Leadership Problems and Solutions, Part II: The Toronto Blue Jays

The Toronto Blue Jays organization is certainly a wicked problem to which there is no clear solution. The problem has many symptoms: inconsistent performance, poor performance under pressure, and high rates of injury. Rumours suggest that some workout habits that leave a lot to be desired. On-field results appear to have impacted the balance sheet and the team suffers from low attendance and a budget where revenues hardly approach expenses.

This all stemmed of a leadership failure, endemic throughout the entire chain of command. Perhaps the best case scenario for the team was a .500 season, but the Blue Jays squandered an early lead and finished well below that mark. The expected win-loss statistic predicted an even better record (84-78). The unsatisfactory outcome was due to a flawed process.

Rogers Communication, the distant ownership, provided insufficient financial support. Paul Beeston, the interim president, was hampered by his recent arrival. J.P. Ricciardi, the arrogant General Manager, misallocated resources with little return and announced decisions through the media. He publically shopped the team’s best player, putting Roy Halladay in an impossible situation.
Dissent within the coaching staff seeped into the clubhouse. The team’s highest paid player did not contribute at a level to suit his salary and clean-up position in the batting order. Rumours suggest that his workout habits and mental training routine leave a lot to be desired. At the end of the season, certain individuals chose to pour gasoline on the fire and Ricciardi was dismissed.

What next?

The status quo is not a feasible option. Halladay would likely demand a trade although he has the dignity and professionalism to keep his opinion behind closed doors. The Blue Jays would be required to sign a corner outfielder or third baseman to provide more power, retain key everyday players such as Marco Scutaro and Rod Barajas, and strengthen the bullpen. The team would hope for the best from their many injured pitchers. Whether it’s a coach or a teammate, a trainer or a psychologist, someone would have to get through to Vernon Wells.
Starting from scratch would consume too many resources, in terms of time and money. Should the team trade Halladay for draft picks, buy out Vernon Wells, and let all of their free agents leave, it would take at least five years to become competitive. Blowing it all up would cost about a million dollars in salary for buy outs. Toronto fans have already become restless and such an action would stretch their patience beyond its limit.

There are plenty of alternatives in between those two extremes. The problem would continue to simmer and might boil over irrespective of any action plan but change is required. Changes made to the organization are as important as how new G.M. Alex Anthopoulos revamps the roster.
The owners and team president must provide clear direction. Beeston must state “This is who we are. This is what we hope to accomplish. Here is what we are willing to spend.” He needs to set standards for how team members should act and how they must support each other.

Anthopolous should model the club’s new standards. The front office must spend judiciously in the short-term and make long-term commitments. If it is possible to extend Halladay, it should be done. The pitcher would likely want to see other personnel moves, which is reasonable because the team has a marginal talent level that cannot compete in the American League East Division for an entire season. The team’s scouting staff has not been accurately assessing players and their weakness must be addressed. The Blue Jays experience too many injuries; there is a problem with their training techniques.
Perhaps most importantly, the coaching staff needs to work together. If there is a rift, it should be repaired because any dissention will spread to the team. Brad Arnsberg, the pitching coach, seems to be an expert in his field and should be retained. It is unacceptable for coaches to poison the locker room where they coach.
I think that Cito Gaston and all the coaches from the two World Series should re-evaluate their coaching styles. As the Coaches Association of Canada said, coach is a balance between looking inwards and looking forwards.
Perhaps coaches could play the percentages more, search for areas where the team can improve their technical skills, or hire a younger assistant coach to better relate with players. It has been reported that Cito Gaston has difficulty communicating with younger players. While it is true to today’s Blue Jays are not veteran professionals such as Dave Stewart and Paul Molitor, there have been positive results from Halladay’s elite example. It is not an impossible dream.
Gaston should touch base with players on a daily basis to ensure they remain motivated. Although rookies such as Travis Snider will make errors, they will learn when they play alongside veterans and become regular Major Leaguers. Aaron Hill and Adam Lind experienced breakthrough seasons but Gaston should work with them to determine their new goals and how they can raise their games to the next level. Somehow, he must turn Wells into an asset; no team would acquire the twenty-three million dollar player on waivers now.

Better players will make a difference but better leadership is a necessity.

Leadership Problems and Solutions, Part I: Integrity and Leadership

Integrity is integral to a play: every player, coach, and staff member must say was that mean, do what they said they would, and acknowledge what they have done. Trust is a cornerstone of all team standards, the foundation of great success.

It is not a matter of morality. (Nevertheless, all teams should not only follow what defines ethical behavior in their respective societies but go above and beyond in order to set the example.) Integrity is not synonymous with judging between right and wrong (Christensen, Fall 2009, p. 16). Camus a dit que «l’honnêté n’a pas besoin de règles» (Camus, 2004, p. 96). Integrity doesn’t need rules, only consistency.

Participation on a team is a promise to multiple individuals:

Players Promise…

• to teammates: “I will be there for you when you need me. I will follow the standards that we agreed to. I will always be honest with you.”
• to coaches: “I will always be open with you. I will do what I say I will.”
• to themselves: “I will keep my words. I will self-evaluate myself sincerely after each performance. I will be at peace with myself.”

Coaches Promise…

• to players: “I will be clear and direct with you. I will set my expectations at the beginning of the year and be true to them. All decisions will be transparent.”
• to all team members: “I will treat everyone fairly and consistently. I will hold everyone accountable to what they say.”
• to recruits: “I will not guarantee anything beyond a fair opportunity and make no enticements.”
• to the community: “When a member of the team that I am coaching says something, you can rely on it.”
• to themselves: “I will keep to the timelines to which I agreed. I will not ask anyone to do anything that I would not feel comfortable doing myself. I will self-evaluate myself continually and sincerely.”

John Wooden placed integrity near the top of his Pyramid of Success. Coach Wooden would say: “Make your ‘yes’ mean yes and your ‘no’ mean no.” Even the bench players on his team, who may have been frustrated by their lack of court time respected his principles. Andy Hill was one such player and he feels that this clarity allowed the U.C.L.A. teams to function better because everyone understood their role and importance to the team (Hill & Wooden, 2001, pp. 88-90).

Integrity is not an outdated idea. Mike Krzyzewski feels that it leads to positive results on the court and positive feelings away from it. To him, it is bad to let others down but it is even worse to let oneself down. Coach Krzyzewski believes that anyone can recover from a bad game or a mistake but that it takes much longer to recover from a lapse of integrity (Krzyzewski, 2006, pp. 97-8).

The 2008 Redeem Team won an Olympic Gold Medal, in good part because they made a commitment to their country and each other. Players and coaches created a set of standards and every team member held each other accountable (Krzyzewski, 2009, pp. 67-84).

“The Celtic Way” defined the National Basketball Association in the 1960s as Boston won eleven out of thirteen championships and modeled the way on and off the court. Despite his influence, “The Celtic Way” did not mean that Red Auerbach managed the team like a tyrant or that he was not open to suggestions from the players. Auerbach was committed to winning and he believed that the best way to achieve this goal was to treat everyone consistently, irrespective of their race or previous role on the team.

