Interesting Adelman Analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter thesanityannex
  • Start date Start date
T

thesanityannex

Guest
Hoopsworld.com

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_15270.shtml

By C. Sawyer
for HOOPSWORLD.com

Dec 8, 2005, 13:15

http://www.hoopsworld.com/printer_15270.shtml
THE TRICKLE DOWN THEORY OF ATTITUDE


There has been a lot of talking, hypothesizing, analyzing, etc. about the Kings sub-par performance lately. Players, coaches, fans, everyone is frustrated and trying to figure out exactly what is wrong. Lack of effort, uncertainty, poor execution, the list goes on.

However today as I was reading various NBA articles one thing struck me, the negative attitude that is so thick it is almost impossible to penetrate.

The Kings players from Abdur-Rahim to Wells are all highly skilled, highly talented players. We know and they know that they are capable of playing better than what they have put on the floor. So it is not a physical, skill issue. As for lack of effort, personally I think that is a cheap excuse. I have seen these guys before and after games, they want to win, they hate to lose, I believe they are trying, but there is something that is muddling their way.

That is where my trickle down theory of attitude comes in. I have worked at a few companies in my career and one thing I have noticed at all of them is that the attitude at the top is what drives the attitude of all. If the leader is driven, energetic and confident then usually so are his/her people; if the leader is neurotic, angry and prone to fits of rage, then again so will the staff be; if the leader is calm, patient and understanding, well you get my drift, right.

Right now I look at Rick Adelman and I see a leader - ultimately the coach is the leader of the team since he has the decision making power of who will play, who will sit, what the style of play will be – who is negative, disillusioned, pessimistic, downbeat, I could go on. And this attitude is trickling down to his players. You are not going to win any athletic endeavor if you don’t think that you can.

What struck me were the following comments:

At the beginning of the season Adelman commented that he did not know what he had in this “churned, burned and reconstituted” Kings roster of his – not the most positive of comments to start the season. How would you like it if you started a new job and your boss said, well I’m not sure if you will be very good at this but I’m basically stuck with you so we’ll see how it goes. Quite the defeatist attitude.

More recently he was asked about the upcoming road trip he replied, "I don't think that's a bonding experience I want, unless you want to go through depression and adversity.” Yea, that’s really inspiring. What a way to motivate.


Now I am not making excuses, these guys are adults, highly compensated, professionals, and they have played poorly and lost. But I think too much attention has been focused on the players and not on the coaching. A big part of this game is mental and if the person who is calling the shots has been negative from the get-go what kind of reaction should you expect. I realize that maybe he is trying to employ reverse psychology, well, newsflash, it isn’t working, time to try something new.

The players have all taken responsibility in one form or another. Bibby has said he’ll take the blame, Miller has said he’ll take the blame. Shareef, Bonzi, Peja, all have acknowledged that they are not playing at the top of their game.

Who hasn’t taken the blame? Adelman.
They haven't done it," Adelman said Wednesday.
“Something’s got to wake them up,” said Adelman.


Maybe it’s time for Adelman to shoulder some of the responsibility, take some of the negative attention off his players, be supportive, be a coach.

The Kings are on a downward spiral right now. Just watching the games, once they get behind they seem to lose steam. Each loss reinforces this negative attitude that they have developed. The first thing they need to do is turn around their attitude and start saying We Are GOOD, We CAN Win, We WILL Win. This needs to start at the top with Adelman, as long as he thinks this team can't win, they won’t.
 
I think this article is classic "casual observer" BS. How would the team react to pretentious statements from Adelman claiming that he is indeed responsible for them missing layups and free-throws, etc. Stupid analysis. This aint Little League.
 
This isn't the first article by C. Sawyer that has been posted here. for the record, C. Sawyer is among a number of freelance writers who contribute articles to HOOPSWORLD for posting. He makes some critical errors, such as using without attribution quotes made to other writers. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

I've never been very impressed with his takes on anything pertaining to the Kings.

Sawyer doesn't get it...
 
quick dog said:
I think this article is classic "casual observer" BS. How would the team react to pretentious statements from Adelman claiming that he is indeed responsible for them missing layups and free-throws, etc. Stupid analysis. This aint Little League.

Hoopsworld however is little league.

I should buy my own domain and run a blog of my random fan meanderings too.
 
Bricklayer said:
Hoopsworld however is little league.

I should buy my own domain and run a blog of my random fan meanderings too.
Yeah! That would be so cool...and you could call it HoopsHype.com. Oh wait...someone already beat you to it. These sites really have no credibity, for the most part. Opinions, opinions...
 
thesanityannex said:
The first thing they need to do is turn around their attitude and start saying We Are GOOD, We CAN Win, We WILL Win. This needs to start at the top with Adelman, as long as he thinks this team can't win, they won’t.
This is the only thing I found that he got right.
 
Circa_1985_Fan said:
Yeah! That would be so cool...and you could call it HoopsHype.com. Oh wait...someone already beat you to it. These sites really have no credibity, for the most part. Opinions, opinions...

I rather like...Brickworld.com :D
 
"As for lack of effort, personally I think that is a cheap excuse. I have seen these guys before and after games, they want to win, they hate to lose, I believe they are trying, but there is something that is muddling their way."

The article is a paradox in itself. The wrtier first insinuates that there isn't a lack of effort from the players and then goes on to say the players are negative and demotivated because of his so called trickle down effect" theory.
 
I doubt if he's even seen the Kings play. If you look at the first part of his little effort, it says:

However today as I was reading various NBA articles one thing struck me, the negative attitude that is so thick it is almost impossible to penetrate.

So basically, he's saying he reads everybody else's stuff and then regurgitates it to submit to Hoopsworld.

;)
 
Teams take on the personality of their coach often, but this isn't exactly what I was thinking about in regard to Adleman going into the article. Those preseason soundbites are just non-commital blurbs. In the 'glory years' when Adleman was asked about the NBA finals in preseason, he'd respond by saying the team needs to get to the playoffs first. This isn't lack of confidence, it's just coach-talk.

If you wanted to talk about trickle down mentality, then look towards the defensive apathy that has plagued the team for years.
 
swisshh said:
Teams take on the personality of their coach often, but this isn't exactly what I was thinking about in regard to Adleman going into the article. Those preseason soundbites are just non-commital blurbs. In the 'glory years' when Adleman was asked about the NBA finals in preseason, he'd respond by saying the team needs to get to the playoffs first. This isn't lack of confidence, it's just coach-talk.

If you wanted to talk about trickle down mentality, then look towards the defensive apathy that has plagued the team for years.

Good point and certainly worth discussing...but obviously outside the realm of knowledge of the writer of said tome.

;)
 
And what this guy is doing (bloviating) is precisely no different than anything that's done here or on any other Internet message board. I'm not seeing the problem.
 
The only "problem" is primarily that we're bored. Aside from that, there's a big difference between quoting an article from what are considered legitimate sources - such as Stephen A. Smith, Chad Ford, etc. - whom we have to admit have the knowledge even if we don't agree with them and something like this which is presented as though it's a "real" sports analysis when in actuality it is, just like you pointed out, no different from anything any one of us might have written.
 
NewMonkey said:
And what this guy is doing (bloviating) is precisely no different than anything that's done here or on any other Internet message board. I'm not seeing the problem.
damn...'bloviating'...thats a $10 word.:D
 
had to look it up

blo·vi·ate- To discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner: “the rural Babbitt who bloviates about ‘progress’ and ‘growth’” (George Rebeck).
 
Back
Top