Explore an Uncommon
Approach to Leadership!
Don't Ask Them To Lead
Leadership is a skill. It's not a rank. It's not a soft factor or an intangible that some people magically find or develop. Sure, some people are better than others at it, but leadership is a skill that can be developed and worked on, just like passing or shooting a basketball. We work all the time with our players on their physical skills, so if we think leadership is important for our team we should be working on it just the same.
We don't ask our point guard to guard the other team's center. We don't ask our power forward to bring the ball up the floor. We work hard to figure out what our players are good at and then put them in position to be successful - to take advantage of their strengths. We don't ask them to do the things they aren't good at. So why do we do just that when it comes to leadership?
It starts with the fact that we think everybody can be a leader, which probably isn't that smart. So we take the players who are older and better than the others, and we put them in positions of leadership. We ask them to lead, generally without defining it for them or really working on their leadership skills. We use general terms like "We need better leadership!" without every really explaining what it means.
Not everyone is capable of being a great leader, but I do think everyone can improve their leadership skills if you are willing to put together an intentional process of leadership development. But certain personalities just aren't that interested in leadership, don't want the responsibility or aren't intellectually curious enough about their teammates to be effective leaders. As a head coach it's important that we evaluate leadership ability, just like we evaluate the the basketball skills of our players.
I've seen plenty of teams go down the road of trying to force leadership out of certain players, because they are the older guys and the better players. So everyone thinks they should lead. But a lot of those guys are uncomfortable with the responsibility of leadership, and that is okay. If they can make 3s and play good defense, ask them to do that. Don't ask them to do stuff they aren't good at.
Define leadership for your team and players, and make it simple and accessible. Figure out who the right leaders are for your team, and put the responsibility on them. Don't ask the players who aren't comfortable as leaders to try and lead your team. You'll get a lot more out of them by letting them be themselves. And you'll get more out of your team by finding leadership from the right people.
Learning - 5 Hours Per Week
In-depth look at why the best of the best keep learning, with some fascinating financial comparisons as well. We have $900,000 worth of services in our iPhone right now.
Winning Big Games In March
Winning is hard, and winning in the post-season is really hard. Late in the year, there is a different emotion in play in just about every game - desperation. Teams are desperate to get into the tournament, desperate for a seed, desperate to keep their season alive. The emotion is heightened because the stakes are higher, whether you are a bad team looking to survive one more night or an elite team trying to win a championship.
So what do we naturally do as coaches this time of year? We squeeze it tighter. We get more involved. We over-coach. We want more control, to make sure we we cover everything. Twice. I've been there as a head coach, and when you know you are one play away from the season ending, you naturally want to have a tighter grip. But more control actually work against you.
I've learned that loosening up your grip is a better way to get the most out of your team, especially in high pressure situations. Your kids feel the pressure too. They know what is at stake. If you show a little anxiety or a little more intensity late in the year, they will certainly feel it. They are taking their cue from you as always. Give them some freedom and confidence. Don't try and control them.
Winning big games late in the year is a lot more about your players making plays than it is about you having control. I used to squeeze it really tight when I was younger and try and coach every play, and all I did was make everyone else just as tight around me. So I completely flipped my approach. I wanted the players to know the post-season was about them, not me. It was almost like a "my work here is done," approach. You guys know what it takes, now you have to make it happen.
In the post-season I'd always tell my team to take chances, to make mistakes, to make plays. I'd tell them I hoped we made more mistakes than our opponent, because that way I knew we weren't afraid. We were laying it all on the line. I wanted playmakers late in the year, playing in the post-season. Scared goes home this time of year. Who is going to make the plays we need to win?
It's not an easy thing to do, because you feel the pressure, you know what's at stake, and it's natural to want more control. But you having more control is not going to take the pressure off your players. It's going to put more pressure on them. And that pressure will affect your decision-making as well. Trying to control every pass is hard, and it will keep you from seeing the game clearly 2 or 3 steps ahead. You'll have a harder time thinking long-term as the game moves on.
Winning big games late in the year is not about you having control. It's about your players making plays. You've trained them all year to get to this point, now give them the confidence to go out and get it done. Playmakers win this time of year. Trust the way you've trained them, and turn them loose.