The coach would say: “I never believed in handling players. You handle animals. I treated my players like people. I respected their intelligence. I was straight with them and they were straight with me. I didn’t lie to them and they didn’t lie to me. There was no double standard” (Whalen, 2005, p. 20).

Bill Russell, who followed him as coach of the team took integrity to an extreme. Russell would say that “a man without integrity, belief or self-respect is not a man. And a man who won’t express his convictions has no convictions” (Whalen, 2005, p. 52).

If a team member senses that any relationship is dishonest, it may lead to lower satisfaction or even reduced performance from peak performers. If a person is dishonest with themselves or others, they can suffer stress along with impaired performance. There is a risk that the dishonest behavior - or the subsequent sentiments of guilt or depression - will contaminate other team members, especially those in the social network of the player or coach who has been dishonest (Messick & Tenbrunsel, 1996, p. 55).

Designing simple team standards of integrity at the beginning of the season and enforcing accountability throughout the season is one of the best methods for a coach to avoid this guilt among team members.

The final step is convincing all team members of the importance of integrity. The coach could simply recruit like-minded personnel but that may dilute the talent level and impede creativity. So at some point, the coach must solicit buy-in from all stake holders.

As a rationalist and believer in Occam’s Razor, I prefer a simple intellectual approach.  Integrity is important to team success but it is even more important to one’s character. Even a single lapse can cause lasting damage. Adolescents have high social needs so some players may be susceptible to peer pressure. Others may be open to an appeal to emotion or have high needs for a trusting and safe environment. This is when the coach must lead.

Maintaining integrity consistently is one of the most difficult tasks that a human can undertake. But it is essential for success in sport, or any other team endeavour.

Works Cited:

Camus, A. (2004). L'homme absurde. In A. Camus, Le mythe de Sisyphe (pp. 94-126). Paris: Éditions Gallimard.
Christensen, K. (Fall 2009). Integrity: Without It, Nothing Works. Rotman , 16-20.
Hill, A., & Wooden, J. (2001). Be Quick - But Don't Hurry. New York City: Simon and Schuster.
Krzyzewski, M. (2006). Beyond Basketball. New York City: Hachette Group U.S.A.
Krzyzewski, M. (2009). The Gold Standard. New York City: Hachette Book Group.
Messick, D. M., & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (1996). Codes of Conduct. New York City: Russell Sage Foundation.
Whalen, T. J. (2005). Dynasty's End: Bill Russell and the 1968-69 World Champion Boston Celtics. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Skills We Should Teach More, Part I: What Should the Point Guard Do After Passing the Ball?

What should the point guard do when they have made a wing entry pass and instigated the half-court offence?

Sit in quiet contemplation: if one’s role is to handle the ball, what are they without it? Are they still a player or merely an observer? Does giving up the rock entail giving up one’s self? Is their performance a result of their effort or the position in which they have been placed? Atlas was still a man (actually a Titan) before the world was placed on his shoulders and retains his identity despite his onerous burden.

Cut through the key and...

• ...post-up: useful against a smaller opponent and when using one or two “go to moves.”
• ...fill the near corner: crowds the wing if they intent to penetrate but provides an immediate outlet and possible high percentage shot if the player currently holding the ball cannot create their own shot.
• ...fill the weak-side corner: a thoughtful choice if they wing will be penetrating and drawing a help-side defender.
• ...set a screen: the low exchange or the flex cut may provide a post with a half-second of freedom from their defender and room to operate.
• ...curl around to the weak-side wing: this initiates a perimeter rotation away from the ball and may lead to a scoring opportunity (shot, pass, dribble) if the ballhandler can get into the paint or makes a skip pass.  The point guard can use the weak-side post and run a circle cut.
• ...give and go: an aggressive manoeuvre if the defence is not playing closely and a an option that can be used in any offence. A U.C.L.A. screen could involve the high post player in the action.

Screen away and set a...

• ...shuffle screen: the opposite wing can enter the high post and curl towards the hoop for a quick pass.  A simple away screen enables a different player to come to the top of the key and facilitates the ball reversal.
• ...downscreen the help-side defender: if there is a penetration, this will lead to a wide open shot when the wing kicks the ball to the shooter. The action also permits a post who can shoot or another forward with scoring potential to come to the top of the key and execute their best skill.
• ...backscreen: the point guard would need to fake a cut into the paint for a step or two before coming back to the perimetre to back-screen the weak-side wing.  The defence might be caught off-guard and the athletic wing could receive a lob pass.

Participate in a swift ball reversal: if the point stays at the top and receives a reversal pass from the wing, they must not hesitate to make a decision. The first look should be inside, to see if the strong-side post has sealed their defender with a drop-step. The next look would be to the weak side to determine if any shooters are immediately open. If the point was comfortable with their offence, they could attempt a fake (jab-step, shot-fake, head-fake) and attack but I think that the prompt reversal opens up so many more options.

Fake a cut and return to the top of the key: suitable if the point guard is a skilled player who is tightly defended. They may have lost their dribble or need a quick break from their manic defender in order to reposition and better attack the defence.

Use a flare screen: this will open up the court for the point should they receive a skip pass. The screen will also be in a good position should they choose to roll or pop after setting the screen.

Swiftly cut behind the ballhandler and receive a hand-off: if the point guard can create their shot succinctly, this hand-off screen may provide all the space that they need. When the wing rolls to the basket, they can seal the defender and create a good passing lane to the block.

Set a ballscreen: I don’t care for this play because it does not create a mismatch. When a big sets the ballscreen, the other players normally have cleared out and formed a weak-side triangle. If the two defenders cannot handle the screen, a help-side defender must rotate, opening up an opportunity for the perimetre players. When a guard sets the screen, there is no mismatch if the opponent switches the screen and the screener is most likely to N.B.A. roll. A big can roll to the hoop or slip the screen, two high percentage options.

Get back on defence and stop any run-outs: at least the point guard won’t be in the way and should give the team a head start on defence.

Walk towards the ball or stand in place without being ready: two horrendous choices, displayed in the worst pick-up games, which badly clog the half-court offence. Any of the other above options would help the team more.

There are dozens of options for the point guard after they have passed. If a point guard does not have the nerve or intensity to force the action with a rapid and aggressive play, they should not be on the court.  Even though they do not have the ball, it is still an opportunity for the point guard to take leadership.

What I Learned this Summer, Part I

Earlier, I described a desire to become a more empathic leader. I hoped to become better at building relationships with other coaches, players, and people in general. I endeavoured to become more sensitive as to what others were feeling and discover how I can help student-athletes on and off the court and inside and outside the classroom. To do so, I read a couple of books which described examples of excellent relationships that resulted in personal development and basketball championships: Red and Me and The Gold Standard.

Bill Russell’s tribute to his mentor Red Auerbach was a quick read that contained several amusing anecdotes. The two worked well together was that Auerbach was tolerant of Russell’s idiosyncrasies because he performed on the court. Auerbach respected all of his players equally but treated them differently, according to their needs and wants. The coach may have a stern image, but he was always open to feedback from others and willing to take suggestions from players.

