I do think there's a reality here, and to what degree it applies with Hardy I know not, where the "expert" is offended by the lay consensus on something and they go out of their way to try to prove lay perspectives wrong and will double and triple down going against things that appear obvious. Jerry, for instance, always felt more comfortable playing second round guys. There's a lot you can argue that the second round guys may have been upper classmen or knew they had to work to compensate for hype, but there was an idea that Jerry didn't play young guys, which was false. Deron was clearly better than the two dunces playing in front of him. Paul Millsap didn't struggle getting pretty good minutes (for his draft position) when he had Memo and Boozer (and Collins and Harpring and Kirilenko) in front of him in the front court. I believe that was an accelerant in Quin's mind of his distaste for Butler. So, even though we chide Cy for that ridiculous-*** take, I do believe this becomes a perception of "questioning authority" where one may respond with, "well, why in the **** not?" to counter what they perceive as being a "given" from lay people.
Tl;dr there's a conceivable scenario where we get Hendricks in the G League and see Sensabaugh minutes and get rationalizations about practice or "he's tearing up the G League and fine where he is" or any one of a thousand different iterations of "hey, it's really rational that the guy you drafted 20 spots higher isn't playing... it's all part of the plan."