Genius and Leadership

Reading "Leaders" by Stanly McChrystal, Jeff Eggers and Jason Mangone, which compares some of the great men and women in history and their leadership style.

"Each of us has varying abilities that can into competencies, but a quantum leap above lies the qualitatively different category of genius. Beyond a useful gift, or natural cleverness, are abilities of stunning skill that separate a genius from the rest of us. In their particular field, whether narrow or broad, geniuses do what most of us cannot.

But does that make them leaders?"

They then go on to compare Albert Einstein and Leonard Bernstein, to see if there genius translates into leadership.

It's a great question to ask yourself as a coach. Are you conflating genius and leadership? More often than not we ask our best players to also be our leaders, even though they might not possess the skills or mentality to do so.

Just because they have some level of genius, and we are drawn to their talent, doesn't make them great leaders. Make sure the people you rely on for your leadership are your best leaders, not just your best players.

When Your Player Gets A Technical

I was watching the replay of the Duke/Kentucky Elite 8 game from 1992 - the Christian Laettner game, arguably the greatest game ever played - this weekend. With just over 8 minutes to go Laettner got fouled going to the basket, and then responded by stepping on Aminu Timberlake's chest. Laettner clearly did it on purpose and got T'd up for it, and rightfully so - you could make a strong case he could have been thrown out of the game.

I sent out a tweet watching the game giving Coach K credit for not over-reacting to the technical, and leaving Laettner in the game to help his team win. There was 8 minutes to go in the biggest game of the year, and Duke obviously needed him to win the game. I wasn't giving Coach K credit for trying to win, I was giving him credit for not making an emotional decision.

I got a lot of positive interactions to the tweet, with almost 100 likes and retweets, but some of the negative responses were pretty intense, which I guess I should have seen coming given it was Coach K, Duke and Laettner. It was really interesting to see the difference in the reactions.

My point was this: When a player gets a technical foul, especially in a close game, it's a pretty emotional moment. The easiest thing to do as a coach - and I've done this - is to get upset and pull that kid out of the game, leaving him to think about what he did on the bench. It shows everyone that you are in charge and you aren't going to stand for bad behavior. But what you are doing there is adding your emotion to an already emotional situation - and that's not usually when the best decisions are made.

So I do give Coach K credit for handling that situation with composure. He didn't add negative emotion to the situation and make it worse. He figured out what was best for his team and stayed on that course. Was he trying to win the game? Hell yeah he was. That's a huge part of his job.

Now if you feel like Coach K made the wrong decision, and should have yanked Laettner from the game, I understand how you can feel that way - even if I don't agree with it. One of the toughest decisions you have to make as a head coach is if necessary discipline rises to the level of suspension for a game. If it does, then you have to make the tough call to sit your player. If it doesn't, there are plenty of other ways to discipline a player and get the right message across. I've said many times I don't believe in half-suspensions or minute restrictions, because I don't think they send a clear message (What you did was wrong! But we are going to play you enough to hopefully still win the game...). Now, is there behavior that clearly merits you are done for the game and you shouldn't check back in? Sure there is. Did this rise to that level? I'm not so sure.

And the hard truth for me is this - At the time, in the heat of a close game, when one of your players makes a terrible emotional decision - that isn't the proper time for you to make the right decision. There is so much that goes into any decision on discipline, and it shouldn't be a knee-jerk reaction that's made in a matter of 30 seconds. That's not how you make the right decision, and I firmly believe that. If you can take your time to get it right, you should do that.

I've had that type of reaction as a head coach, and I've learned from it. A kid gets a technical foul in a heated game, and I'm pissed off, so I bench him the rest of the game. But when I go back and watch the tape, I realize the officials made a mistake. He didn't do anything to deserve the technical foul, he was actually trying to help the situation. And the official clearly overreacted. But I sat him down for the rest of the game to send him a message, and I had to apologize to him and the team later. Now, is there a lesson to be learned in not putting yourself in that situation to get a technical? Certainly. But I was reacting to the T, not to the behavior of my player.