Russell did not fit the mold of a traditional Association centre but Auerbach did not try to change him; he adapted the Celtics’ systems to suit Russell’s strengths. Likewise, when Bob Cousy arrived in Boston, Auerbach did not curtail his extravagant ballhandling and fancy passes; so long as the ball got to the right person at the right time, Auerbach didn’t care how it got there. Throughout his career as a coach and a general manager, Auerbach never became set in his ways: he perceived how things were changing around him and adjusted his philosophy accordingly.

Mike Krzyzewski talks about taking the time to understand the situation and the people involved (whether it’s the superstars who comprised the Redeem Team, international basketball, or possible opponents). One of the reasons that he titled his book “The Gold Standard” is because he chose not to have “rules” for the basketball team but rather “standards” that the team would live up to, like playing hard every shift, being on time, and representing the United States with pride. He had spoke to some of the team leaders (LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, and Jason Kidd) to get their suggestions and turned this support into buy-in for the entire team.

A lot of Krzyzewski’s coaching was done on a one-on-one basis. He didn’t hesitate to ask players what they wanted but at certain points during the two year quest for Olympic Gold, he put his foot down and told the team that they were not living up to their standards. Also, Krzyzewski relied on the entire team staff, ranging from assistant coaches to trainers to help sense the mood of the team.

A coaching strategy that I employed with Ontario Basketball’s Elite Development Program over the summer was to try and debrief players as soon as they came off the court. This became an opportunity to provide more personal feedback and also learn more about what each player was thinking and feeling at the time.

The Fog of War

Robert S. McNamara was one of the brightest minds of the twentieth century yet he was still unable to prevent one of the fieriest conflagrations in modern times from exploding. Reflecting upon his time as Secretary of Defence for John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, he grants a lengthy interview with director Errol Morris, who combines the 2003 discourse with archival footage, original tape recordings, and thoughtful music composed by Philip Glass.

McNamara does not limit himself solely his role in the escalation of the conflict in Vietnam but explains his background, education, military service during World War II, and work to revitalize the Ford Motor Company. He reveals that he enrolled in several philosophy courses during his years at Berkley and one can see how his insight is more nuanced than his black and white, statistics-based reputation would suggest.

Forty years removed from the Pentagon, McNamara believes that he has finally gained the perspective and the experience to accurately evaluate his service in the cabinet. Obviously, he devotes a significant segment of the film to his innovative use of statistics in the military (minimizing the “casualty rate per unit of destruction”) and the automotive industry (introducing seatbelts and other inventions to better “package” the driver when they are on the road) but The Fog of War is much more than a risk-management thesis. McNamara talks about different ideas, such as empathy with the enemy in order to understand their motivation and the humility required to reconsider one’s ideas and change course when justified by the evidence.

The overall effect of the film is subtle. War - including tactics such as the fire-bombing of Japan and the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam - may have been chaotic but the film possesses a calm, reflective mood. It is still possible to revisit the decisions of the past and analyze how they could be applied to the present day. McNamara acknowledges that his choices were not always correct but states that it is difficult to make perfect decisions based on imperfect information. Leadership is dynamic and it is better to constantly assess the situation and be willing to change than stubbornly follow the same goals and strategies.

What I Hope to Learn this Summer, Part I

I hope to improve my ability to deal with people and egos, to better motivate student-athletes and demonstrate more empathic leadership. I recently read Competitive Fire by Michael Clarkson and learnt many facts that I hope to apply in the coming year. We often discuss how it seems that teenagers have a “fight or flight” mentality but there is a scientific basis to the argument. Under pressure, the brain releases hormones, such as adrenaline or noradrenaline, that can cause aggressiveness, increase feelings of fear, and inspire the body to perform faster, higher, or stronger.

All people, including athletes, need to manage these feelings. Teenagers at school or on the court may be sensing this stress for the first time. It is up to coaches to transform aggressiveness into confidence and fear and tension into increased focus. Some players need to be reminded of a comfort zone, such as the gym where they had fun as a child. Others need a combination of assurance and encouragement so that they channel their urge to defend their ego in a positive direction. It may be necessary to put the sport or evaluation into perspective so fear of failure is not catastrophic. Mental sets at the beginning of class or practice can help a group of student-athletes develop their ability to focus or one-on-one discussions afterwards can give an individual the boost they need to get through the day. Or it may be necessary to simulate game conditions in practice and help players visualize a successful performance.

The ideal of Tachypsychia is very intriguing. During a competitive situation, the brain releases hormones which allow the person to perceive more information. This creates the impression that time has slowed down, a player can see gaps in the defence, or that the ball has entered the net a moment before it actually does. Inducing that feeling - and handling it in a calm manner - is a challenge for a coach.

Visualizing that a big game is just another pick-up game back home is similar to thinking that the audience for a big PowerPoint presentation is comprised of friends and family. Focusing intently on a foul shot and ignoring distractions is similar to excelling on a final exam. That is why I want to help others handle stress better.

There are so many different strategies to maximize the affects of arousal that a coach may need to treat every player differently or a teacher may need to attempt multiple techniques with different groups of students. Sensing what is appropriate for each occasional is an aptitude that I wish to improve over the next two months. In addition to my own personal reflection, I hope to read Red and Me and The Gold Standard. The former is an account of the unique relationship between a superstar and an elite coach (Bill Russell and Red Auerbach) and the latter is the story of a team comprised of multiple egos under extreme pressure (the 2008 United States “Redeem Team.”

The Best and Brightest

“Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it,” according to George Santayana. According to David Halberstam’s book, The Best and the Brightest - which exposes how the Kennedy and Johnson cabinets of the 1960s handled Vietnam - it may not be so simple. John F. Kennedy’s administration had lofty goals: some of the most educated men in the country sought to redefine the role of the United States on the world stage. Some sought to curtail the arms race, others sought to establish a new, modern “Great Society” back home. Despite their best intentions and their amazingly bright minds, they failed miserably. Although the scholars had many good ideas, they lacked the aptitudes to implement them properly.

“The charts look good,” said Walt Rostow, National Security Advisor to Lyndon B. Johnson, in 1967. Yet despite that claim, the situation in Vietnam was worsening. Those making decisions didn’t have the proper statistics and consequently made incorrect choices. Many Far East experts had been purged from the State department and few individuals with experience in Southeast Asia remained to analyze the events.

Some information was false due to incompetence, other information ignored because decisions makers didn’t want to acknowledge what was happening. The United States viewed the war quantitively (believing their shear numbers advantage would win), rather than qualitively (and acknowledge that the Viet Cong was employing a different type of warfare). Some information was even falsified in order to avoid excessive media coverage. Ironically, when Johnson’s team lied about the true cost of the war, it wasn’t that the country couldn’t afford the higher figure but the fact that he had lie that helped bring him down.

“He’s my intellectual,” said Johnson about Rostow. Johnson was somewhat paranoid about Kennedy’s appointees and how they treated him. Advisors were hired based on the opinions, not their ability to understand a situation. Robert McNamara, the Secretary of Defense, was fired because he opposed an escalation of the bombing in North Vietnam. Aides were reluctant to bring their superiors information that might seem negative or pessimistic.

