I don't think he came across that way at all. As mentioned above, he complimented him quite a bit, and just said he is not sure his body is NBA ready yet and could have used another year. And then went on to say other nice things.
Nice to know Fred would never do this
- Thread starter TedFlintKansas
- Start date
I don't think he came across that way at all. As mentioned above, he complimented him quite a bit, and just said he is not sure his body is NBA ready yet and could have used another year. And then went on to say other nice things.
Yea, he probably didn't need to say it, but I doubt anyone is going to bat an eye over it.
Yeah I have problems with the article specially with the part I quoted. As JP has pointed out these are student athletes they are getting a scholarship well overwhelming majority get scholarship and a I believe they get a stipend.
As far as what the coach said I have no problem. He complimented the athlete though what he said could have been out of a desire to have the player for another year and maybe the player needs another year to develop more.
I'm in the boat where he probably didn't need to say it, but I'm also in the boat that it really wasn't that bad and at the same time was very complimentary. With that said, I thought the article overall was way overblown and I'm one who thinks the over-the-top profanity of the article only ends up discrediting the writer and makes them sound uneducated.
I compare this piece and the person reading it to that of a referee (reader) and a coach (writer) and the more specific examples of CHF (level-headed writer) and Mad Fran (this article's writer). Now, if you are a referee (reader), do you listen more to the well thought out, level-headed CFH (level-headed writer) when he disagrees with you, or do you listen more the the Mad Fran (this article's writer) coach who flips out over every little detail? My guess is that most refs listen a bit more to CFH when he disagrees with them. On the flip side, I'm sure there are a few refs who probably react more to a Mad Fran, but at the same time, how does that make you feel about their competency as a ref too? I know if I were a ref, I would have a hard time taking Mad Fran seriously and would just get rather annoyed overall, just like I had a hard time taking the writer of this article seriously and found myself just rather annoyed overall while reading the article.
I compare this piece and the person reading it to that of a referee (reader) and a coach (writer) and the more specific examples of CHF (level-headed writer) and Mad Fran (this article's writer). Now, if you are a referee (reader), do you listen more to the well thought out, level-headed CFH (level-headed writer) when he disagrees with you, or do you listen more the the Mad Fran (this article's writer) coach who flips out over every little detail? My guess is that most refs listen a bit more to CFH when he disagrees with them. On the flip side, I'm sure there are a few refs who probably react more to a Mad Fran, but at the same time, how does that make you feel about their competency as a ref too? I know if I were a ref, I would have a hard time taking Mad Fran seriously and would just get rather annoyed overall, just like I had a hard time taking the writer of this article seriously and found myself just rather annoyed overall while reading the article.
Last edited:
The interview itself was pretty tame, but you're crazy if you don't see the potential this could have to hurt recruiting. Just because he thinks Ennis may not have an NBA body (and rightfully so) doesn't mean he has to say it. All that will come of this is rival schools telling recruits "do you really want to play for a Coach that's going to say things that will hurt your draft stock?" As far as I'm concerned, if a kid comes and plays his butt off for you for even a year you owe it to them to not make statements that could, even remotely, hurt their professional prospects.
Anyone remember when Royce was trying to get drafted? Hoiberg was making calls on his behalf, talking to NBA people he knows, trying to find a team to give Royce a chance, etc... He was doing everything in his power to help Royce get to the NBA and get in the right situation. Fred didn't go on ESPN and say "Royce has a great skill set that is definitely NBA quality but damn... that kid has anxiety issues that will plague his career for years." Would it have been a true statement? Certainly... but Fred was trying to help him not hurt him.
It only as harmful as opposing coaches can make it out to be. I think a competent recruiter could make a recruit consider it in their decision.
Mental issues =/= physical limitations. I understand that you are trying to put your favorite coach in a favorable light, but this is a massive stretch.
Good comparison. I don't think Fred ever said anything negative about Royce in public, even though he was acutely aware of the issues and probably was pretty honest in private. Of course, a GM isn't going to make his decision solely based on what a coach says in public, but he might have his opinion influenced by the pressure that comes from a fan base that picks up on something like this.
It would be if it was journalism. It's not...it's a blog. It's one step (and a small one at that) above linking a news story on this message board and commenting on it.
I guess I don't see how it is a stretch. There is no need for a former coach to discuss former player's limitations, be them physical, mental, behavioral, whatever. Let the scouts do their job, but there is really no good that came come to your program from disparaging a former player.