I was at a high school game a few years back watching a friend of mine coach, and his best player got a technical foul early in the second quarter after a skirmish. He and a player on the other team got a technical foul. I saw it pretty clearly, and my guys kid really wasn't involved and was trying to walk away. But the ref stuck them both. So the kid sat for the rest of the 2nd quarter (while the opposing player who got T'd up kept playing), and his team went down by 14 points, never to recover.

So I asked the coach about the T's after the game. He said they had a rule, that if you get a technical foul you sit the rest of the quarter. I found that interesting. First of all, the penalty by definition is going to be random. If you get a T with 8 seconds left in the quarter, you only sit 8 seconds. But this kid got stuck early in the quarter and had to sit over 7 minutes. That didn't make sense to me.

I asked my guy if he had ever gotten a technical foul and he said he had, he'd gotten a few. So I asked him if he always sat for the rest of the quarter when he got one and he laughed and said "no, of course not." Um, okay.

If you have a rule about technical fouls and they are unacceptable and you stick to that rule, because it works for you and it fits your personality, I have no problem with it. We all handle them differently. But not all technical fouls are the same, and the actions that lead up to them certainly aren't the same. I'm certainly not arguing against discipline or accountability. But I do think it's important to think about how consistent you are with it, and the manner in which you make those decisions.

You may have a rule about being late for practice as well, but everything is contextual. I've had players late for practice because they overslept or they were flat out lazy. But I've also had players late for practice because they had a young daughter and their mother couldn't get over in time to take care of her, so they had to wait until she arrived. And that made them late for practice. Are those situations going to merit the same response? Technical fouls come in different context as well. The difference with technical fouls is often they happen in the heat of an intense game, where it is even harder to make the right decision.

For the record, my teams have always had a rule on technical fouls which we discussed at the beginning of each year. The team would agree that they were unacceptable, and I would make sure to talk about how you can't put yourself in a position where you might get one, because sometimes the officials will overreact. We would have a team run of "11 in a minute" - 11 lengths of the floor finished in one minute, for everyone on the team, if we got a technical foul. That would give us a chance to discuss the technical and how it came about - but also to finish the game and give our team the best chance to win. I've gotten one technical foul in 13 years as a head coach, and thats' one too many. I ran the 11 in a minute drill myself the next day while the team watched.

If you want to say that Laettner stepping on Timberlake's chest was enough to bench him for the rest of that game, I get it. The truth is if we had replay back then for flagrant fouls like we do now, he probably would have gotten a flagrant 2 and been ejected from the game. Should Coach K have taken that matter into his own hands and benched Laettner immediately? You can make that argument as well. I'm not so sure. Was Coach K thinking about winning? I'm sure he was, and I don't see how you can kill him for that. It's absolutely his job to think about winning, and with 8 minutes to go until the Final Four that is only magnified. Did he put winning ahead of discipline or what was right for the player and his team? I have no idea, and neither do you. I don't know nearly enough about how he handles discipline inside his program. I have no idea if he handled that with Laettner and how he did it. You can certainly have your opinion on it, and reasonable minds can disagree.

But I do firmly believe this - making a reactive, emotional decision in the heat of a game to bench a player because he got a technical foul is not the right way to go. Measured, unemotional decisions to me lead to the best outcomes. And it is simply hard to be measured and unemotional in that moment.

Regardless of what approach works for you, it's important to be consistent. And it's harder for me to be consistent making an emotional decision during an intense game. Don't overreact to the emotion of a technical foul, take the time to make the right decision.

Get Your Defense To Help Your Offense

Watching some film from the season, going through one of our games, when they go inside the huddle. The opposing coach says, "Right now our inability to score has completely taken all the fight out of us on defense." It's a good point, and one that is pretty commonly talked about amongst coaches. When teams aren't scoring, they don't seem to have the same energy on defense. When they score, they tend to guard better. We talk about that dynamic all the time.

It's so common now that it's almost become accepted. If we can't get the ball in the basket, we aren't going to have a lot of energy defensively. But we should be trying to achieve the exact opposite - finding a place where the energy on defense is what makes our offense better, not the other way around.

It's not that easy to do, so it's something you have to really be intentional about. Once you get your guys thinking that way, the evidence is there. You'll always get some easy baskets off of great defense. So if you get stops, it's going to help your offense. A breakaway dunk or a transition 3 can be a great momentum play, and often times those start with your defense.