Throughout the administration, there was widespread refusal to admit wrong and accept weaknesses. Once the conflict escalated, the United States felt reluctant to withdraw because they didn’t want the world to think they were conceding defeat to a Communist country. There was also a reluctance to change and alter a course of action once it had been understand.

To me, a surprising fact was that many of the cabinet came from families that had advised the president a generation before (and some families continued to advise a generation later). Although they claimed not to be political, personal grudges and mistrust permeated the administration.

“The only difference between the Kennedy assassination and mine is that I am alive and it has been more tortuous,” complained Johnson during the 1968 primary season. Halberstam has written a detailed history of the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. The book covers how people achieved their positions at the time and what happened after it all fell apart. It was not one decision that led to the disaster in Vietnam but many small choices, some made repeatedly.

“All men dream; but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds Awake to find that it was vanity; But the dreamers of day are dangerous men. That they may act their dreams with open eyes to make it possible,” recited T.E. Lawrence after World War I. The 660 page chronicle is incredibly fascinating and sometimes depressing. Any leader can learn from this text and improve themselves and their team. Any person could read this, or Lawrence’s Seven Pillars of Wisdom, and wonder how the same mistakes are made over and over again, even today.

K.I.S.S.

Basketball is often overanalyzed, needlessly complicated searching for an elixir of life that will transform hardwood into championships. A slew of factors affect performance and their identification is paramount.

Changing tactics hastily, without justification, courts disaster. The play might flounder - despite its suitability for that particular moment - because players are not executing correctly. Use timeouts to seek room for improvement before obfuscating the issue with new sets. Don’t jump to conclusions and adopt a zone merely to feel better about doing something. Ensure the shift is required because there is no worse sensation than losing due to gratuitous coaching.

Basic cuts (like the Backdoor, Shuffle, and Hawk) are the most common because they are the most effective. Don’t forsake a fundamental option because it didn’t succeed once or twice. The cut may have been open but the ballhandler missed it, wasn’t skilled enough to get the ball there, or felt there was a higher percentage target elsewhere.

Good players read defences but imagining opponents or making decisions based on limited information doesn’t make one any smarter. Good players should rely on their skills first and foremost. If the game is still in doubt, basketball I.Q. may come into play but don’t make the sport harder than it needs to me.

Good coaches should apply their judgment most of all. Keep their toolbox fully stocked but only open it sparingly. Likewise, there’s no need to say anything just to fill the air. Positive body language is infinitely more valuable than idle instructions. Bad decisions bring a leader back to the back; discretion remains the better part of valour.

No End in Sight & Shake Hands with the Devil

No End in Sight, a documentary by Charles Ferguson analyzing the United States involvement in Iraq, was released to very little fanfare this past week. The only theatre in town screening the film was the Bloor Cinema on a Friday night.

Ferguson sought to encompass the perspectives of the American decision-makers, tying them to the events that covered the first critical year of the Iraqi occupation in 2003. In many ways, U.S. choices made regarding the Iraq War paralleled British decisions in the Crimean War. In explaining how the entire war has been comprised of one fiasco following another, No End in Sight illustrates several salient lessons regarding leadership.

Lack of Knowledge: those who were making decisions neither understood the political situation in Iraq nor possessed combat or occupation experience. Few members of the Coalition Provisional Authority spoke Arabic, straining communications with Iraqi citizens. The De-Ba’athification policy deprived Iraq of most of those with education who had been working in the country’s administration.

Failure to Adjust: when one plan went array, there was no impetus to make alternate arrangements or modify expectations. Frequently, those who reported that something didn’t work out as planned were fired. Prejudices guided decisions, such as expensive contracts awarded to U.S. based companies when local groups were completing the same projects using less resources.

Communication: decisions were made in Washington and from behind the walls of the Green Zone, reflecting a disconnection between allied troops and their commanders. Many in the U.S. Armed Forces resented the decision-makers due to their lack of experience and the belief that they were not entirely truthful.

Poor Planning: the U.S. government did not devote enough time to planning the post-war occupation. Key information was ignored and not considered when creating the blueprints of the post-Saddam Iraq. The Armed Forces sent roughly half the number of troops required; consequently looting abounded, key structures - ranging from the National Museum to government buildings - were demolished, and ceaseless violence turned most Iraqi citizens against their occupiers.

Shake Hands with the Devil, the film adaptation of General Roméo Dallaire’s book describes how international leadership breakdowns led to the genocide in Rwanda in the 1990s. In contrast to No End, this film is based on a single point of view. Whilst the film demonstrates how numerous soldiers were affected by the atrocities, the main theme is one man’s struggles to balance his job with his values, trying to do whatever he can to save lives despite operational constraints imposed by his superiors.

The single perspective of Roméo Dallaire is the film’s strong point and weak link. Roy Dupuis appears in nearly every scene and the audience connects sympathizes with him. However, Dupuis’ performance is at times wooden. Questions arise as to whether the film is entirely accurate, especially with regards to accusations of French complicity in the affair.

The film is very disjointed, jumping from one incident to another. On one hand, it suits the chaotic nature of the hundred days of the genocide. On the other, it prevents deeper investigation of specific incidents.

Scenes in a therapist’s office symbolize the regret Dallaire feels because he was forced to ignore evidence proving that militants were acquiring weapons. Furthermore, the Rwandan Prime Minister was assassinated under the “protection” of United Nations peacekeepers unable to fire on her attackers.

Leading by Example: The protagonist models the way for the troops under his command. A lynchpin of Dallaire’s leadership is his devotion to those who serve with him and those whom he feels responsible to protect. He is also creative, devising outside the box, such as “exchanges” of non-combatants, to solve crucial problems.

Resources: It seems that the U.N. mission is crippled by a lack of resources, from troops to ammunition. The international community spends so much time arguing over terminology that Dallaire cannot even conduct basic operations in attempt to prevent the genocide. Like Iraq, the ultimate decision-makers handcuff the troops on the ground with their inaction.

Those who Forget History…: Like the Middle East, Rwanda was a country were the ethnic divisions - between Hutus and Tutsis - were created and heightened by European powers, in this case Belgian colonials.

Both situations in Iraq and Rwanda reach a degree of absurdity, characterized by a scene in Shake Hands were Dallaire is kicking a can in an open area, amid threats of sniper fire. An armed militia member appears, asking the U.N. forces present if they members of “Dallaire’s Gang”, announcing that he will kill the general if he sees him. Dallaire introduces himself and the two shake hands. The militia member walks off, unsure of what to do next.

Some of the events across the globe, from Yugoslavia to Darfur to Somalia to Iraq to Rwanda are so violent that the indifference of international observers is best described by absurdist metaphors. General Dallaire and other soldiers are so deeply influenced by what they witnessed that they can’t leave it behind, inching forward, one day at a time.

