Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="RF2044, post: 5690253, member: 40"] It would be an understatement to suggest that JB has always been hard on certain players. Even going back decades, there were often players he'd ride harder than others / single out as that season's whipping boy. And the players reacted to that differently. Some chafed under this acerbic criticism and didn't cooperate even if they weren't "bad" kids [too many players to list, but Flynn and Mintz are examples]. Some used it as motivation, worked harder, and didn't let it bring them down [Jason Hart]. Some got into contests of wills with Boeheim, and had to be talked down off the ledge by ACs [Harris, Coleman]. And some nearly let it break them [Roberson] because they internalize the criticism. And some struggled early, but then came through the crucible stronger and thrived later on, after earning Boeheim's trust [Scoop]. This isn't an overt criticism of Boeheim. Exceptional coaches [and players] are often unusual people who are driven and sharp edged -- its part of what makes them excel in a competitive environment. But it also meant that he was like a bull in a china shop in terms of interpersonal dynamics, and the assistant coaches had to do a lot of clean up for this insensitivity. And it wasn't as pronounced earlier in his time as SU as it was later on. And to Boeheim's credit, there are plenty of examples of guys who after their playing careers had ended -- even players who gave Boeheim the most difficulty, like Harris / Coleman / Devo -- view their time under Boeheim differently, and give him lots of credit for helping them grow up. But toward the end of Boeheim's time on the hill, a couple of things had changed. First, he was substantially older, and had more difficulty relating to players who were teens / in their early 20s. Net result: he was more emotionally distant - more of a program figurehead at that point. Second, the composition of the staff changed. Mike Hopkins had been the yin to Boeheim's hard edged yang -- and was a guy who was kind of like a big brother / the players' best friend. The good cop counter to the bad cop of the head coach. And he left. Red had many of those same qualitities and could certainly relate to many of the players culturally, but wasn't quite the same as Hopkins, so the safety valve that had depressurized many situations in the past was no longer there. Third, as he got older, Boeheim's tolerance for "head cases" precipitously diminished, and he didn't tolerate shenanigans as much as he had earlier, when he'd put up with a lot more in pursuit of wins. He started recruiting guys who wouldn't give him trouble, because he lacked the patience to put up with that type of off the court nonsense anymore. And as his tolerance went down, his knee jerk reaction to player speed bumps became sharper. And finally, at the end of his tenure, there was a new wrinkle: the perception of family-related favoritism. This had not been an issue at any prior point of JB's lengthy coaching career -- but by the time Kadary was here for his lone season on the hill, JB was featuring his son as the team's top shot taker [and the following year, would also have a second son transfer in], and the perception was that he treated Girard like another "son." So what does this have to do with Kadary? He wasn't as bad as many of his predecesors had been, in terms of off the court stuff. And he was far from the first player to feel isolated in CNY, or not like it. And he certainly was not alone in not resonating with JB's interpersonal style. But for many other players [not all of them], they were able to get over these challenges either because of AC intervention, or because the team was winning at a high level. Think: Dion Waiters, who was about as big of a headcase as there was, but sublimated a lot of that his second year and was willing to come off of the bench [despite being the eventual #3 pick in the draft] because the team went 30-1 that regular season; winning cures all. Toward the end, the team wasn't winning as much. Grousing became more prevelant. Hopkins was gone, and the "good cops" weren't as "good" at that role as Hop had been. And an inner city kid like Kadary found himself not enjoying the experience. He couldn't relate to a nearly 80 year old man, who her perceived as showing blatant favoritism to a player who wasn't as good of a point guard as he was. And from Kadary's standpoint, he didn't get with the program as much as he should have -- it wasn't all on Boeheim. Maybe things would have been different if Hop had been on the staff. Maybe he would have headed things off at the pass and depressurized the situation, like he had with strong-willed guys like Paul Harris. Or maybe Kadary would have suffered in silence like a similarly taciturn player, who broke under this style of coaching, like Tyler Roberson. Nevertheless, as it turns out Kadary was pretty good. Borderline NBA good [although his inability to shoot consistently ultimately held him back]. It was a faux paux to squeeze him out and tell him he was going to sit behind a player who was being misutilized as a PG, and wasn't as good at is as Kadary was. But Boeheim marched to his own drum, and at that stage of his tenure, at the end of his career, he was less tolerant of push back. It's too bad, because Kadary probably could have turned that losing season with both Boeheim boys into an NCAA squad -- that is only my opinion, but I believe it fully. I can only imagine how dynamic that offense would have been with scorers like Cole, Buddy, Jimmy, and Joe -- with Jesse manning the middle and Kadary pushing the ball, handling full court pressure with ease, and distributing the ball with his outstanding court vision to a floor full of shooters. On that type of squad, he could have easily led the ACC in assists. What might have been. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?