The Importance of Character
As a point of clarification, while Managing Editor Phil Kasiecki was seated courtside and watching the game, he did not personally observe the beginning of the altercation, and did not personally observe the contact between Ridley and Padgett. The sources for that information were nearby observers. Not expecting those observations to be disputed, Phil simply reported their version of the events, in doing so not making it clear that they were reported to him by third parties. The account of events from that point forward was based entirely on Phil’s personal observation.
While confident in the reliability of the gentlemen whose observations were reported, we apologize for any confusion that may have been caused by not attributing that account to other observers. Mr. Kasiecki’s column appears in its original form below.
For additional accounts of the games and the altercation in question, please refer to the following articles authored by our colleagues at YourNabe.com, NYC Hoops.net (affiliated with Rivals.com), and the New York Daily News, citing the NYC Hoops report.
Thanks for visiting Hoopville,
Andrew Flynn
Executive Editor
July 15th, 2008
An oft-underestimated component of players and teams is their character. We talk a lot about a player’s talents and what they can and can’t do, as well as with what teams do best and what they don’t do so well. In the context of evaluating talents for the next level, be it for college or the pros, that focus is even more acute.
But make no mistake about it: character and intangibles are what really matter most. That’s because they underlie everything we see out on the playing field, even if it’s not readily apparent at first. It’s why one player blessed with all the physical gifts in the world might be just a complementary player, why another player who’s undersized or not very athletic might be the best player in a major conference, or why a player with modest talents always seems to be a key part of winning teams. It’s also a large reason why one player who at one time has upside becomes a star while another with upside becomes a bust.
Although it’s visible quite often, this came back to mind after an unfortunate experience this weekend at the Rumble in the Bronx at Fordham. A tournament with a lot of tradition and always the most competitive team tournament in the relatively quiet month of June, this time around it was almost home to the kind of rumble the event’s name does not imply.
In the second half of a semifinal game between two New York-based teams, the Gauchos and Juice All-Stars, Gauchos post player Taaj Ridley hacked James Padgett of the Juice All-Stars hard. But that wasn’t all, as he extended his arm in a follow-through and whacked Padgett in the face. Neither player is a small man: Ridley is listed at 6’6″ and said to be about 250 pounds, while Padgett checks in at about 6’8″ and 230-240. Padgett retaliated with a solid punch right to the face, and everything escalated from there. Benches were emptying, with Gauchos coach Dwayne Mitchell running out to rein in Ridley. Seconds later, Gaucho big man Dan Jennings (who stands about 6’9″) had grabbed a chair from the bench, and it took about a half dozen people – including a parent – to wrestle the chair away from him.
I’m not a genius, but my guess is that he wasn’t about to set the chair down on the court so that someone could sit and relax in it.
This occurred in what had been a physical game, and perhaps too much so. The teams can’t really be considered arch-rivals despite being from the same area, as they rarely play in the same tournament and have different shoe sponsorship (Juice is Adidas-backed while the Gauchos have Nike sponsorship). While there is something to be said for letting teams play, sometimes the action on the floor isn’t physical, it’s full of flat-out aggression, and that’s when officials need to rein it in and make some calls. That might not prevent something like what ensued on Sunday, but it can’t hurt.
After the fracas was over, the game was called (there was no sense trying to continue playing after that), and the Gauchos were declared the winner of the game since they had the lead. A colleague suggested an alternative I liked regarding the next game: the Gauchos also don’t play and the winner of the other semifinal is declared the champion by a forfeit. That way, both teams understand that behavior like this has consequences, not just the losing team (and in this case, the Gauchos weren’t angels, either). That didn’t happen, and I didn’t expect it to; I don’t hold that against tournament director Jim Hart. But that is why I did not watch the 17-under gold final and why you will not see anything about it in the forthcoming recap of the event here.
A few observers, who I believe are parents of players that were in the game, were visibly frustrated by what happened. No one can blame them; there have been similar incidents in recent years in New York during the high school season, including one that got a lot of buzz over a year ago in the city championship at Madison Square Garden. One of the observers got right to the heart of the matter in alluding to the character of the young men, lamenting how colleges recruit them for their basketball ability and overlook their character, thus meaning that bad character has no consequences for the kids. While she said it to a group largely composed of media members and not coaches, her point is well-taken and leads to something else.
Actions have consequences in life, and that’s true on the athletic playing field as much as anywhere else. In this context, it is worth repeating an observation made in this space before: winning teams are full of high-character kids. Yes, some teams that have won have had to dismiss a player or two from the team along the way, but their character is shown by the fact that they did that instead of letting said player(s) kill the chemistry of the team the remainder of the season. Teams without such character are rarely winning teams.
On Sunday, both Jennings and Padgett didn’t give very good accounts of their character (nor did Ridley, who started it all off). One might say, it’s just one incident – and maybe it is – but nothing in life happens in a vacuum. It’s understandable that Padgett would be frustrated – a blow to the face is nothing to take lightly. But all he did was escalate it, and one has to wonder about Jennings since he felt the need to grab a chair in the melee. If there were police officers in the building when this happened, there might have been some arrests – that’s how bad this was.
Both are sure to be recruited at the Division I level. Padgett has shown himself to have post scoring ability with an offensive game that’s a bit rough around the edges, while Jennings plays at powerhouse Oak Hill Academy and will get plenty of looks even from coaches who go to see someone else who plays on the loaded team. But a character question is sure to follow both players, at least for teams who want to win.
An incident like this helps no one. It hurts the players for the reason just mentioned and it will help the travel basketball scene be looked at in a negative light even more than it already is. The latter is unfortunate since this incident has nothing to do with it other than taking place in a major team event. It hurts the tournament because it’s a dark cloud on an otherwise fine event.
One could say that I should not write about this and perhaps few will know that it ever happened. But that just wouldn’t be right. I try to be fair and helpful to the kids; they are, after all, the ones who this is all about. They are also the ones who have no voice every time the NCAA tries to cut down on the opportunities for coaches to evaluate or when July is the time for more events every year. Additionally, I think the bum rap that AAU and travel team basketball in general gets is undeserved to a good degree. But part of being fair and helpful is some tough love, something that a number of young athletes don’t get nearly enough of.
It should be noted that my sentiments about the travel team scene aside, the melee that ensued apparently did not lead to a teaching point for one of the participants. Jennings played in the title game, and according to one report, was a key player in the Gauchos’ victory. He had no business playing in that game, and sitting him out would be one way to show him that his action has a consequence. Gauchos coach Mitchell deserves a thumbs down for that.
We can pump up the kids all we want – and when I talk to many of them, I try to be positive first so as to encourage them to keep working hard – but we can’t get carried away and let them think they are what they aren’t. It’s a tough world out there, and giving kids a false sense of where they fit in it doesn’t help them. It doesn’t help a kid to make him think he can play at a level he can’t, or that he can get away with something he can’t.
It also doesn’t help the kids to let an incident like this go unchecked. They need to know that incidents like this have consequences and help no one, so they might think a little more about their character in the future. Other players need this as an example to think about their own character. At the end of the day, character is at the heart of everything that happens, even if it’s not the first thing that’s talked about.
