Is Scheyer Too Nice?

[Lunchab1es]

Scheyer showed tremendous competitive fire on many occasions during his playing career without being emotionally demonstrative on the court. I also remember the game he had in high school when he scored something like 21 points in 90 seconds to bring his team back for a win.

21 Points in 75 seconds, but unfortunately his team still lost. Maybe if he had been meaner they would have won.

[Billy Dat]

This narrative bugs me for all the reasons people have pointed out.

What no one has mentioned is that the guy he's replacing was a guy who would never have been accused of being too nice. For 40 years, we had a domesticated Bob Knight, a guy who lived and breathed extreme emotional motivation but managed to avoid the aspects of Knight's approach that made Knight lose his job and, basically, ruin his reputation.

So, when things get tough, many Duke fans want broken clipboards, thrown markers, colorful profanity and other histrionics.

Not me, there are a lot of ways to get the job done.

[Phredd3]

I think there's a lot of overreaction in some of the pushback, here. I thought there was a clear lack of motivation from the team in the last two games. It doesn't mean Coach has been a failure. It's a question about whether or not he's using all the tools at his managerial disposal. Maybe he is. I don't know. But if he gets angry with the team - ever - I haven't seen it. He's following in the footsteps of a master motivator. Coach K was a man who got plenty angry with his teams at times, and did so quite publicly. You can't ignore a coach who rips off his suit coat and slams it on the ground in the huddle. At the same time, his teams absolutely loved him, and knew that K would go to the mattresses for them.

So the question isn't about Scheyer being a failure, it's about whether or not he is able or willing to use certain tools to provide motivation. Maybe he'll find other ways to do the same thing. Maybe he's considered angry and has consciously decided that it wouldn't help. But I think asking if he's too nice is a pretty fair question after two sub-par team performances in a row.

[WVDUKEFAN]

I made a similar post, and I believe you are spot on. I don't see a lot of emotion from the sideline.

I think there's a lot of overreaction in some of the pushback, here. I thought there was a clear lack of motivation from the team in the last two games. It doesn't mean Coach has been a failure. It's a question about whether or not he's using all the tools at his managerial disposal. Maybe he is. I don't know. But if he gets angry with the team - ever - I haven't seen it. He's following in the footsteps of a master motivator. Coach K was a man who got plenty angry with his teams at times, and did so quite publicly. You can't ignore a coach who rips off his suit coat and slams it on the ground in the huddle. At the same time, his teams absolutely loved him, and knew that K would go to the mattresses for them.

So the question isn't about Scheyer being a failure, it's about whether or not he is able or willing to use certain tools to provide motivation. Maybe he'll find other ways to do the same thing. Maybe he's considered angry and has consciously decided that it wouldn't help. But I think asking if he's too nice is a pretty fair question after two sub-par team performances in a row.

[Papa John]

This narrative bugs me for all the reasons people have pointed out.

What no one has mentioned is that the guy he's replacing was a guy who would never have been accused of being too nice. For 40 years, we had a domesticated Bob Knight, a guy who lived and breathed extreme emotional motivation but managed to avoid the aspects of Knight's approach that made Knight lose his job and, basically, ruin his reputation.

So, when things get tough, many Duke fans want broken clipboards, thrown markers, colorful profanity and other histrionics.

Not me, there are a lot of ways to get the job done.

Agree 100%. I'll let Coach Scheyer be Coach Scheyer... I think the difficulty we're all experiencing is the fact that Coach Scheyer is in the process of figuring out exactly who Coach Scheyer is. He hasn't been in this position before, so everything is new. He's making mistakes, learning and growing from them, and trying to identify the most effective methods that he is comfortable using to motivate his team. It's gonna take some time. Unfortunately, we live in a world characterized by immediacy and impatience, which naturally amplifies any criticisms.

[HoKogan]

Given how today's younger players might not respond favorably to some caustic @#$hole who hasn't proven himself yet in their eyes, the most important thing is that the team trusts Scheyer, win or lose. He's learning on the job, not just game management, but player motivation. K was a master ego manipulator and I don't mean that in any nefarious way. Figuring out what makes a player tick, how to get them to buy in, how to reward and admonish without breaking trust, that takes a real real long time to learn.