Your Composure Gives Them Confidence
I always want my team playing with confidence. To get there, I want them to know that I believe in them. Confidence is a challenging attribute to coach, because the nature of coaching is that you are correcting mistakes and trying to eliminate the wrong behavior. It's easy to lose sight of coaching them to be confident.
I've always felt your composure as a head coach gives your team confidence and reinforces the fact that you believe in them. When your team sees you react - especially with great emotion - it naturally rattles their confidence. When you don't react to everything that happens, whether it is good or bad, you reinforce the idea that everything is okay. That you are confident in your team, and that you believe in them.
I've always wondered if we would coach differently if we didn't play the games in front of a public audience. If there was no one in the gym watching, would the reactions from the head coaches be the same? Coaching is intense and the pressure is usually pretty high, but so much of the reaction you see doesn't necessarily look like a reaction to coach the behavior of the team. It looks like a reaction meant to let everyone in the building know that the head coach is in control, and the head coach isn't going to accept that bad pass or missed assignment. It looks like the coach thinks the mistakes are almost a personal attack. When you react really emotionally to mistakes as a head coach, it's sure to have a negative impact on the mentality of your players.
Even if you react with great emotion when something positive happens for your team, you are inherently sending a message that you didn't expect it. And when you. react with great emotion, you can expect great emotion from your team. They are going to follow your lead. Now there are certainly times where your team may need some emotion and you have to react accordingly. But if you consistently react with emotion your team is going to get a strong message, one way or another.
Think about the confidence of your team when you try and control the emotions of the game. I've always feared a composed team, a team that knows it is prepared and expects to be successful. The best teams are the ones that are used to winning and expect the positive results that come with it.
Your composure as a head coach goes along way towards maintaining a winning mentality with your team. Keep your composure and they will know that you believe in them and continue to play with confidence.
The Guy I Hate Playing Against
- Expects success - because he knows he's put in the work
- Never gets caught up in the emotion of the game
- Is constantly encouraging his teammates
- Isn't afraid to get on is teammates when necessary
- Doesn't have enough emotional energy to engage the refs
- Never lets the crowd get him off his game
- Can handle the ball with both hands
- Takes pride in getting stops
- Makes the right play with the game on the line
- Can guard outside of his natural position
- Is a great screener
- Goes to the offensive glass all of the time
- Is constantly moving, almost never standing still
- Has counters to his go-to stuff
- Finishes with both hands
- Plays with great intensity and great composure
- Understands what gives his team the best chance to win
- Doesn't need all the credit
- Helps his opponent up when they get knocked down
- Back cuts hard when he's overplayed
- Knows how to talk constructively in the heat of a game
- Shares his emotion with his teammates
- Sprints back on defense after he scores
- Sprints back on defense after he turns it over
- Knows the tendencies of all 5 guys on the floor for us
- Never gets tired
- Doesn't pound his chest
- Is constantly talking
- Never takes a play off
- Enjoys the success of his teammates
- Is disciplined
- Knows the time and score
- Wins the toughness plays
- Can take critical instruction in the heat of a game
- Is all about winning
Are They Responding To Your Voice Or Your Standards?
As a head coach I learned I had to be careful about my voice becoming too dominant in practice. When you first become a head coach you are trying to establish standards and a culture, and you want to be strong delivering the message. You want to be clear and loud, so there is no indecision with regard to your message. I've always felt - and still feel - that this is the right approach. Your team has to know that your message, your voice, matters.
It's important to be aware of the impact a dominant voice can have on your team. While you want your kids to learn to respond to your command, it's easy to create an environment where they are just doing what they are told. They hear the command and they try and execute it, because that's what they are being told to do. They become a compliant team. Compliant teams can be good, but teams that take ownership have a better chance at long-term sustained success.
Over time I realized that having a dominant voice can suffocate the rest of the voices in the gym. Not only your assistant coaches, but also your players. They get used to the head coach telling them what just happened, what needs to happen next, and how to fix it. But this can also make it hard for them to take ownership and to show the leadership you want them to display. I learned you have to create some space for them to lead and take ownership.
The best way to do this is to stay quiet. Leave some air in the gym and let them fill the void. See how they respond, let them speak up. It's not easy to do, as we are all used to controlling the action and the tone in the gym. But you have to recognize that your voice can stifle all of the others. If you aren't getting the leadership you want, create an environment where that leadership can flourish.