The Reason Why

The Charge of the Light Brigade
Lord Alfred Tennyson

Cecil Woodham-Smith wrote The Reason Why to document the circumstances that led to one of the most disastrous military ventures in history: the Charge of the Light Brigade during the Crimean War. I read it on the recommendation of David Halberstam, who said it made history come alive for him, and found it to be an excellent metaphor for leadership - in any field.

1. Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
“Forward, the Light Brigade!
“Charge for the guns!” he said:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.

First and foremost, the British system of purchasing commissions led to the ill-fated Charge. Undeserved promotions were given to those who could afford to pay the most, instead of those who were the best qualified. The British generals, Lord Raglan, Lord Lucan, and Lord Cardigan, were wholly incompetent and had a deeply dysfunctional working relationship, leading to a stream of horrendous decisions.

During their careers, especially Cardigan’s tenure in the army, countless skilled soldiers left their regiments or faced court marshal. The three also looked upon officers who had served overseas with contempt, scorning their expertise and the information that they provided.

Pragmatic, accurate evaluation of talent would have put the right people in the right places. An open mind would have allowed the generals to use all of their resources to their fullest potential.

2. “Forward, the Light Brigade!”
Was there a man dismay’d?
Not tho’ the soldier knew
Someone had blunder’d:
Their’s not to make reply,
Their’s not to reason why,
Their’s but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.

Few British troops sought to take responsibility for the Charge and other failures earlier in the Crimean War, rather pointing the fingers at each other and casting blame. Consequently, there was a fair amount of resentment among the officers, rather than respect. Soldiers did not understand decisions made by their commanding officers, a disconnection that fuelled a poisonous environment.

3. Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon in front of them
Volley’d and thunder’d;
Storm’d at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
Rode the six hundred.

Commanders micro-managed to excess, focusing on details like uniform trim or precise formations on the battlefield. Troops died of exposure and others were weakened as a result of spending nights outside, in formation. The brisk weather of the Balkans was perfectly suited to an adjustment in British tactics. The big picture - winning the Crimean War - was not nearly as important as looking good whilst doing so.

Jon Gruden, Lane Kiffin, and numerous other coaches devote too much time sweating the little things. The main objective of statistics is to identify what factors are closely tied to success on the field so that the most time and resources can be apportioned towards those key areas.

4. Flash’d all their sabres bare,
Flash’d as they turn’d in air,
Sabring the gunners there,
Charging an army, while
All the world wonder’d:
Plunged in the battery-smoke
Right thro’ the line they broke;
Cossack and Russian
Reel’d from the sabre stroke
Shatter’d and sunder’d.
Then they rode back, but not
Not the six hundred.

The British were quite arrogant while preparing for the Crimean War, underestimating the size and skill of their Russian opponents and the commitment required to achieve victory. They were also unaware of specific troop movements and reinforcements throughout the conflict. Better information would have resulted in better decisions.

5. Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon behind them
Volley’d and thunder’d;
Storm’d at with shot and shell,
While horse and hero fell,
They that had fought so well
Came thro’ the jaws of Death
Back from the mouth of Hell,
All that was left of them,
Left of six hundred.

Flexibility is a leadership attribute often derided. Politicians who adjust their policies are deemed to have “flip-flopped” but isn’t adapting one’s strategy to changing circumstances a sign of best practices? It’s certainly the main objective of timeouts and the half-time intermission.

The British army did not utilize all available information because intelligence was ignored due to the prejudices of the aristocratic commanders towards their Turkish and “Indian” soldiers. Had any of those commanders considered the reports from the field earnestly or thought to alter their tactics to better suit fighting in the Crimea, the Battle of Balaclava would have resulted in an opposite outcome.

In military disasters throughout history, intransigence and a refusal to recognize change have led to countless casualties that could have been prevented.

6. When can their glory fade?
O the wild charge they made!
All the world wondered.
Honor the charge they made,
Honor the Light Brigade,
Noble six hundred.

The author, Woodham-Smith, feels that the loss of the Light Brigade inspired the United Kingdom to modernize their armed forces. Most notably, service academics improved the expertise and experience of officers whilst innovation and technology brought the army into the twentieth century. Often, a complete calamity, such as the Battle of Balaclava, a bankruptcy, a blowout on the court, or the New York Mets’ 2007 September collapse is the perfect time to re-evaluate every aspect of an operation in the name of progress.

Exogenous Events

Like all the exogenous events inspire the price of crude to surge, bandits raiding a village and seizing the barley crop should drive the cost of the commodity to new highs. Amid the death and destruction, farmers face financial ruin and decide to take action by hiring a number of samurai to protect them. Showcasing innovative cinematography and a tremendous score, Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai illustrates the significance of trust and teamwork and the importance of brains over brawn.

Initially, tensions prevent the ronin and the town’s residents from working together well. Nobody wishes to risk their life to save others. Only when barriers between the villagers and the samurai and the warriors and the farmers dissolve can an effective team take shape. Throughout the film, the village is successful when working together but fails when individuals deviate from the plan.

Mike Krzyzewski wrote - as have many others in many books of dubious quality - that like a hand only becomes stronger when five fingers make a fist, a team must come together to succeed. Yet ultimately, the threat of the invaders is required to inspire everyone to unite.

“Once more, we survive.”
- Kambei Shimada

Neither the strongest or fastest, Shimada’s poise allows him to lead the other samurai and villagers. Throughout the film, he balances pragmatism with honour and humility. All of the samurai offer different skills and the diverse contributions are required to overcome the marauders’ superior numbers.

At first, the film portrays the struggle as a battle between good villagers and evil villains. As the samurai learn more about the struggle, they discover that the townspeople are not what they seem, guilty of war crimes yet sacrificing their own food to ensure that the guests are well-fed. Again, people are painted not in black and white but shades of grey.

The film’s characters mirror human characteristics: youth, impulsiveness, rage, wisdom. Ultimately, cunning and experience triumph but not without struggle. Kurosawa's climax illustrates the intensity of battle and the mastery of fear needed for victory.

As the film concludes, it is time to reseed the barley fields. Despite their success, the village must make a new start. Despite the accolades won, Shimada and the surviving ronin must accept that the victory does not belong to them and they must deal with the costs of the fighting.

Four Lessons from Lute Olson

Reading Lute!, an autobiography by the longstanding coach of the Arizona Wildcats, provided interesting food for thought. First of all, the calm and composed appearance of Lute Olson belies an insatiable enthusiasm for basketball and unwavering loyalty towards those who play on the teams that he coaches. Olson’s fifty-year career links the game’s past to its present, from Pete Newell and John Wooden to Roy Williams and Mike Krzyzewski, from the Pacific Coast to the Mid-West and back.

The book is typical of most sports autobiographies and will not contend for the Pulitzer Prize. Yet the text remains capable of imparting several lessons from Olson’s coaching philosophy. If I were to highlight one critical concept from the entire book, it is that creativity -along with the flexibility to adapt - is an essential coaching attribute.

Thinking Outside the Box: Once, while coaching the U.S. National Team, Olson ordered Mugsy Bogues to guard Drazen Petrovic because he felt the 5-3 guard would disrupt the Croatian’s propensity to dribble immediately after receiving the ball.