I'm not concerned until it seems like the team gives up on Scheyer, I don't see it happening with this squad.

[ChillinDuke]

I think there's a lot of overreaction in some of the pushback, here. I thought there was a clear lack of motivation from the team in the last two games. It doesn't mean Coach has been a failure. It's a question about whether or not he's using all the tools at his managerial disposal. Maybe he is. I don't know. But if he gets angry with the team - ever - I haven't seen it. He's following in the footsteps of a master motivator. Coach K was a man who got plenty angry with his teams at times, and did so quite publicly. You can't ignore a coach who rips off his suit coat and slams it on the ground in the huddle. At the same time, his teams absolutely loved him, and knew that K would go to the mattresses for them.

So the question isn't about Scheyer being a failure, it's about whether or not he is able or willing to use certain tools to provide motivation. Maybe he'll find other ways to do the same thing. Maybe he's considered angry and has consciously decided that it wouldn't help. But I think asking if he's too nice is a pretty fair question after two sub-par team performances in a row.

I pretty much exactly align with Phredd here.

I don't think it's unfair for someone to look at the last few performances of this team and wonder about the coaching tactics. That's not calling Scheyer a failure in any way. And it's also not mutually exclusive to believing Scheyer will grow and improve over time.

For some, being "nice" might just be their analogy or wording to describe this fact pattern. I wouldn't get too wrapped up in the terminology.

- Chillin

[Music man55]

I don’t believe it’s fair to Coach Scheyer to make comparisons to Coach K really in any way. We were blessed having K for forty two years, the absolute GOAT! There will only be one Coach K and now it’s time for the Jon Scheyer era. I don’t expect him to carry himself like K and I don’t expect his coaching philosophy to mirror K’s. Let’s all take a deep breath and let Coach S do his thing, his way. I am excited for the future of Duke basketball!

[Billy Dat]

Good discussion here about whether or not Scheyer is in over his head. What I like about this, are how the media guys, who have had more access to Scheyer than most of us, characterize his undeniable competitive fire

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000593314861

Relevant segment begins at 31:38

[flyingdutchdevil]

This narrative bugs me for all the reasons people have pointed out.

What no one has mentioned is that the guy he's replacing was a guy who would never have been accused of being too nice. For 40 years, we had a domesticated Bob Knight, a guy who lived and breathed extreme emotional motivation but managed to avoid the aspects of Knight's approach that made Knight lose his job and, basically, ruin his reputation.

So, when things get tough, many Duke fans want broken clipboards, thrown markers, colorful profanity and other histrionics.

Not me, there are a lot of ways to get the job done.

Well said. I don't want a coach who gets emotional and throws his players under the bus (mainly figuratively but a little literal).

I DO want a coach who can motivate his players. I DO want a coach who can work the refs. I DO want a ref who can stand up for his players and program when need be (even against his own fans). Scheyer has not proven these yet, nor should he have. He's only been a coach for 3 months.

Sidenote: to me, there are 3 main elements to a coach: recruiting, preparation/motivation, and game plan/management. Scheyer has proven recruiting, and safe to say he gets an A+ for that. For motivation, I don't know, but I do know the players play really hard. They came into the season hungry and wanting to prove something. So I think Scheyer will look good on this dimension. As for game plan/management, that is tougher. I think Scheyer has made some good moves, some bad moves, and some ugly moves.

He's a first year coach. I may be hard on him, but I don't want Duke mgmt to do anything. The program needs to assess Scheyer after his 2nd/3rd year and make a decision after his 3rd/4th year.

[Southgate0809]

Tony Bennett doesn't show a lot of emotion on the sideline either.

[Kedsy]

But I think asking if he's too nice is a pretty fair question after two sub-par team performances in a row.

Because Coach K teams never had two sub-par performances in a row?

There are very few questions that I would consider fair after just two of anything.