Ultimately what you want as you establish your culture is for you standards to rule the day. You want your players to be accountable to your standards, not to your voice. So if you feel like you are constantly driving them and trying to pull their best out of them, but they aren't really responding, you might want to take a step back and see how they respond. When things aren't right in practice, it should be your standards that are the measuring stick - not your response, as the head coach, to their behavior.
Eventually if all they do is respond to your voice, you are going to have a very well-trained team that is compliant and will do what they are told. But on the road in a tough environment, your voice isn't nearly as powerful. Half the time they can't hear it. They have to respond to the standards you have set.
So give them room in practice to hold themselves accountable to their standards. Sometimes it's as simple as asking a question. "Is that a good enough effort in transition defense for us? Is that acceptable?" Let them respond, and get used to the standards being the measuring stick.
Most coaches will tell you that the best teams are led by the players, not the coaching staff. Well if you feel that way, you have to create that environment. I visit a lot of practices whenever I get the chance, and I'd say the majority of those teams are responding to the voice of the head coach.
Set the standards clearly, and let them respond to them. You'll get more leadership and production out of your team when you do.
Give The Players A Voice
Good stuff from a recent Athletic article about Eric Musselman at Arkansas, and how he learned from Chuck Daly to give the players a voice:
He adds this is a risky strategy, as that third game against UCLA showed. The team will have to live with the possibility that Hagans gets hot early and forces the defense to adjust. So Musselman asks his players to really consider this plan and decide in the next two days if they’re comfortable going that route.
That he gives them this option is mind-bending. College basketball programs, by and large, are monarchies, not democracies. The head coach usually dictates everything. But Musselman asks his players for input on all kinds of topics. He gauges them in timeouts over whether they want to switch ball screens or hedge them. He lets them choose where to eat on the road, what time to have pregame shootaround, what uniform combination they want to wear each game. The team’s leading scorer, Mason Jones, requested gray uniforms for the Vanderbilt game. But by the time Arkansas reached out, Vandy had already packed its gear, so the Hogs had to stick with the home whites. Musselman opened Thursday’s practice by apologizing for the mixup, then unzipped his sweatshirt to reveal a new design specifically for Saturday: white tops with just a Razorbacks logo and numbers on the front.
“Is that good enough?” Musselman asks, as players holler their approvals. “Mason, is that a little outside the box for you?”
When the Razorbacks played at Indiana last month, they arrived in Bloomington the afternoon before the game and were scheduled for a shootaround at Assembly Hall. On the team bus from the airport, Musselman stunned his staff when he gave the players a choice between going to the gym or resting in the hotel. Three players opted to take a nap. The Razorbacks upset the Hoosiers the following night.
Musselman says he learned from Chuck Daly to give players a voice. But Daly coached pros, not college kids. Still, this helps explain why the Razorbacks have played so hard all season and quickly accepted the new staff. “Part of getting guys to buy in,” assistant coach Clay Moser says, “is making it a partnership. Nobody wants to be told what to do all the time.”
Will Weaver And Sydney Kings
Really enjoyed this look inside the approach of Will Weaver, an American coach in his first year running the show for the Sydney Kings.
https://nbl.com.au/news/how-will-weaver-has-brought-the-sydney-kings-to-the-brink-of-nbl-history
Let Them Coach Each Other
In my fourth year at Rhode Island College (2008-09) we had established the program at a pretty high level. We had been to the Elite 8 in 2007 and went back to the second round of the tournament in 2008, winning the Little East Championship in both years. We had beaten two division I teams in exhibition games (Iona, Holy Cross) the last two years. We had our entire team coming back for the 08-09 season, so we knew we had a chance to be good. We had established a championship culture and our guys were used to winning.
I knew going into the season we had a chance to be really good. I was locked in and ready to drive the team hard. As we started practice though, I noticed something different. I really didn't have to say much.
Obviously with the whole team coming back our guys knew what to expect. We had added a couple of freshmen that year, so obviously they had to pick things up, but with so many veterans we really didn't have to slow down. The new guys could just pay attention and pick things up as we moved along.