It's really a shift in mentality that has to come from you. You have to emphasize the defensive end of the floor, and make sure you reward great effort on that side. The kids have to no it matters. Then you have to show them how it translates into offense - how you can get easier shots and score more points. Connect the dots for them, and continue to emphasize and reward the defensive effort. That will go a long way towards flipping your mentality.

If defensive effort is a constant - and non-negotiable - for you, it shouldn't be affected by anything else. Not the previous possession, a missed shot, or a lack of points on the scoreboard. You have to drive that point home, that no matter what happens, we are going to guard. And if it's not something you generally pay close attention to as the head coach (it should be), turn it over to one of your assistants and let him or her be the bad guy. Create that mentality that the way you guard will never change. Make it something you know you can count on.

It's not easy, but winning isn't easy. Everyone of your kids would rather play offense than guard somebody. So be intentional about it. Don't accept the fact that when your offense doesn't click, your defense is going to get worse. Flip it around, and put it on your defense to pick up your offense.

Greg Wright - Hunting Park

Mike Jensen of the Philadelphia Inquirer with a great story that shows the impact an AAU coach can have on his kids. RIP Greg Wright.

https://www.inquirer.com/sports/greg-wright-hunting-park-warriors-cancer-20200318.html?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar

Battlefield Communication

"Battlefield communication is incredibly important for athletes, coaches and members of our armed forces and members of our first-responder communities." - The Program

We are constantly telling our teams to communicate. We all want our teams to communicate more. But where we miss the mark often is that we don't work with them on how to communicate. How often do you talk to your players about the most effective ways to communicate? The longer I've coached and the more I've seen the challenges teams have with communication, the more certain I am of the importance of teaching how to communicate. How many times have you heard a coach say, "I don't get it, off the court these guys won't shut up?" Well, they know exactly how to communicate with each other off the court. It's second nature. But on the court, in the heat of an intense game or practice, it's not that simple.

More from The Program:

"Words can get drowned out and our attention can be snatched by something else more pressing. We further complicate the environment when we do not communicate effectively. Too often, in a fit of frustration, people will yell a general statement to no one in particular. "We have to work harder!" or "Catch the ball!" The impact on the team is no different from the drunk, shirtless, painted fan in the stands yelling "Play defense!" Nobody listens to that guy either.

"Battlefield communication has three components: name, command and volume.

Name: Use your teammates name. Yelling "Let's go guys" has never worked. Direct your message to the person who needs to hear it. We all like to hear our name called and are far more likely to pay attention to the message delivered when our name is used.

Command: Tell your teammates what you need them to do. During the heat of battle, literal or figurative, we don't have time to be unsure and insecure. Using modifiers like "I think" or "maybe" only dilutes the message. Be clear with your command and communication.

Volume: Use the volume appropriate for the location and situation. For a pair of Marine Corps Scout Snipers in a hide site exiting a reconnaissance and surveillance mission, the appropriate volume may be a whisper. On a volleyball court, foot field, pool deck, or trading floor, the appropriate volume is nearly always loud.

Say the person's name, give the command, and use the right volume. Make it a habit."

I think this approach translates very well with basketball teams. It may not always be perfect or easy, but it is a great way to teach communication to your players. First of all, so much of what we all say gets lost in the moment, because we are naturally focused on the next most important thing. I've stood in front of my team at many practices trying to get a stern message across, only to have it fall on deaf ears. Using someone's name directly when you want to deliver a message is a great habit.

The command aspect actually gets muddled a lot more than you think it would. We always stress talking on defense, but I learned early we also had to tell them what to actually say. I've had players who called out a screen like this: "Hey, I see you Cam, here it comes, get over it, get through it..." There is too much communication, and the command actually gets lost. What I want them to say is "Screen right! Screen right!" and that's it. If you listen closely to your team and what they say on defense, I'll bet at least half of what they are saying is just noise, not a message. Well if that's the case, the actual message is going to get lost.

We used to say to our guys "Talk to the ball" on defense, a phrase of I always liked. But I've learned we have to tell them more. We want you to talk to the ball, but here is what we want you to say.