Adapting to the Team’s Personnel: Olson has always practiced a fast-break, freelance offence and recruits players with skills suited to that style of play. While remaining trye to the fundamentals, he doesn’t hesitate to adjust some of the details to make the most of the roster, for example introducing a three-guard offence when required, a set that is now common throughout the game.

Helping Players: Both of Olson’s wives have provided guidance to the players he has coached. Recognizing that players and coaches can’t become friends until after graduation, Olson ensured that the players knew that they had a network that supported and cared for them.

Managing the Little Things: Olson analyzes the game tirelessly, looking for any little edge. For example, when Steve Kerr played for the Wildcats, Olson insisted that he catch the ball in a jump-stop in order to accelerate Kerr’s release for occasions when he was guarded by opponents who were taller and quicker.

Sport in Canada, Part II

Last week, addressing some of the obstacles that Canada faces in its quest to Own the Podium, I ignore a critical consideration: the separation of sports funding by provincial boundaries. Canada manages National Sports Organizations and the Canadian Olympic Committee but ten provinces and three territories control various Provincial Sports Organizations - and far more money - according to vastly different standards.

Certainly, thirteen diverse recipes produce thirteen different outcomes, some more successful than others. For example, the Government of Quebec links sport to the health and fitness of the overall population and spends about $7.40 per capita on sport, four times the amount spent by Ontario, Canada's largest province.

Kouzes and Posner's Five Leadership Practices illustrates how Quebec employs logical ideas and methods to get the most out of their money, generating winning athletes and healthy citizens.

1. Modeling the way
   Quebec's Minister of Education, Recreation, and Sport sees achievements by the province's athletes as a way to demonstrate that "fitness is fun"
   Should Canada choose to follow Quebec's example, international results would improve. Quebecois athletes have access to resources similar to peers in other countries; athletes in other provinces do not.
   
2. Inspiring a shared vision
   Quebec has become a leader among Canada's aquatics and speed skating communities as a result of its top facilities and podium finishes at international competition.
   
3. Challenge the process
   Quebec has made a commitment to building international-level facilities throughout the province, inspiring potential athletes to move to Quebec to train and allowing the province to host more sporting events.
   The province incorporates ideas from various sports into training for all athletes, for example using dance to improve flexibility.
   
4. Enabling others to act
   Investment in coaches and facilities provides athletes with the resources needed to win.
   
5. Encouraging the heart
   Many Quebec athletes were motivated by the success of their predecessors. The province endeavours to create a culture of sport and health.

There are more details to Quebec's accomplishments but these key points, gleaned from a TSN report during their Canada Games coverage, exemplify that sport in Canada has a long way to go to match world standards but that money, hard work, and focus can make success possible in all sports.

Assertiveness and Coaching

Different coaches have different personalities, which contribute to the diversity of sport. Some display more energy than others, some have a stage presence, and some have a sense of humour about their job. Nevertheless, there is more than one way to coach successfully.

Coaching and control are synonymous in the minds of many individuals inside and outside the profession but that is not an accurate description. Coaches motivate student-athletes to reach their potential as a group. Crafting systems that best suit the team is part of that task, managing every single detail of the team is not. Creating accountability among the players for their actions on the court will bring everyone together.

In practice, coaches should teach the team how to make decisions. If the coach only instructs a set of rules and guidelines - insisting that they game be played "the right way" - they curtail the enthusiasm of the players. In games, players own their decisions and they deserve as much input as possible - if they have earned it. Over the years, Larry Brown has been fired many times compared to Phil Jackson who has only been given the axe once (in Puerto Rico in the 1980s).

A coach is ultimately responsible for the outcome of each game and the entire season so many feel that they need to be "harder on this group on seniors than any group before them," as the coach at Niagara said after qualifying for the N.C.A.A. Tournament. But there are many occasions when a passive personality is very effective.

Recently, I coached a game where I hardly did anything. The players won the game and I didn't screw it up. Not that I would have screwed it up had I been more involved but they basically ran the entire show. I could have intervened if necessary but there was never an urgent need to do anything.

The team used the usual offence and defence to take a seven point lead. Although we lost the lead briefly at times, we controlled the tempo of the game. The players suggested a switch to a match-up zone, which I didn't really agree with, but I value their input. After pressuring the ball well, the other team hit a few shots over the defence so we switched back to person-to-person defence. Players made shots down the stretch to win the game; all I did was make sure the five players on the court were the five that were playing the best together.

I worry at times that I do not display enough emotion on the bench. Coaches should be a mirror image of the character that the team should be showing. Remaining quiet was likely a disservice to the team but the bench was enthusiastic, so that overcame my shortcomings.

Afterwards, I watched a YouTube clip of Don Nelson receiving a technical foul with no time on the clock. Gilbert Arenas had already been sent to the line with a chance to tie the game with two free throws and he made those plus the T, winning the game for the Wizards. Nellie probably went over the edge, but it's a subjective line. His active involvement cost his team the game insteal of inspiring the team to play better defence or whatever. Perhaps the team leaders should have handled the situation themselves.

Phil Jackson tries to take two technicals per season. Other coaches, like Gregg Popovich and Pat Riley get nailed far more often. Some coaches are loath to call timeouts, others bail out the teams they coach constantly. It's a superficial illustration of the different levels of assertiveness that are effective on the sidelines. All things considered, it's mature teams that can handle the ups and downs of the game and work things out together that win.

Three Lessons from Jack Donohue

Recently, I read Dream Big Dreams: The Jack Donohue Story by Mike Hickey, a thoroughly entertaining biography that is required reading for Canadian Basketball coaches. Both Andy Higgins - who knew Coach Donohue personally - and I found the book to be very insightful and had difficulty putting it down. I've listed three lessons any coach can take from Jack Donohue's life and coaching career.

Helping Players: Jack Donohue helped the Canadian Senior Men's National Team, the College of the Holy Cross, and Power Memorial players, among others, lessons about teamwork, responsibility, sacrifice, and enjoying life, that they remember to this day. He exemplified the potential of the coach to shape the lives of young people. Although the players may have questioned Donohue at the time, they now appreciated how much he helped them improve themselves.

Players must understand their role on the team, receive an opportunity to do what they do best, and know that that someone on the team cares for them (source: Author Unknown). In the coming months I will try to follow Coach Donohue's lead and stress these aspects of my coaching philosophy.

Donohue never abandoned a friend when they were down, including acquaintances who were incarcerated, Al McGuire during his illness, and Steve Konchalski when he was fighting Basketball Canada (successfully) over his wrongful termination. He maintained his relationship with players and coaches from New York City like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Jack Curran, and Lou Carnesecca for the rest of his life.

Technical Fouls: While coaching Power Memorial as an opponent was shooting foul shots, Donohue strode onto the court and took the ball from the player's hands. He refused to give it back until the official listened to his concerns. (I once had to call timeout to speak to an official about a technical foul that he assessed to a U.T.S. player for using profanity; perhaps I should have been more forthright.) When the U.S.S.R. was taking Canada to the woodshed, Donohue entered the court, assumed a defensive stance, and began guarding the Soviet ballhandler.