But what I noticed was the way the guys were coaching each other. It wasn't just that they knew what to do, it was more that they knew what our standards were. They knew what was good enough, and what wasn't. Our mission was always "Championship level, everything we do." They had won championships before and been deep in the NCAA Tournament. So not only did they know what was expected of them, they knew what the right level looked like. And the best part about it, was they were holding each other accountable for our championship level standard.
I remember specifically how powerful the feeling was when I would blow my whistle and before I could drop it out of my mouth to say something, one of my players would beat me to it. I would stop shell drill when something wasn't right and I'd hear "C'mon, no middle, let's go." Or I would blow the whistle and immediately here "That's not good enough, let's go, do it again." They were coaching each other. They knew what championship level looked like and they were holding one another accountable to that standard.
As a coach, it almost made me feel good when there was a mistake. To know that they were going to correct it, to coach one another, and to be coached by one another, was very powerful. They were taking ownership of our daily approach, and taking responsibility for our standards.
This is where you are trying to get as a team. I didn't set out to get to that point - at that time, in my fourth year as a head coach, I hadn't really thought about that type of scenario. But I learned a lot about it from my players, seeing the way they took on the responsibility. From that point forward, it made me think about how you create that kind of atmosphere for your team.
There is no question it was the right combination of talent, success, leadership and culture. Talent makes a big difference, it always does. When the difficult stuff that you have to do to win comes naturally for your players it makes the buy-in that much easier. We also had some great natural leaders on that team - players that were generally concerned about the success of the team and the mentality of their teammates - and that makes a big difference. It was natural for many of them to speak up
But I also think it's an environment you have to create. You have to give your players the room to take ownership, to speak up, and to lead. It was something that was a part of our culture, certainly off the floor. I always wanted to give my players a voice, to listen to them, to ask them how they felt about what was going on with the program. So I do feel like we created an environment that made them comfortable speaking up.
However asking their opinion in the office off the court is a little different than giving them some space in practice. I always had a pretty dominant voice in practice, because I didn't want there to ever be any doubt about the message. I had to learn to give my players some room to take ownership, to give them the space to speak up. Sometimes I simply would ask them after I blew the whistle "Is that good enough for us?" And let them respond.
We want leadership, we want ownership, we want our players to take responsibility. But do we allow our players to actually take that on, or are we too busy telling them what we want them to do? We too often think coaching is telling our players what to do, when really it's teaching them how to take responsibility for what they are doing. Too often the head coaches voice is the only one ringing in the gym, and the players are being told what to think. That suppresses their ability to lead, their ability to really own what they are doing.
Keep a close eye on the impact of your own voice. If you want leadership and ownership from your players, give them the space to make that happen.
Best teams I've coached - whistle drops out of my mouth, they are already saying something.
Change Their Rhythm
We were down 3 to Creighton in the 2nd half this week with about 15 minutes to play. They were in a pretty good flow on offense, getting the shots they wanted and we had been fortunate they missed some shots they normally make. Creighton is the best 3-point shooting team in the league, and one of the best in the country. Our game plan was to guard them man to man and take away their 3s.
I've always been a man to man guy as a head coach. I believe in having a defined defensive system that you can work on every day and get your guys to believe in. Some of my teams at RIC went an entire season without playing a possession of zone or any other defense. When we were really good, we guarded, and the way we guarded became our calling card.
However I learned that no matter how committed you are to playing a certain kind of defense, you always have to have something different in your arsenal in case you need it. There are nights where even the best defensive teams are out of sync or your opponents offense is just flowing. While you may not want to change defenses as a head coach (and believe me, I rarely did), sometimes you just need to change the rhythm of your opponent. When they've got a great offensive flow going and they are getting the shots they want, a different defense can simply disrupt that flow. It can change their timing, it can change their pace, and it can change where they are getting their shots from. Sometimes it's a simple as doing something different.
You may look at a team with great shooters and think there's no way you want to play them zone, but a lot of times great offensive teams like to execute their stuff because they know exactly how to get the shots they want. By changing defenses, you force them into a different way of attacking on offense and it can change the rhythm of their offense.
We were fortunate that Creighton struggled against our zone the other night. But simply by changing defenses we interrupted the flow of the game and changed the pace just a little bit. They never really got into a flow on offense against our zone, and we stayed in it for most of the final 15 minutes. Creighton ended up scoring just 20 points in the second half and we won the game by 16.
