Depends on the quality of coach of either team, being on the receiving end of better coaching is better, the court time factor is overrated if you're receiving better development from coaching.

Depends on what level either team should grade, if there’s a huge disparity in the grades, higher grade is better as you’re competing against better talent.

Depends on the maturity and readiness of the player’s game, if they’re so far behind the standard of the higher team, lower team is generally better.

Agree with BigD, and would also note that training is for 3-4 hours, and there's typically lots of game simulations so development playing with better kids during the week cannot be underestimated. Just need to have the maturity on Fridays to understand minutes may be limited. Good luck!

BigD's first sentence is #1, all about the coaching.

Yes, it's all about the coaching, and don’t listen to their BS, see how their past performances go.

Apparently, according to Shakespear, Julius Caeser said, and I quote, "I would rather be leader in a village than number two in Rome".

Make of that whatever you will!

On a more serious note, remember to ask what your kid wants, too. They don't all want to be "Caesers".

As a bottom age playing U14 or U16 VC for the 1s and only getting 5mins a game or as a bottom age in VJBL1 in the 2s team and getting 25mins a game. If both teams have strong coaches, I heard most experts believe you will develop better as a bottom age to play in the 2s and getting the extra playing time.

What does strong coaching look like? Is it a technically strong coach who knows their Xs and Os and runs complex structures, it is a coach who develops decision making by giving the players rope or a coach who is technically strong (shooting technique etc) or a combination of all these?

Classic big fish, little pond or small fish big pond scenario.

Might I suggest take into consideration how strong the 1's team will be. Sitting on the bench, playing 5-10 minutes AND losing every week is not good for self esteem.

If they are a strong competitive team and coach is smart, they'll look for opportunities for bench players to play more minutes when they're up 15-20 points. Bench players need a license to make mistakes, that's how they'll learn.

Harder to assess, but look at the team mates too. Playing in VC is awesome, but if team mates make fun of them for sitting on the bench and yell at them if they make a mistake when they are on the court, not a good environment.

Ideally, a lot of development happens at training too.

One final comment, if they do choose to play in the 1's and receive less court time, play domestic and be a top 3 player. I've seen bench kids in VC play domestic with same team mates and they play two games a week and sit on the bench in both, not cool.

All very good points.

Can I ask this group, how do people feel about closed door try-out sessions? It is really helpful for the kids to focus on the try-out, without overbearing parents, but I do worry a lot when I see multiple kids who might only be 10 or 11 in tears leaving closed door sessions, or hear from parents after the fact that their kid is really upset with it all. Maybe it's a club culture thing more than anything.

Views?

As a parent, I don't like closed door trials. I feel parents are trialing the club as much as the club is trialing the players.

As a coach, I understand why clubs do it. We had an open session for our pre-camp (domestic kids) and had parents cheering and saying "shoot it, shoot it" when clearly the kid should pass.

Last year (as a parent) I saw a club call in kids after session to tell them they're cut and have them leave stadium in tears, not cool.

This year, as a coach, we when cut, it's done via an email to the parents post-session with feedback.

I'm sure players may feel disappointed with the way they performed at trials, but I've not seen any athlete leave in tears, that just shouldn't happen.

Thanks Phizzer.

I agree - a big red flag for a club when I see kids leaving basketball courts in tears. Unfortunately, I saw several at a try-out recently. While we sometimes say kids need to toughen up or parents need to put less pressure on kids, and that can of course be true, seeing several in tears is an indication that something has gone wrong in process or culture or both. For that club, I think open doors is required and let the light shine in.

A lot of parents have high expectations for their children, lots of them false expectations, in saying that, parents should be able to watch but not have a say, which quite often happens when people in the mates act get involved. Lots of children are evenly talented so it can be unsettling to miss out, the really good children normally pick themselves.
Let you child try out and encourage them to have fun, enjoy it, they can help you make the decision, explain that in 1st could be little game time and more in 2nds. It's under 14-16 reps, not the world championship.

Think it's also important to consider what the athlete's goals are. If you have the opportunity to play for the best team in your state for instance but will be getting fewer minutes, if your goal is to be a senior basketballer, I think there is credibility to going with the higher team to get multiple hours of training a week going up against great players. This opinion is compounded if the leagues you'll be playing are vastly different and if the coach you're going to have is better in the higher team

That's not the only pathway to becoming a senior basketballer of course but something to consider. However, If the twos coach is better and theres not much difference between level - I think the decision is easy, go to the twos!

I agree if the 2s coach is just as good, then better for development to start in the 2s than be the last boy off the bench in the 1s. Only concern is if you want to make the Vic Metro teams, they will more likely pick the boys in a 1s team than boys in the 2s.

Kids crying because of pressure or treatment at try-outs is just not right. That would also be a red flag for me, and I do know some families who have moved clubs because they just didn't like the way their kids were treated. You can be tougher on the older kids, and expect more of them, but not 10-12 year old kids. This is a reason for kids to leave sport - particularly young girls - and you don’t have it in other sports like football which is quite encouraging and nurturing. Disappointing stuff. I probably can guess the club by the way, but won’t say. No one speaks up because they don’t want that impacting their kid, which kind of institutionalises the issue and the culture that certain clubs have.

you are lucky to be in a position that would allow you to choose a team. some kids would just want to make a rep team.

1/ Private Practice = HOMEWORK
2/ Team Training Sessions = SCHOOL
3/ Game = EXAM

Private practice includes Private Coaching, Academy Coaching and Training and personal individual practice. Afaic, this is the greatest influence on development. Without it, the other two things are somewhat moot.

Team Training sessions are important to an extent. But it depends on the association and the coaches. I have seen plenty of situations where a 2s team trains with a 3s team and the 3s team is basically treated like fodder just to make players in the 2s feel good even when some of them are clearly inferior to some players in the 3s.

Game Time is a function of the coach. If the primary aim is to win games, then the coach is going to implement strategies and tactics that maximise the chance of winning games, making finals etc. Selection of players (starting five) always serves that purpose. So you don't have to be Einstein to figure out who is going to get the most game time during games and over the course of the season.