Sports Illustrated writer Any Staples decided to take the NCAA recruiting exam that all coaches are required to take before being allowed to go on the road and recruit.  More evidence that the rule book needs a major overhaul.  An interesting piece.  

Gregg Popovich has flown under the radar as an NBA hall of fame coach, and his ability to adjust to the way the game has changed and his personnel is a big part of his genius.  Do you remember the Spurs championship teams of the late 90s and early 2000's?  They were a tough grind-it-out defensive team that pounded the ball inside and played a half-court game on both ends.  Do you realize that this year's Spurs are the most explosive offensive team in the NBA? They averaged almost 104 points per night in the NBA and led the league in field goal percentage (48%) and 3-point field goal percentage (39%).  His 1999 championship team only shot the ball 74 times per game, and this year's Spurs put up 83 shots each night.  This year's team averages almost 10 points per game more than the '99 Spurs.  

NBA rules have changed since the Spurs first title, with hand-checking rules being called a lot differently to encourage a more wide open style of play and more scoring.  Pop has clearly adjusted, moving from the grind it out half-court to a more wide open high scoring attack.  It's great evidence of two things: the subtle genius of Gregg Popovich as a coach, who surely should be headed to the hall of fame.  But also the importance of the ability to adapt.  

You need to be comfortable and smart enough to put your team in the best position to win, not to ask them to play the way you want them to play. If you're best players score close to the hoop, you need to emphasize pounding the ball inside.  If you don't have the athletes to get up and down the floor, you don't want to run with a team that can't handle it.  Popovich and the Spurs are a perfect example - you need to adjust to the way the game changes, and to the personnel that you have.   

Are there differences?  Sure.  The Heat did it through free agency, with Bosh and Lebron getting together to join Dwyane Wade in Miami.  The Celtics did it via trade, giving up the 5th pick to get Ray Allen and a host of players to get Kevin Garnett to join Paul Pierce.  So do we hate the Heat because it was done through free agency?  I get that there is hate for Lebron because of the way he did it, with the "decision" on national TV and a boy band press conference by the Heat in Miami (a level of hate I still don't get).  But is that really it?  Most of the hatred I've heard comes down to the Heat trying to manufacture or buy a championship by stacking the talent on their team, and bringing together superstars.  The Celtics did the same thing, they just did it a different way, and they were applauded for it.

Keep in mind, there are other differences as well, and most people don't acknowledge this through all of the noise.  Lebron James actually took less money to play for the Heat than he would have gotten in Cleveland (the Cavs could have signed him for significantly more money than any other team due to NBA cap rules).  Kevin Garnett actually forced the Celtics to sign him to a 3-year extension on top of the deal that he had, one that is still paying him 20+ million dollars per season.  One thing people don't remember is that the original Celtics-TWolves trade fell through because Garnett told the Celtics he would opt out of his contract after the coming season.  He wasn't moving until he was guaranteed his money, and the Celtics were happy to oblige.  

So on an individual level, Lebron took less money while Garnett made sure he got paid before he would agree to the deal that gave him a chance to win.  Yet Garnett is generally celebrated and Lebron is hated. Does that make a lot of sense to you? 

I have no problem with what either player did, or what either team did.  The teams are trying to get as many good players together as possible to win a championship, whether by draft, free agency, or trade.  The players have the right to get as much money as possible, and they can also use free agency or their contracts to get themselves in the best position to win.  I don't blame either side for doing what they did.

But if you root for the Celtics and you hate the Heat, or you love Garnett and you hate Lebron, I think you need to take a closer look at the facts.  

Take 10 minutes to watch this video from the CBS Morning Show on Memorial Day as we all give thanks to the veterans who have served and sacrificed to allow us to live the way we do.  If Louis Zamperini isn't inspirational to you than I'm not sure you have a pulse.  

The Celtics and 76ers play game 7 tonight, and it's a game that defines what can be so cruel and immediate about sports.  If the Celtics win they have a legitimate shot to get to the NBA Finals and they've had a great year after a really tough start.  If they lose their season is mediocre and seen as a disappointment.  If the Sixers win they've had a huge year, a young team coming from the #8 seed to get to the Eastern Conference finals.  If they lose, they've had a solid year, winning one playoff round against a team who lost the team MVP to injury.  

Dealing with the defining game is really interesting.  As a college coach you may be fortunate to face one or two of these games in a season - one to win the regular season crown, one to win the tournament championship.  The reality for most in one bid leagues is that those 40 minutes can be the difference between a great year and being just another solid team.  

The pressure is obviously enormous  when facing a season-defining game, and your kids can definitely feel it.  So there is no need to avoid talking about it or downplay it.  If you do that, your kids will get more tense because they will still feel the pressure but it will be under the surface.  Talking about it can be very relieving.  It's a huge game and everyone knows it. Don't try and avoid it.  

Understanding your team's mentality is really important to your approach to a huge game.  The Celtics are a veteran team who have been there before and won a championship.  They know how to win these games, they've done it before.  I'd probably try and minimize the importance of the game if I was Doc Rivers.  Just be ourselves guys, we've done this before and we know we are the better team.  The Sixers are an upstart team that is young and is experiencing success for the first time.  They have a chance to do something truly unexpected and special. If I'm Doug Collins, I want to understand how my team has handled playing with great emotion all year.  If you think they are going to feed off the energy, then I'd be talking consistently about how big of an opportunity this is.  If you think they might not be able to handle that energy, I'd try and downplay the importance of one game and just get them thinking about playing the way they've always played.  The pulse of your team is really important here.  

One of the best things to use in this situation is your long term approach.  If you focus on the process long-term and not the results, than your kids are trained to play those 40 minutes just like every other 40 minutes they have played all year.  You play a certain way, regardless of the situation, regardless of the score.  When you do that I think a lot of the pressure goes away. Your team is not thinking about the results, they are thinking about the task at hand.  Rely on the culture you have built over the long haul, and trust it when you are approaching a big game.  

A great look at the philosophy of one of the best coaches I have ever been around, Ray Treacy, the cross country and track coach at Providence College.

The two words most of his athletes use to describe their coach's approach: consistency and simplicity.  

"I coach based on experience."

He's a terrific leader and his results at Providence College and with the runners he continues to train have been remarkable.