The point being that no matter how committed you are to defending a certain way, you should always have something reliable that you can go to just to change the rhythm of your opponent. No matter how good you are defensively there will be nights when they get into a great flow, and simply by changing what they see you can disrupt that flow and possibly change the complexion of the game.
The Program On Toughness
I'm reading the book "The Program: Lessons from elite military units for creating and sustaining high performance leaders and teams." I'm really intrigued by their definition of toughness.
I love the idea that toughness is binary - you either are tough or you are not. It is an on/off switch, not a dial.
The Program defines tough as the ability to withstand and attack adversity or hardship while continuing to make good decisions that lead to mission accomplishments.
Toughness is binary. It is a 1 or a zero. We are, or we are not, physically and mentally tough. Thankfully, both are learned traits.
Often, coaches and business leaders will contact us about their team, explaining that they have team members who are tough, but when things "get bad," not so much. So the coach or business leader asks if they can put their team on a 0-10 scale. Our answer is always the same: no.
Toughness isn't a dial. It's an on/off switch. It's binary, a one or a zero.
Someone who is a "one" (a tough person):
- Has great habits
- Makes good mental decisions regardless of the adversity
- Is emotionally resilient; "cheerful in the face of adversity"
- Craves a challenge
Someone who is a "zero" (not a tough person):
- Has poor habits
- Makes poor mental decisions when faced with adversity
- Has no emotional resiliency; when things are good, they are happy and share their happiness. When things are bad, they are mad/sad/angry and they share their madness/sadness/anger.
- Avoids adversity
We are or we are not tough. We can do tough things, show toughness and exhibit the qualities of a tough person in a practice, game or business day. It doesn't make us a tough person; it just means that we are doing something tough or being tough at that moment.
Toughness, like any core value, means we are tough all the time and in everything we do.
Habits
Pete Strickland was the head coach at Coastal Carolina for a number of years, and before that an assistant coach at a bunch of different places including NC State, GW, Old Dominion, and Dayton. He's currently the head coach of the Irish National team.
I got to know Pete a little bit when he was an assistant coach and he used to go back and work Morgan Wootten's basketball camps outside of DC when I was a young coach trying to learn and make my way in the business. I picked up a lot from Pete watching him teach and coach at camps.
Pete used to give this talk to the kids at camp about habits. He'd pick a kid out of the crowd, ask him where he was from and who his big rival was back home. He'd put him in a scenario in the big game back home against his rival, with :07 seconds left and his team down by 1, with no time outs left. He'd have the other kids count down the final :07 seconds and he'd ask the player, "OK, in this scenario, down by 1 with no time outs left, against your biggest rival, packed gym, which habits are going to take over for you? Your good habits, or your bad habits?"
He'd then ask the whole group of kids to show their hands. How many people say his good habits are going to take over? How many people say bad habits? There would usually be a decent split between good habits and bad habits.
Pete would then tell the crowd that he couldn't answer the question, because he had never seen the young man practice. His point was the habits that will take over under pressure with the game on the line will be the habits you practice every day. If you practice good habits, those habits are going to take over. If you practice bad habits, those habits are going to take over. The answer is whatever habits you practice.
Practice good habits. I've always remembered that from Coach Strickland as long as I've been a coach. Isn't that what we are really trying to do as coaches? Figure out what the habits are that are consistent with winning, and get them to practice them every day. Hold them accountable for their habits.
It sounds pretty simple and it makes a lot of sense. But in practice, it's not that easy.
Think about how much you focus on habits in practice. It's easy to get caught up in the big picture, in what the whole thing looks like. It's easy to overlook habits if the overall result is something you can applaud and feel good about. And at the end of the day one of the real traps in coaching is that we want to feel good about what is happening with our teams. So we tend to overlook the stuff that doesn't make us feel good, especially if it's not having an immediate effect on the result.
So one of your players jogs back on defense in practice. He misses a shot and doesn't immediately sprint back, giving the offense and advantage. But your big man gets back and blocks a shot at the rim, saving two points. What are you coaching in this scenario? The bad habit was your shooter jogging back on defense, something that is surely going to cost you in games. But are you addressing that lack of hustle, or are you celebrating the blocked shot?