The volume, and the way the message is delivered, probably takes the most work. I don't think there's an easy scale to use to determine how loud the message should be in certain situations. The important thing is to talk to your team about how the message is delivered, and get them to pay attention to how it is received.

If your freshmen center blows a wide open lay-up off a great feed from your point guard, and your point guard screams at him "C'mon Matt! You need to focus!" he's probably going to make him more uncomfortable after missing the lay-up than he is going to get his point across. If he waits until the next whistle and pulls him aside and says "C'mon Matt, focus on that lay-up," the message will likely be a lot more productive.

A lot of the volume and the delivery of the message is going to be trial and error. The situation, the noise around you, the urgency and the receiver all play a role in how to best make the point. But it should be part of your communication process and the way you teach your team to talk.

Name, Command, Volume. Three essential aspects to effective communication, especially in the "heat of battle," or the intensity of a basketball game. Don't just tell your team to communicate. Teach them what to say, and how to do it.

Perspective From Rob Lanier

https://twitter.com/nate_smith_9/status/1235358991447986179?s=20

A Strange 24 Hours

I saw John Paquette from the Big East Office in the Dunk on Wednesday night, March 4th, as we were getting ready to play Xavier in our 2nd to last Big East game. The Big East Tournament came up and I said something like "Well, that's if we play it." He laughed and said "Don't worry about that." The coronavirus was still relatively unknown. But I'll never forget us laughing about it.

We had a good practice last week on Tuesday morning at the Ruane Center. Our guys were fired up to get down to New York, and having won 6 in a row to finish 12-6 in the league, we had a lot of confidence. We had gone from an afterthought in the Big East to one of the hottest teams in the country in 3 1/2 weeks, so it's safe to say we couldn't wait to get to New York.

At that point, nothing seemed very different. We had decided to take a bus down to New York instead of the train, partly because of concerns over the Coronavirus. But it was still just something that was mostly happening elsewhere. We weren't really thinking about it other than making sure we washed our hands and used hand sanitizer at every opportunity. Honestly it was really just something funny to talk about at that point.

We got to New York around 4:00 in the afternoon on Tuesday and unloaded at the hotel. Everything was normal, and the buzz and speed of the city was invigorating. There really is nothing like the energy of the Big East Tournament. We had a little time to get settled in our rooms, we met to watch a little film, and we went to dinner at Brother Jimmy's BBQ. We enjoyed a great spread and watched some of the other conference. championship games.

Some of the talk was about whether or not fans would be allowed at our games. But a shutout still didn't seem like an option. Our academic coordinator Jaime Lipski glanced up at the CAA final between Hofstra and Northeastern and said "Wait, is that game being played without fans?" Nope, just a light crowd between two teams from New York and Boston playing their final in Washington D.C.

I was getting texts from a few friends who were planning on coming in to the City for the tournament, asking if fans were going to be allowed. To be honest, we hadn't even heard any talk of that. I'm sure the Big East was discussing all possible options at that point, but word hadn't really gotten to us about anything happening. I told all my friends fans were still on, they hadn't told us anything different.

We woke up Wednesday morning, the day before we played, and everything was as expected. Coaches got their workouts in, we had our team breakfast and we left around 10:35 to get to practice at Baruch College at 11 (the battle for practice gyms at the Big East Tournament is real. Someone should write a story on all of the gyms that have been used over the years). John Alesi at Baruch took care of us, as he did Creighton who practice before us and Depaul who practiced after us.

Nothing had changed for us that morning, and now we were just over 24 hours from tip-off of our game. And obviously the 7-10, 8-9 games were going to be played that night. All was a go. Some more colleges had started to go to virtual/online classes only that morning, telling kids not to return after spring break. We started to wonder if and when Providence College would do the same.

As we started to warm up word spread that Villanova and Butler were having trouble finding a practice gym. They were scheduled to practice at John Jay College, but the school totally shut down. So they couldn't use the facility. I'm not sure if they found a place or not to work out on Wednesday.

We had a good final practice and felt ready for Butler. We went back to the hotel, had some lunch and had a little down time before dinner. Some of our guys had study hall, the others just hung around and rested. I took a walk over to my father's old apartment on 33rd and 3rd, a place I hadn't been to in years. The city had plenty of life and it was a nice day to walk around. Maybe the city was a little slower, I don't know - but to me it was hard to tell that anything was different.