After the "T", Donohue exclaimed that "someone on this team has to play defence." Like my colleague Kash stated this afternoon: "different players are motivated in different ways and a coach must know what buttons to push." Caring for players means standing up for them during games.

Supporting Other Coaches: Donohue was known and appreciated for the help that he provided to other coaches and the Coaches of Canada organization. Many coaches in Canada are part of the Donohue family tree (Ken and Kathy Shields, Steve Konchalski and Doc Ryan, Jay Triano, Olga Hrycak, Leo Rautins, and Chris Critelli). Coaches must not only mentor players but others in their profession, a responsibility Donohue never shirked.

Once, Donohue and a friend were volunteering at a local high school practice when the school's Athletic Director walked into the gym and asked them to identify themselves. Donohue introduced himself as the former coach of Canada's Senior Men's National Team. The A.D. asked them to leave because they didn't have the "proper qualifications" to coach at that school. I know another Athletic Director who forbade a former Canadian Olympic coach from making an appearance at his school but illuminating the error of his ways will inspire neither a critical self-evaluation nor spur the school to improve their methods.

Leadership Failure

After losing to the Miami Heat 99-77, T.J. Ford commented that “Being out there with Chris, I don’t have to make plays all the time. And now I’m finding myself having to make a lot more plays and sometimes trying to make too many plays. And I think that’s what happened tonight with so many turnovers.”

Disappointing comments from a disappointing player during a disappointing season. Not to mention irresponsible, idiotic, and irritating.

A team’s point guard should want to make plays, not shy away from them. To demonstrate good leadership and improve performance under pressure, T. J. Ford - or any of the Raptors’ key players - should have said: “Chris is an important contributor to the team and the team will miss him. Nevertheless, it’s my role to take ownership and make more plays to help my teammates.”

As the Rock would say, players should know their roles -- and when they their roles change. Although professional basketball players are held to a different standard than pick-up players at the AC, the fact that the Raptors can’t pull themselves together lately remains a coaching failure too. It reflects poorly on the coaching staff that players did not want to step up to increase their roles or were unable to do so, mentally or physically.

Nevertheless, Ford was acquired to run the offence, distribute the basketball, and lead on the court (i.e. make plays). He may have a different leadership style than Chris Bosh and the team may display a different character when Bosh is absent. Naturally, he controls the ball less when Chris Bosh plays but when Ford is required to step up and make more plays, it should not result in disaster.

Adversity and the Toronto Maple Leafs

For the third time in four seasons, Mats Sundin has returned to the Maple Leafs after a serious mid-season injury and questions arise regarding his influence on the team. Based on anecdotal evidence - the 2002 Playoffs and November 2006 - it seems as if the Leafs do worse when their captain dresses:

2002 Playoffs Arm Injury

Last Five Games Before the Injury (4/12 to 4/23):
Record: 4-1-0 (8 pts)
Points per Game: 1.60 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 3.20 - 2.20
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 29.2 - 29.8
Power Play: 12.5% (3 - 24)
Mats Sundin Productivity: 2 G - 5 A - 7 Pts - +6 - 12 Shots

Mats Sundin’s Absence (4/24 to 5/16):
Record: 7-5-0 (14 pts)
Points per Game: 1.17 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 2.83 - 2.75
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 28.8 - 28.4
Power Play: 21.5% (11 - 51)

Mats Sundin’s Return (5/19 to 5/28):
Record: 1-4-0 (2 pts)
Points per Game: 0.4 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 0.80 - 1.80
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 26.8 - 25.4
Power Play: 15.0% (3 - 20)
Mats Sundin Productivity: 1 G - 3 A - 4 Pts - +1 - 13 Shots

2005 Eye Injury

Injury Occurred During Season Opener (10/05):
Record: 0-0-1 (1 pt)
Points per Game: 1.00 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 2.00 - 2.00
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 25.0 - 23.0
Power Play: 11.1% (1 - 11)
Mats Sundin Productivity: 2:53 minutes of ice time

Mats Sundin’s Absence (10/08 to 11/03):
Record: 6-5-1 (13 pts)
Points per Game: 1.08 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 3.58 - 3.50
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 26.33 - 32.67
Power Play: 27.0% (20 - 74)

Mats Sundin’s Return (11/05 to 11/12):
Record: 3-2-0 (6 pts)
Points per Game: 1.20 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 4.20 - 4.20
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 28.60 - 32.80
Power Play: 23.5% (8 - 34)
Mats Sundin Productivity: 2 G - 5 A - 7 Pts - E - 15 Shots

2006 Elbow Injury

Last Five Games Before the Injury (10/30 to 11/6):
Record: 4-1-0 (8 pts)
Points per Game: 1.60 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 3.60 - 2.00
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 28.2 - 34.4
Power Play: 21.4% (6 - 28)
Mats Sundin Productivity: 3 G - 6 A - 9 Pts - +1 - 19 Shots

Mats Sundin’s Absence (11/09 to 11/24):
Record: 4-2-1 (9 pts)
Points per Game: 1.29 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 4.00 - 2.43
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 33.57 - 29.29
Power Play: 33.3% (12 - 36)

Mats Sundin’s Return (11/26 to 12/2):
Record: 0-4-1 (1 pt)
Points per Game: 0.25 ppg
Goals Scored per Game (for - against): 1.25 - 3.75
Shots on Goal per Game (for - against): 37.25 - 24.50
Power Play: 8.0% (2 - 25)
Mats Sundin Productivity: 2 G - 0 A - 2 Pts - -3 - 23 Shots

Sundin’s Value to Toronto: Does Mats Sundin make a positive contribution to the Leafs? Despite the recent losing streak, I think the answer is yes. This question can be divided into two issues, which I think can be answered by coaching and the team’s character.

Improved Performance During Sundin’s Absence: Adversity motivates the Toronto Maple Leafs to improve their intensity and focus. This is a strategy that other coaches can use to inspire teams to play harder, together, and smarter. In the past two seasons, the team has bettered their defensive numbers, in terms of goals and shots against. The offensive numbers decline but this is because the Leafs have made the games tighter and more conservative. The team improves its focus, making the most of power-play chances. Combating adversity is a button that Toronto coaches and alternate captains have been able to press to lift team performance.

Play After Sundin Returns: Mats Sundin is still the Leaf’s most skilled offensive player and as he goes, so does the team’s offence. When the team has not played well offensively, Sundin has still been able to get shots on goal and score his usual percentage of the team’s points. But there seems to be a let-up in intensity, as defensive numbers fall. Shots by both teams increase, perhaps indicating that the games have become more wide open. The Leaf’s power-play execution falls, which I think can be attributed to an over-reliance on Sundin and a drop in team chemistry caused by suddenly inserting someone who plays a great deal of ice time into the lineup.

Summary: The statistics - provided by ESPN.com - and analysis are too superficial to provide a concrete answer. First of all, Sundin doesn’t affect the team as much as the disruption caused by his absence does. The team is 1-2 in the first game after the injury but has been able to turn things around into a winning record.