Say you've got an athletic kid who is a pretty good rebounder, but doesn't usually block out. He just goes and gets the ball. When a shot goes up, are you holding him accountable for the fact that he doesn't block out, or are you letting it go because he's going up and getting the rebound? There is a difference between accountability for the right habits and accountability for the result.
Is it okay for practice to start a couple of minutes late every day because two kids are still in the training room, or hanging out in the locker room? If it is, you are overlooking the importance of being on time. It's still possible to have a great practice if you start 5 minutes late, but you are overlooking a really important habit. Does the specific message you give to your players really matter?
I'm reading a book called "The Program" which studies the cultures of elite military units. One of the things they say all the time is "The standard you walk past is the new standard." The point being if you just walk past something and let it go, without addressing it, that is the new standard you've set for your team. If your kids are throwing their dirty laundry on the floor in the locker room and expecting someone else to clean it up, and you see it and don't address it - well, that is the new standard for your team.
Think about the habits you want your team to establish. That is really what we are coaching. There are so many things that we "walk past" in practice because the result turned out okay or we just don't seem to have time. We are "locked in" on certain things, and we overlook the basic habits.
Our job as coaches is to hold them accountable for the right habits every day. That is what translates into the games and sets you up for success. Figure out what habits are important to you and your team, and coach them on those habits every day. Hold them accountable when their habits don't meet your standards. Training them on their habits is essential in a high-performing culture.
Individual Achievers vs. Managers
I really enjoyed this podcast from Ryan Hawk with Jim Clifton, who is the CEO of Gallup. Clifton talks about the research they've done that statistically backs up what is most important to organizations. And his conclusion is that managers of people are extremely important to the success of the organization.
One great point he makes is about differentiating between individual high-achievers and good managers. Clifton says that every organization should differentiate between the people who are just really good and really productive at the job, and the ones who are fit to lead other people. He actually makes the point that he, even though he's the CEO, isn't a very good manager. He spends most of his time talking to clients. He has other people who manage the organization. And he points out that any organization should have a pathway to advancement for high-achieving individuals that doesn't include management or leadership.
So many organizations - including our own teams - end up with the wrong people in leadership positions. And I think Clifton has hit on a great point here - just being a high-achiever as an individual doesn't necessarily make you a great leader. We do this with our teams all of the time. The best players are generally expected to be the leader, even though talent really isn't an indicator of leadership ability.
I learned early on in my head coaching career that I had some great players who really weren't comfortable as leaders, and I was making a mistake by trying to force leadership on them. I learned they just needed to go out and be great players, and I needed to find leadership from my best leaders, not my best players.
I always say this - I can name 90% of the captains out there on any team. They are the best players, the loudest players, and the oldest players on the team. But being old, loud or talented really aren't the characteristics of great leaders.
Clifton isn't dismissing the importance of leadership here, and neither am I. But there should essentially be two paths to the top of your organization. The high achievers should be able to get to the top of your team without necessarily having to be captains or leaders. They should be counted on to be great players. And there needs to be a path to leadership - becoming a captain - that is available to the people on your team who are the best at it. And that doesn't have to involve talent.
Find a definition of leadership that works for your team and fits your personality. But make sure that definition allows your best leaders to step to the front, and sets a tone where they will have a voice regardless of how good they are.
Individual high achievement doesn't necessarily translate to leadership. So our organizations should not be built that way.
The Pacers New Culture
A look at how the Pacers new management team went about building their culture with the "Three T's" - Togetherness, Toughness and Trust.
Love the way they engaged their players:
“Looking back, I think the most important thing that we did as a front office was get our players’ input,” Buchanan said. “We asked Darren Collison, ‘What do you want from a front office?’ At the time, Boston had just traded Isaiah Thomas after he had played in the playoffs right after his sister died. He said, ‘Do you want the honest truth? Players in our league don’t trust front offices, for the most part. You guys can just trade us – regardless of how loyal we are to the team.’”
When asked how the Pacers could earn back their players’ trust, Collison said, “I want to know ahead of time if I might be traded. I don’t want to find out on Twitter or ESPN.”