We watched a little film before dinner, and then the team went out to eat. I went over to the Garden to scout the St. John's - Georgetown game as they were on our side of the bracket. I just love the energy of the Big East Tournament at the Garden, and having grown up in New York there's still something special about hearing "St. John's - Georgetown"

The Garden was half-full that night, but had good energy as you would expect. Honestly, I didn't think the crowd was any smaller because of the coronavirus, it was kind of what I'd expect for that game on the first night of the tournament. Both teams played hard and the building had a lot of life. Georgetown took control late in the first half and led by 10 until there were about 6 minutes to play. Then St. John's scored 23 points to finish the game on an incredible run. It certainly wasn't 1985, but the Garden had a lot of juice.

My wife and I left after the first game, taking the gamble that we wouldn't see Xavier or Depaul in the finals 3 days later. We cabbed it back to the hotel, and former Friar point guard Donnie McGrath met us in the hotel bar when we got back. By that time Mark Emmert had announced that the NCAA Tournament was going to be played without fans, and they were looking for some smaller venues to play in. Word had spread that the Big East was having discussions about what to do with regards to fans for the tournament. My friends were still texting me, and my response was we were still playing, but likely without any fans. They were going to make a decision that night.

We were sitting at the hotel bar and Donnie walked in to say hello, but he was finishing up a phone call and stepped back outside. That's when everything changed. I looked at my phone and saw the alert that said "NBA suspends season," and said to my wife "Holy sh!t." I showed her my phone and said "No way we play tomorrow." A minute or two later I looked up at the TV and there was an announcement that the Jazz game had been canceled, and that the trainer had gone out on the court before the start of the 2nd half talk to the officials, and they pulled the teams off the court. They then announced that Rudy Gobert had tested positive for the virus.

From that moment forward, the same for most people in America, everything was different. I think we are going to look back and be glad that Rudy Gobert tested positive (and obviously hope he fully recovers). But that was the moment where it really seemed like playing a basketball game was a stupid idea. What happens if a week from now one of our players test positive for the virus? A basketball game being played the week before would seem like a really dum idea at that point. From that point on I was very confident our season was over.

Donnie walked back in and I told him that the NBA had suspended the season and that Rudy Gobert had tested positive. He said "Oh, sh!t, Rudy?" He and Gobert had been teammates for a year playing overseas and remained good friends. The Jazz had been in New York the week before, and they had practiced at Baruch. All of the sudden hearing stuff like that made you a little nervous, hit close to home. We kept talking and checking our phones, and I kept saying "There is no way we are playing tomorrow."

I got a text that we were going to have a team meeting around 10:00 and we needed to get all of our guys downstairs. Coach Cooley, Bob Driscoll and Kevin Kurbec had been on a call with the Big East, talking about what was going on the next day. The NBA news had just hit, a good example of how fluid and rapidly moving the situation was. We were going to play tomorrow as scheduled, but the Garden would be closed to fans. Each team would get 200 tickets for everyone - staff, band, team and close family members. That was it.

I remember Coach saying to the team, "and this looks like how it's going to be for the foreseeable future, even in the NCAA Tournament. If there is an NCAA Tournament." And a few guys took exception. "Man, Coach, don't say that." I think that's when it first hit them that this thing wasn't headed in the right direction.

I remember walking out of the room after the players left saying to no one in particular, "I can't believe we are going to play."

It was an interesting challenge, dealing with the reality of what was going on around you, the changing landscape of the dynamics of our game, and trying to keep the players mentally ready to win. Obviously we didn't want to have conversations with the players about not playing the game, but I do think it was in the back of everyone's mind. But it was so close, the first game literally just 14 hours from tip-off, that you had to take the approach like the game was on.

I went upstairs - took a long, hot shower - and kept the news on the TV. The whole day just felt like a tidal wave, with more and more cancellations and decisions that 24 hours ago were impossible to imagine. There was too much going on. I must have told my wife half-a-dozen times "I still don't think we are going to play."