[dukelifer]

Because Coach K teams never had two sub-par performances in a row?

There are very few questions that I would consider fair after just two of anything.

In K’s second season one could have asked if he was too mean - as he lost 6 of his last 7.

[cato]

You know what I will remember about K’s last game in Cameron? How livid he was when he took the stage post-game. My family was shocked at his first words and the fury with which he delivered them. He didn’t spare attention for the moment or the occasion, but took his first opportunity to let the team know that their performance was completely unacceptable.

Now, that was a message that was delivered with a hall-of-fame tenure and a long track record of learning how to communicate with players, staff, management, etc.

I don’t think Jon has that style. He is not going to lose his temper like K. And I am happy about that. It is much easier to be a guy who loses his temper than one who can help people learn how to hold themselves accountable.

But that is all besides the point. The point here is whether Scheyer is too nice, and it’s not a crazy idea to discuss. Jon has been a coach for a while, but I bet he still identifies more closely with the players than an old guy who can’t mix it up on the court anymore. Maybe “too nice” isn’t about whether Jon loses his temper or breaks a clipboard, but about making the jump from being a player, then an assistant, then an associate HC to now being the old man.

Coach K is no longer around, holding people accountable. That is Jon’s job now, along with everyone on his staff.

I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that there is no way Jon could have figured out exactly how to do this part of his job until getting the opportunity to actually do it. The guy’s got to get through a few important months before he even has *1* season under his belt.

So if the question is whether Jon is “too nice,” the only correct answer is “TBD.”

[Billy Dat]

You know what I will remember about K’s last game in Cameron? How livid he was when he took the stage post-game. My family was shocked at his first words and the fury with which he delivered them. He didn’t spare attention for the moment or the occasion, but took his first opportunity to let the team know that their performance was completely unacceptable.

Now, that was a message that was delivered with a hall-of-fame tenure and a long track record of learning how to communicate with players, staff, management, etc.

The problem with this exact example is that the intervening time period has been horrendous for K in terms of what went down that week and in that locker room and in public afterwards. As the ultimate leader of the program, with, I would guess, the power to have that week go exactly as he wanted it to go, he went along with a circus atmosphere whereby everyone says there was ZERO practice and little preparation and far too much media. So, he failed the squad that week in a major way. And, when it didn't go the way he wanted, he blasted a bunch of kids behind closed doors and in front of the world for something that he should have taken responsibilty for. I actually think it was one of his lowest moments running the program, and in trailers for his new "Masterclass" on leadership, he issues a mea culpa of sorts. It was an unprecedented week, but I don't accept it as an example of where his "fire" was used for good, I think was ugly and uncalled for.

[cato]

The problem with this exact example is that the intervening time period has been horrendous for K in terms of what went down that week and in that locker room and in public afterwards. As the ultimate leader of the program, with, I would guess, the power to have that week go exactly as he wanted it to go, he went along with a circus atmosphere whereby everyone says there was ZERO practice and little preparation and far too much media. So, he failed the squad that week in a major way. And, when it didn't go the way he wanted, he blasted a bunch of kids behind closed doors and in front of the world for something that he should have taken responsibilty for. I actually think it was one of his lowest moments running the program, and in trailers for his new "Masterclass" on leadership, he issues a mea culpa of sorts. It was an unprecedented week, but I don't accept it as an example of where his "fire" was used for good, I think was ugly and uncalled for.

I agree entirely with you. If my post suggested otherwise, it was not intended to. I have a few positive memories of that night, but neither the game nor K’s first comments are among those.

[Phredd3]

Because Coach K teams never had two sub-par performances in a row?

There are very few questions that I would consider fair after just two of anything.

Now that's just silly hyperbole. You think it is too small a sample size to be able to answer anything, I get that. Fine. Regardless, what makes the question unfair? Nobody is questioning his integrity. Nobody is implying he's a bad person. It's just a simple question about his motivational techniques. And by the way, the sample size is larger than two games when it comes to observing this facet of our new coach. He's always been a very even-keeled guy. We've seen that over the course of several years. So when the team appears to be needing a kick in the pants, why on earth is it unfair to wonder if this observed behavior is enough to get the job done. You're reacting as though Scheyer should feel insulted. Heck, I think there's a real possibility that Scheyer himself may come to think he been too nice.

