Kevin McHale, Royal Jelly Master? David Thorpe's theory of Player Development

David Thorpe was just on a really interesting podcast on ESPN:
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=7510545

He discusses a theory on player development that he calls "The Royal Jelly" theory.

Basically, the idea takes the way that queen bees are created and uses it as a metaphor for how a team can best develop players. So, just as bees give the larvae that are to be queens royal jelly and a larger cell, Thorpe says that developing players have to be given authentic confidence and a determined role on the team in order for that player to become someone who can contribute to a team and actualize his potential.

In the conversation Thorpe discusses two Rockets: Parsons and Dalembert, and how their surprising success this season is an example of Thorpe's theory.

The theory, especially as applied to the Rockets, brings up some interesting questions. Is McHale's coaching and player development style particularly representative of Thorpe's theory and a validation of this theory? If so, and we point to the success of Parsons, Dalamebert, Lowry, and (hopefully) Dragic, then what do we say about the regression of Budinger and the non-development of Twill?

Personally, I think McHale has done a good job of developing the players. Morey should definitely get credit for bringing in Parsons (Les gets the credit for bringing in Dalembert), but McHale has to be praised for seeing past expectations and giving Parsons a role that he can grow into. Many coaches would not have done that. And, in regards to those players who have not developed (Hill, TWill), I would say that they did not bring the effort and maturity needed in order to take advantage of the opportunities and confidence which McHale did indeed bestow on them before moving onto other people on the roster.

However, I think the theory also puts an onus on the team to clear out some of the clutter on the roster. McHale's desire to have a short bench is largely about giving players the confidence and roles which Thorpe sees as necessary for them to play their best. But, if you agree with this theory, then you are doing a disservice to a young talented player like Morris if you do not structure your roster in such a way that he can have a chance to succeed. Given, Parsons's success was a surprise, and I am sure the Rockets saw the opportunity he is getting as being meant for Morris -- but the organization needs to adjust to the new reality.

 

It isn't a video, just a podcast. But, I agree with your points, and Thorpe says as much as well.

The theory mainly stands out to me because of its 'truthiness' and because I think it indicates a key problem for the Rockets player evaluation and acquisition philosophy (which I overall like) is that they acquire players with out having a role and career development path for them. Players thrive much better if they feel they are part of the plan of the team and that their presence has a purpose.

 

Actually, I'm not sure I agree with you completely. Martin for instance -- sure, the season started slow for him under McHale, and I was right there with so many others saying to trade him for nothing and that he couldn't play in McHale's system. Look at him now though. He is back in or near the top 10 in scoring, and that avg. keeps rising -- PLUS, not sure if you've noticed, but his defense is better than I have ever seen it before. Is it great? No. Is it good? Not really. But it no longer makes me visibly angry while I am watching the games. McHale's toughness that you mentioned has to get credit for that.