on the surface but in reality they think the exact same way. A coaches thought process is "what is best for the team" which really means "what is best for me" whereas a player thinks "what is best for me" and that that would be "best for the team".

In a coaches perfect world a kid would be willing to come in and spend his first couple of years on the bench, unless he is just a star who is simply to good not to have on the floor right from the start, and develop, wait, provide the team with depth, never question any decision by the coach, and then hope to play as an upper classmen and then if he doesn't ever play much be a "good teammate" and cheer the team on all while putting in just as much work and time as the guys that get to play. And of course I get that, that is what works best for the coach.

A kid on the other hand wants to know if he is ever going to get a chance to play. The players the coach is favoring are pretty obvious to everyone right off the bat so it doesn't take all that long for a kid to figure out if he is ever going to get to be a player, especially for more than maybe just his sr year. And of course these kids have turned down other schools to go to the one they did because the coaches were telling them they are a player. And so once they realize that they're probably never going to be a big contributor and get a large amount of playing time they understandably want to go somewhere else where they have a better chance.

I don't blame either the coach or the player for wanting what they want and trying to have things be the way they want them to be, because ultimately whether you are a player or a coach you are doing what you are doing for you, not because you're altruistic or any other such stuff. Dave rose wants what he thinks is best for him, a player wants what they think is best for him.