It reminded me of something Jeremy Lin’s trainer, Josh Fan, once told me: coaches and players should always ask, “Is there a better way?” instead of blindly repeating, “This is how we’ve always done it.”

The Core Ideas: Beyond Reductionism

Three ideas sit at the heart of this book: ecological dynamics, nonlinear pedagogy, and the constraints-led approach (CLA).

Traditional drills break movements down into isolated parts — cone work, air defense, stationary shooting, even two-ball dribbling. They look neat. They feel controlled. But they rarely prepare players for the unpredictability of the game.
Ecological dynamics views skills as something that emerge in context. Skills aren’t files stored in the brain to be recalled later. They’re created in the moment, in the interaction between player, task, and environment.
Nonlinear pedagogy embraces variability. Instead of running the same drill 20 times, it changes space, time, rules, and pressure — forcing players to adapt again and again.
CLA means the coach doesn’t impose “the correct move.” Instead, the coach designs conditions where the best solutions naturally emerge.

Sarama uses a beautiful metaphor: basketball isn’t classical music played from a score sheet — it’s jazz, improvised and alive.

The Reality Check

Then reality kicks in.

When I shared some of these ideas with a friend, his response was blunt: “No one gonna take you seriously here.”

And he added: “If your top don’t believe it, your grassroots won’t believe it.”

Those words stung — not because he was wrong, but because he was right. The challenge isn’t just about methods; it’s about culture and authority.

In our part of the world, if leadership doesn’t believe in a new approach, the grassroots won’t risk adopting it either. Even the most evidence-based ideas struggle to survive in such a climate.

Malaysia’s Reality

Here in Malaysia, different levels of basketball often operate in silos. Coaches, clubs, and organizations rarely share a common language or framework.

From top to bottom, most people focus on short-term results — a win-now mindset. The grassroots are left to repeat what’s familiar, not necessarily what’s effective.

I won’t claim to know exactly how things work everywhere else. But in our context, these cultural and structural barriers are real.

They explain why innovative frameworks like CLA struggle to take root, even when the evidence is solid.

Choosing to Experiment

Sarama ends his book with a call to critically absorb, localize, and experiment.

Don’t copy-paste methods blindly. Instead, create a cycle: theory → practice → theory → practice.

That’s how continuous evolution happens.

And maybe that’s the real takeaway here. We don’t need everyone to agree at once. We just need a few to start experimenting — to show there is another way.

Because yes, maybe no one will take you seriously at first.

But if nobody tries, that line will always remain true.

What if we chose to test the unfamiliar? What if we asked the uncomfortable question: is there a better way?

If this story made you rethink how we grow the game, hit the subscribe button. I send one like this every Sunday.