Sundin’s first game back was likewise disruptive as the team went 1-2 despite riding winning streaks at the time. The adversity motivational tactic helps players raise their levels of focus and intensity and they seem to drop after Sundin returns. Also, each player was required to do more while Sundin was away, increasing team fatigue levels (so the team may have started losing games whether Sundin had returned or not).

Given that the coaches handled the absence of the team’s key player well, they could probably do more to prepare for his return. Paul Maurice stuck Sundin on the third line whereas Pat Quinn had returned him to his usual place on the first line. Neither tactical strategy was successful in 2005 or 2006 so it suggests that a mental training strategy would be necessary.

Losing the leading scorer was initially challenging for a team that I am coaching as every player felt the responsibility to replace the missing contribution themselves. This inconsistent performance was followed by a realization that the team was in a deep hole. That challenge - combined with a strategy of breaking up team goals into smaller, achievable ones - permitted the team to play better and come together as a team. When the key player returns, positive reinforcement and a reminder of team tactics are necessary.

The Toronto Maple Leafs need Mats Sundin. When he returns from injury, his performance is high (whether the team does well or not). During his absences, he likely continues to lead, motivating the team by modeling the way and creating a positive atmosphere. The responsibility falls to the team’s management to mitigate the disruption caused by his return and maintain the team’s performance.

The Responsibility of the Coach

Evidently, it is the players play hard, play smart, and play together; the coach merely plays the role of the enabler and the modeler. If contributions were not made on the court when they were needed, contributions off the court were irrelevant. Players wear headbands and win games, coaches can only ban the former and observe the latter.

According to Bear Bryant, “After a victory the players deserve the credit; after a loss the coach deserves the blame.” Is Bryant’s dissection of the blame appropriate? If players merit praise for their physical and mental performance than they should receive criticism when warranted in a loss.

Except the opposite nature of victory and defeat create the possibility of dual judgment. Players seized the day and won the game. Winners performed up to their standards of quality under pressure. Losers didn’t perform. But why?

Usually because of a failure in the role of the coach. Did the coach model the way? Inspire a team vision? Challenge conventions? Enable and motivate others? Read enough Kouzes and Posner? The losing coach probably did not do enough or didn’t do it the right way for that group of players.

Fortunately, there is hope for the defeated coach. I’ve found that coaching is largely an exercise in self-actualization so everything that happens is a piece of information that can be used to climb higher so long as that information is thoroughly and accurately studied.

Self-evaluating after a loss I noted that the two major times that I intervened in the flow of the game resulted in positive outcomes for the team. There were no Isiah Thomas moments so I should be satisfied with my self-actualization, right?

In reality, my superficial analysis did no favours to either the team or me. The players deserve credit for working hard, overcoming adversity, and becoming closer together. For an early season game at this level, it was a sincere success. Reflecting critically, I realize that I deserve blame for countless acts that all contributed slightly to the defeat.

Thankfully, basketball wasn’t banned yesterday so there’s hope. Even if I can only fix one screen and roll sequence or speak slightly more concisely before the next game, it’s still a step forward and only one of many along a longer path.

Irrespective of my self-improvement, the players must still play the games. Becoming a better coach will provide the team with many more tools to do their job, win, and earn the credit they deserve.

Team vs. Individual Discipline

The San Diego Chargers have blown it by suspending TE Antonio Gates. As Red Auerbach said, never punish the team for the sins of the individual. N.F.L. holdouts and contract renegotiations are unbecoming to the sport and out of control; the issue should be addressed in future collective bargaining to create uniform rules for all teams.

Nevertheless, the Chargers painted themselves into a corner with their ultimatum that Gates sign the qualifying offer or be suspended. Therein lies the massive flaw with ultimatums - they limit your options. You should never make a threat that you aren’t willing to carry out and San Diego must follow through with the suspension if they value their integrity.

A more pragmatic decision would balance the best interests of the team on the field with the front office’s negotiating position. San Diego treated an issue with shades of grey like it was black and white and Coach Schottenheimer et. al. might pay for that error with their jobs if they miss their season goals because they don’t beat Dallas in Week 1.

In professional sports, principles do not win any games although a team can collapse without them. What should the Chargers have done? Unfortunately they have few options because sports are about money, winning, and performance. Ultimately, the hammer lies with the skill position athletes and the coaches don’t have many discipline tools aside from the fine.

In “amateur” sport, there is greater flexibility. Coaches have a wide variety of hammers of different shapes and sizes available for their use. Tyrone Willingham addressed poor class attendance at the University of Washington with a series of 6:00am conditioning sessions. Coaches can ask themselves “what’s important now?” and use their best professional judgement.

Likewise, back in May, Stephen Harper didn’t follow Auerbach’s advice when he tore a strip off Belinda Stronach and effectively demoted her before a key vote. No matter what happens, a coach or leader cannot permit an individual to hurt the team. This really hurt the team as the Conservatives’ bid to defeat the federal budget fell short by a vote.

A key aspect of leadership is working with those above and below you in a cordial fashion. Nothing is ever final but Harper’s drastic overreaction towards Stronach poured gasoline on a fire he should have been extinguishing. (Of course, she should not have been dancing on the bar at an Ottawa nightspot after another key vote.)

Harry Potter and Leadership

Harry Potter becomes a Quiddich coach in The Half-Blood Prince and does a decent job. I found his tryouts somewhat uninspiring; he should have brought a practice plan. Choosing his keeper based on five penalty shots - an extremely unreliable sample size - was asking for trouble, but it worked out in the end.

Before the first match, I thought Harry was setting up Weasley to be Rafael Palmeiro. However, tricking his keeper into thinking he had taken performance enhancing drugs was quite the ruse. A lot of sport is mental as opposed to physical; sensing that Ron was prone to negative self-talk, Harry employed his mental training skills to help that particular student-athlete play to the best of his abilities and deliver the win for his team.

Leadership and Star Wars

After a second viewing of Revenge of the Sith, I wanted to comment about the leadership styles of the Jedi and the Sith. The Jedi alienate Anakin Skywalker when they cease to model the way and ask him to spy on the Supreme Chancellor. The Jedi Council distrusts Palpatine and his motives but their clandestine actions render Skywalker more susceptible to the overtures by Darth Sidious.

Meanwhile, Palpatine senses Skywalker’s self-actualisation, loving and belongind, and power needs and speaks to them. In Skywalker’s mind, the Chancellor has enabled him to reach his potential, in contrast to the rules and dogma of the Jedi. Darth Sidious motivates Skywalker differently than Darth Maul or Darth Tyrannus and he engenders great loyalty in his future employee as a result.

Employees are happy when they feel that their talents are valued, they value their organisation, and they feel that they organisation is valued by others. Palpatine encourages Skywalker’s abilities, undermines his feelings for the Jedi Order, and nurtures his allegiance to the Galactic Republic/Empire.

Palpatine’s remark, “Good is a point of view,” is a pertinent reminder to keep perspective. Darth Sidious may be one of the most evil fictional characters ever, but he makes an effort to practice good leadership and reaps the benefits - at the expense of his soul and billions of lives.