Dalembert, shown not helping Canada

sixers.com

A week has
passed since Samuel Dalembert’s dismissal from Team Canada.  Since the 76ers are relying on him to play a
big part in their upcoming season I figured we should try to figure out if he’s
a head case or not. 

To recap: The
Canadian Coach cut Dalembert essentially for not being a team player.  Dalembert furiously responded, claiming that
he followed the rules he was told and was being treated unfairly. 

Personally I
was surprised to hear that Dalembert was being cast as a miscreant.  I had interviewed him several times at the end of last season while I was putting together my “what happened” Sixers
season recap and while he certainly has an exuberant personality he was also a
guy who routinely credited the teams’ success to their camaraderie and their
dinners together (and “Sammy Defense” a line he would say with a smile and a
laugh). 

He didn’t seem like the troublemaking
type, but if you put him in the right (wrong?) situation it didn’t seem
implausible that he wouldn’t react well. 
There were two basic sides, the Dalambert was a bad teammate and acted
above the team (the Canadian team’s side) and that he was treated unfairly and
made an example out of (Sammy’s side). We’ll look at them both

Michael Tillary at the Starting Five recently caught up with Sammy to discuss to incident.  The interview which shows Dalembert’s side well and while
I’ll distill it’s main points, the entire thing is worth a read.

Here’s Sammy’s side:

• Canadian Coach Leo Rautins was extremely disorganized,
  which led to confusion.  Virtually of all
  SD’s complaints came from this lack of communication.  He claimed that Rautins would do things like
  call practices 30 mins in advance, often when Sammy had scheduled projects, or
  yell at him for missing events that Dalembert had believed were presented as
  optional
• He was disrespected from the get.  He does the Basketball
  Without Borders in the summer and feels Rautins did not treat that as a
  serious commitment. (A charge with Dalembert countered by telling
  Rautins that he was “full of crap”)
• The meals the team accused him of missing were not
  mandatory until he didn’t show up
• Meetings that he was expected to attend the coaching
  staff missed
• His absences were for the benefit of the team (he
  doesn’t eat pork, so he missed pork-centric meals)
• His coach called him out in front of the team instead
  of in private
• The team was poorly run, i.e. they would be told there
  was a team bus, then told that there not be a team bus and they should get
  cabs, then the bus would come.

The Canadian Team’s side

• The Canadian side is a bit simpler.  They say Sammy missed practices, meals and
  team events.  They questioned his desire
  and commitment to the team and thought he was acting like a diva. 
• When Dalembert mentioned a lack of NBA players they
  said that was a slight against Joel Anthony, who had a cup of coffee in the
  league after being called up from the D League. 
  (Anthony has not complained)
• He wasn’t being a team player on the court, taking contested jump shots instead of playing within the offense and generally acting a star.

I think the basic takeaway was the playing for Team Canada wasn’t
the experience Sammy imagined.  He did
become a Canadian citizen in order to play for the team and did give up a
project that meant a lot to him to be able to train.  Since he was also probably their most
talented player, it isn’t crazy to suggest that Dalembert had expected the
rules to be a bit more lenient for him. 

He makes millions of dollars and plays about a hundred games a season
(preseason and playoffs included) for his profession and he saw his commitment
to Team Canada
as something extra.  He was risking his
livelihood and giving his time and he expected that to be treated as
commendable instead of expected.

Also, SD is by means a superstar, but he is a solid NBA starter and as such
is used to fancy hotel rooms, secured transportation and the respect of his
coach (Cheeks is famously a “players coach.”) 
I don’t know if he was justified in wanting the extra
attention/leniency, as it seems that he did, but that desire certainly does
seem understandable.

In the end it looks like it was a bad situation for everyone, but one that
probably isn’t going to be paid forward onto the Sixers.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 29th, 2008 at 2:59 pm and is filed under Dalembert, Sixers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.