Recently, I have been critical of select leaders – new Notre Dame coach Brian Kelly, Sarah Palin, Memphis Grizzlies Coach Lionel Hollins - as the actions of each negatively impacted their followers in some way.
Admittedly I have been remiss in failing to highlight more positive actions of leaders that truly benefit their followers – the actions of those looking out for the welfare of their respective organizations. This seems like an appropriate place to begin 2010.
Geoff Petrie has been the GM of the Sacramento Kings since 1995. When he first took over the floundering franchise, the team was in disarray. The Kings had very few player assets – so Petrie built through both the draft and (arguably) brilliant trades. He drafted lesser-known players such as Pedrag Stojakovic and Jason Williams – both of whom blossomed into stars. And he made a blockbuster and regionally unpopular trade in sending 33 year old guard Mitch Richmond – the Kings best player at the time – to the Washington Wizards for the oft troubled power forward Chris Webber, who was 25 and entering the peak of his career.
In signing Vlade Divac and trading for Mike Bibby, Petrie slowly and steadily assembled the components of a championship caliber team, including the coaching staff. From the 1998-99 season through the 2005-06 season, the Kings, once laughingstocks, were mainstays in the playoffs – consistently competing for the top spot in the Western conference, at a time when most of the top teams in the NBA resided in the West.
In the 05-06 season, the Kings' core had aged and they once again had to start over – this time primarily through the draft. Over the past four years, Petrie has drafted Kevin Martin, Francisco Garcia, Jason Thompson and two of the top rookies in this year’s draft class in Tyreke Evans and Omri Casspi. The Kings are widely regarded as a team on the rise, even though there have been occasions this year when their entire starting lineup has been under 23 years of age.
That’s why the news that hit the wires was somewhat surprising. Although Petrie is slated to make roughly $4 million this season, he just finished negotiating his own three-year extension for $1.2, $1.4, and $1.5 million, respectively. Essentially, Petrie negotiated an average pay cut of 66% over the next three years. Why? Here’s part of his reasoning:
Given the economy, what's happened in the job market everywhere … I happen to believe in shared sacrifices.
Taking such a dramatic pay cut is unusual. Negotiating the pay cut yourself, despite reported feelers from major market clubs offering the opportunity to make more money elsewhere, is extraordinary. Contrast these actions with some of the prominent headlines in 2009: the absurd bonuses paid to Wall Street executives after taxpayers had bailed them out of an impending financial crisis; coaches such as Brian Kelly abandoning his team prior to its bowl game for the promise of more prestige and more money at Notre Dame.
It’s too bad that Petrie’s sacrifice was nothing but a brief footnote on the news wire. These types of actions may not be reaching the larger public, but I guarantee that they’re making news within the Kings’ organization. When it comes time for these younger players to renegotiate their contracts, they’ll remember the monetary sacrifice that Petrie has made in order to finish the job that he started. And that will influence their negotiations. And that will have a positive impact on the entire organization.
Thank you for bringing these positive leadership examples to the fore. It does seem more and more rare to find examples where non-financial rewards are weighed at least as equally as the financial rewards.
ReplyDeleteAs I read this I began to think of bad leaders such as Lane Kiffin who has just been named Head coach of USC and left Tennessee after just one year. Not only did he begin a stir in the South Eastern Conference by calling out coaches and using secondary violations to recruit players. I also question the leadership of Kentucky basketball coach John Calipari. In his two previous head coaching jobs he has led two different teams to the final four but later revoked due to ineligible players. I look at people such as Bob Knight whom was fired from Indiana for violating the zero tolerance policy but still was able to go to Texas Tech and was considered on many team's radars again once he retired midseason last year. Even though people believe that these people may not be good leaders in one way or another they always seem to be offered an even bettter opportunity. The question may not be the coaches being bad leaders but the people above them allowing it to be ok because they win. My last thought was about a kid whom everyone thought was all about money. Brandon Jennings who went to Italy instead of college to use up his year after high school which is a new rule implimented by the NBA. Instead of just making money it has been found that it actually developed Jennings as a person and had taught him many leadership skills which will help him later on in his NBA career.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, Pat. It does seem that coaches are sometimes rewarded without merit. It's like the same coaches are rotated amongst the open slots. Likewise, athletes sometimes seem to be criticized without merit.
ReplyDeleteI think it is very noble that Petrie cut his own pay. I think as a leader, you need to be willing to make sacrifices for your followers, in this case, followers being athletes. It is too bad that acts such as these go unnoticed, and the acts such as the ones of Brian Kelly are recognized. Sacrifice is something that a leadership should be able to deal with and know when to make sacrifices and what sacrifices to make. These sacrifices need to be able to benefit the followers as well as be worthwhile and have an impact.
ReplyDeleteYep - I agree. The sacrifice needs to send a message about your values or beliefs - and Petrie's pay cut may have suggested that he believed in the Kings as an organization, and was willing to accept less money in order to build something.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this entry the first thing that came to mind was when Randy Moss took a huge pay cut in joining the Patriots. His contract with Oakland called for him to earn $9.75 million in 2007 and $11.25 next season. In its place, he signed a one-year deal for $3 million, which also included $2 million in incentives. Now I know both scenarios are different, however, they both emphasize sacrifice. Petrie’s along with Randy’s actions show their faith towards their organization. These sacrifice for the better of the team show great leadership.
ReplyDeleteThe Randy Moss situation is a bit different. While it may have looked like he took a big pay cut, Moss' contract probably would not have been renewed. That's not to say that he couldn't have made more money elsewhere, though, so you're right to assert that it is a sacrifice. But I wonder if Moss is a leader on the Patriots, or he is following the lead of those who have gone before him in that organization.
ReplyDeleteI think that an interesting point to look at is the fact that no one hears about these positive stories of pay cuts and such. I know for my blog entry i wrote about the fact that student athletes go for the glory and not the right things to do as a student athlete. We always hear on ESPN about the suspensions for poor grades or breaking of team rules. Not once was there a mention of the academic All-American team or the other positive academic awards. But everyone is talking about the draft and personal glory. This story of scrafice is refreshing and i can admit i did not know of this until i read this.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Moss and Petrie situations are quite a bit different. I also do believe Randy is a leader on the Patriots and to his fellow wide-outs in practice. However, I would have to say he is following the lead of those who have gone before him in that organization. The best name that comes to mind is long-time patriots vet Troy Brown who also played at Marshall.
ReplyDelete