If he's not asking himself this question, it's honestly probably a mistake. He may well decide the answer is no, but he should at least be asking. Why the heck wouldn't we be able to ask the same thing? I don't get it.

[DoubleBlue]

On the women's side, Coach Lawson also seems to have an even temperament on the courtside. At times she does express displeasure and disgust with some of the refereeing, but not with the players. Of course she is also not far removed from her playing days and has even less on-the-job coaching experience than Coach Scheyer. I get the impression that she is a real student of the game and is several steps ahead of the game action, but perhaps still learning the psychological aspects of getting the most out of her players.

There is much that we don't see in practice and team meetings so our perspective is limited. At this point of the season, with the gaudy 14-1 record no one is questioning Coach Lawson's style or effectiveness. That was not the case last year and some posters (I included) expressed some concerns. Likewise I think its too early to make any conclusions on Coach Scheyer's coaching style until more results are in.

[rsvman]

I'm with Billy Dat. There are a lot of different ways to motivate and a lot of different ways to interact with players.

I neither expected nor hoped that Scheyer would take the Coach K approach. There were certainly a lot of things to like about Coach K, and I think he is genuinely a good man, but if I were allowed to choose just one thing to change about him, it would have been to get him to tone down the anger, the yelling, and the cursing (is that really three things?).

Anyway, I get that if I could have done that, maybe he wouldn't have been Coach K anymore, and maybe, in a 'Sliding Doors' kind of way, it might have changed everything. So I guess I'm glad I didn't actually have the power to do that.

When it comes to Scheyer, I feel like we should let him be himself and let him grow into the job. At this point in time I am not critical of what he has done. In fact, I have been mostly pleased with the changes that have happened (playing more players, bringing the defense back a little so we don't get burned by so many back cuts, less demonstrable on the sidelines, putting the scrubs in earlier during blowouts, etc).

Let's let the man do his job! It's a really hard job and so far I think he is doing fine. I also think he will get better over time.

[mattyoung18]

Some folks here have been questioning whether Coach Scheyer is too nice, especially after the loss at NC State. Rather than discussing this randomly and repeatedly in multiple game threads, I thought we might have a thread dedicated to this issue.

Of course, I'm familiar with the wisdom of Leo Durocher. (I also note that Durocher only had one World Series title in 24 years of managing, when there were far fewer teams.) I also remember an article published before the season summarizing what some scouts saw watching Duke practices, and at least one of them wondered whether Scheyer is too nice. I have several issues with this contention.

First, how nice do we know Scheyer is behind closed doors? Obviously, from what we can see during games, Scheyer is very calm and generally positive, both with his players and with the referees. That doesn't mean, however, that he isn't less nice in the locker room. In fact, there was at least one report before the season that he had been very tough on Flip in practice and even threw him out of at least one practice.

Second, was Leo right? Thinking about it, although there certainly are some successful coaches who are known for getting on their players, such as Tom Izzo, there are others that, at least my limited knowledge, seem to be genuinely nice with their players. Tony Bennett comes to mind. In other sports, some of the very successful coaches and managers seem to be very positive with their players. For example, Dusty Baker is known as a players' manager. Davey Martinez won a world championship with the Washington Nationals in 2019. (Yes, I know he has been far less successful recently, but I think that is a personnel problem rather than a managerial problem.)

Third, would being less nice be helpful with this team? Duke has only one returning player with significant experience in the program, and that player is hurt. Right now, Duke is playing five freshman, one sophomore who did not play much last year, and two transfers. The team seems pretty fragile and lacking in confidence. Would being tougher help?

My bottom line: I like having a coach who is home with the officials and positive with the players. If he wants to get on the players, I'd prefer that he do it behind closed doors. I also think that Scheyer's apparent approach is the right approach with this team.

Hes too nice when compared to the GOAT Coach K