After hearing similar things from veterans like Thaddeus Young, Al Jefferson and Cory Joseph, the front office reached an agreement with their players: If they entered serious trade discussions, they would inform each player involved in the possible deal – but if the deal fell through, the player needed to stay committed to the organization.
The arrangement worked well. Buchanan said that in 2017-18, two different trades nearly happened and both sides held up their end of the bargain. Indiana’s front office told the two players about the potential trades once the talks became serious and, after the deals fell through, both players didn’t let the news affect their commitment to the team.
When Victor Oladipo joined the Pacers, he was impressed by the front office’s communication with players and willingness to listen.
“I haven’t played on many teams, but based on the teams I have played on, it’s pretty rare for upper-management to take the players’ input and opinions to heart and really try to apply those things throughout the entire program,” Oladipo explained. “For them to do that, it just shows what kind of people they are and it shows what kind of organization we’re trying to build.”
Also love the "Reset" button in the training room on the way out to the court.
Whining
A big part of being a great competitor is handling the emotions that go along with competing. The intensity of competition can make that very difficult, but great competitors have the ability to move on to the next most important thing - the next play - regardless of what just happened.
If you are constantly arguing over foul calls or complaining about something, you aren't showing that you are a great competitor. You are actually showing the opposite. The guys who spend most of practice locked in a conversation/argument with the guy they are guarding about who is fouling who, or who spend extra time on the floor when they get knocked down to let everyone know they think they got fouled - those guys aren't great competitors. They are hurting their team.
We often excuse bad behavior by saying someone is just really competitive, and I hate that. Somebody who is arguing over calls or whining because they're getting fouled isn't showing his competitive side. He's showing an immaturity that is hard to win with.
I can't stand the guy who takes the ball to the hole, ends up on the ground, and takes his time getting up and jogging back because he thought there should have been a whistle. Making it clear to everyone that you think you got fouled, and therefore you aren't going to hustle back into the play is a sign of your own personal weakness. It's not a sign of a competitive edge.
Practice and games are intense and emotional. Obviously at times we are all going to get upset. But fighting for calls or showing your displeasure in another way that affects your ability to move on to the next play isn't showing me how much you want to win. It's showing me I can't win with you.
Stop whining. Stop arguing over whether something was a foul or not. Stop bitching to the assistant coaches in practice. And stop with the drama every time you go to the rim, trying to show the world that you feel that you got hit. First of all, it's annoying as hell to be around. No one likes it. And secondly, it's likely hurting your team and your actual ability to compete in some way. Great competitors, kids that you can win with - they aren't doing that.
Handling the emotion that comes with competition is a big part of being a great competitor. Bitching about the stuff that you can't control doesn't make you a great competitor. Great competitors fight through the tough stuff - right or wrong - and move on to the next play.
Defensive Emphasis
So much of coaching is not what plays you run, but what you emphasize. What is important to you as a coach. Because your players are reading you every day, and they know what is important to you. It's a lot more than what you say. They read your reactions, your emotions, your tone. They can tell what you like and what you don't.
I've always said there are two kinds of coaches - those who clap when the ball goes in the basket in practice, and those who get pissed. I'd say at least 80% of coaches probably clap when the ball goes in. We all like a well executed play that results in a clean bucket. The problem is, in practice, when the ball goes in it is going in against your defense as well.
I think a great defensive mindset can separate teams and programs. It's just not that common to have a team that thinks defense first. Players aren't brought up that way. They don't go to the park in the summer to dive on loose balls. So it takes a lot of preparation and effort to train your team to think defense first.
Try and get used to being upset when the ball goes in in practice. Don't applaud the good offense, hold the defense accountable for the mistakes. they made. Your team will take on your mentality, and if you are thinking defense first they will do the same. Train your staff, your managers, and your players to see the game through a defensive lens. You'll create a mentality that can separate you from most of the teams in your league.
Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders?
There is a pathological mismatch between the attributes that seduce us in a leader and those that are needed to be an effective leader. If we want to improve the performance of our leaders, we should focus on the right traits. Instead of falling for people who are confident, narcissistic and charismatic, we should promote people because of competence, humility and integrity. Incidentally, this would also lead to a higher proportion of female than male leaders — large-scale scientific studies show that women score higher than men on measures of competence, humility and integrity. But the point is that we would significantly improve the quality of our leaders.