Is Kidd really the best head coach for this team?

[DallasMaverick]

To clarify, what I'm trying to describe (with moderate success, at best) is deeper than that. 

When I'm running my teams, I set it up in such a way where the students know that if they can live up to my standards, the competitive results will come as a matter of inevitability. This mindset can be implemented/executed in a variety of ways - with vinegar, honey, sarcasm, genuine love, begging, whatever - and though the course of an average season, I'll lean on all of those techniques at some point, with someone on the team. BUT, their mission in life is to live up to MY expectations. 

The problem I run into sometimes is that there's a level we sometimes can't reach because the students aren't able to fully grasp the opportunities their hard work has afforded them. They don't have the requisite confidence and hunger to achieve to their fullest potential when the time comes. This approach absolutely, 100% raises the floor of what they can accomplish, and usually results in an impressively high achievement level for the team, relative to most others. But, there's often another, higher level that we leave on the bone because the students don't quiiiiiite take the ownership needed to get to the top. 

The MOST successful years are when the students are all on the older, more experienced side, because their past experience helps them wrap their heads around all that's at stake, including the rarity and preciousness of each season's opportunities. This is why I've always understood why most NBA coaches prefer older players. They just "get it" more. Not necessarily how to set a screen or run a curl cut (though they're better at that stuff, too) but more understanding the moment and it's context within the bigger picture of the season's goals. 

Kidd's style is to make the players' goals the team's goals, which is intriguing to me. It has nothing to do with his delivery.

I've seen that phenomenon, as well.

My observation about leadership styles is that autocrats can often achieve some incredible results simply by force of will, punishment of non-performance, and perhaps some candy and rewards for achievement.  But this will often either drive off or alienate the real leaders on the team, who would otherwise take ownership and responsibility for the results.  Even in victory, there's often great discontent. 

A humble leader who works for a more collaborative decision-making process tends to attract people who want to own responsibility and credit for the final result.  A real bond forms. Players and coaches tend to have each others' backs, and trust each others' judgments more.  Greater stability, greater contentment.