But the game was on, so I got up early, got my workout in and went to our team breakfast. We were talking about it amongst the coaches, and Coach Blaney said "next week is cooked," referring to the NCAA Tournament. I remember saying "I still don't think we are going to play today." It seemed hard to believe, as it was about 90 minutes until the Creighton-St. John's game was set to tip.

I went upstairs and got dressed for the game, but it still didn't feel like we were going to play. I got in a cab with Ivan Thomas and Matt Garvey to head over to scout the first game, and we were all talking about it in the cab. None of us could believe we were playing. It seemed very clear there was no way the Big East Tournament was making it to Saturday for a championship game, so why were we playing today? At that point the NBA, the G-League, Fiba and the Euroleague had all been suspended. We were really the only national basketball league in the world still playing. It didn't feel right. But I also understand that an awful lot goes into a decision like canceling the Big East Tournament.

We got to the Garden at about 11:40 and dropped our stuff off in the locker room. Andrew Ford started laying out the uniforms in the locker room and we walked into the arena to grab a seat at the press table. The Garden looked different for sure, but there was still some buzz. The bands were playing, and there were small groups of fans behind each bench making noise. It felt a lot like some of the early-season tournaments we play in sunny locations that don't draw a lot of fans. Except you look around and realize you are in Madison Square Garden. It was certainly odd.

As we sat down, I still wasn't convinced we were going to play. I even thought when the teams went into the locker room for their final preparations, they might not come back out. I think others felt the same way. Just after the ball was tipped, I got the first alert on my phone and read it out loud "The American Conference and the Big 10 have canceled their tournaments. The Big 10 pulled Michigan and Rutgers off the floor during warm-ups." John Cahill, the Big East Director of Officials was sitting right next to me and he said "this game won't last very long." Other alerts came rolling in, as other conferences made the same decision. I had my notes out on Creighton and St. John's, but we were sitting there watching a game that likely wouldn't be finished.

I can only imagine what the Big East office was going through with the City of New York. So many people are affected by this, and we are playing our tournament in the biggest city in the country. I'm sure at first no one even imagined shutting down the tournament was even a reality. Within 24 hours it became a certainty. Not an easy time for people in leadership positions with how fast the impact of this situation was spreading. You want to talk about a no-win situation? This was it for any leader in athletics.

About midway through the first half, we got a text from Kevin Kurbec saying that they had pulled the team off the bus. The Big East didn't want us bringing the team over. They hadn't officially canceled the tournament because I think they were in conversation with the leadership of the schools making them aware. But our players were back up in their hotel rooms packing their stuff. It took us a minute, but finally we got up and walked to the locker room. We were going home.

As we walked out of the Garden in the first half of that game, it was obvious a lot of people noticed. There were a lot of looks and whispers like "where are they going?" Kevin McNamara actually sent out a tweet about us leaving, saying it didn't look like the game was going to be played. Less than 24 hours earlier we were finishing up our practice at Baruch, ready to play. Now we were heading home.

On the way home it was announced that the NCAA Tournament was officially canceled. The season was over, just like that. I wasn't on the bus, but I know it was a pretty depressing ride home. When we got back, we met as a team in the locker room. It was almost impossible to comprehend. Coach thanked and congratulated the seniors. The seniors spoke up and thanked their teammates and coaches. Not only was the season over, but the campus was closed. Everyone needed to make plans to get off campus within the next 36 hours. I had this feeling like "are we really doing this?" It was all incredibly sudden, and hard to swallow.

It was a numb feeling, still hard to process. It was the right decision for sure, with everything going on in the world. But it still didn't make sense. It was as strange of a day as you'll probably ever see in college basketball.

Fighting Hate With Humanity

This video is just awesome.

https://twitter.com/CBSEveningNews/status/1238601732986482688?s=20

"The Work Is The Reward"

No one has better perspective than Buzz.

https://twitter.com/aggiembk/status/1236470730986045441?s=20

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.

https://medium.com/accelerated-intelligence/the-5-hour-rule-if-youre-not-spending-5-hours-per-week-learning-you-re-being-irresponsible-791c3f18f5e6

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.

Ken Pom On The Intentional Violation

https://theathletic.com/1597865/2020/02/11/kenpom-the-rule-loophole-that-is-the-best-way-to-foul-up-three/