MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 04:12:18 PM

Title: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 04:12:18 PM
Of the 74 schools that belong to the NCAA Division I power conferences -- the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, Pac 12 and SEC -- 57 men's basketball head coaches have been at the same school for the past 3 years.

The attached tables organize these 57 coaches by wins over that period (2016-19) into 5 quintiles: 3 groups of 11 coaches, and another 2 groups of 12 each. The tables also include information on NCAA tournament results and Division I head coaching experience. Big East coaches in bold.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 04:30:29 PM
A few observations:

• There isn't a single coach in the 1st quintile with less than 13 years of experience as a Division I head coach.

• By this measure, Wojo is the 3rd best coach in the Big East — but in a virtually indistinguishable pack with Greg McDermott, Kevin Willard and even Ed Cooley.

• This is why anybody who says Wojo is in over his head has absolutely zero credibility. He's doing just fine; his performance over the past 3 seasons is on par with a number of more established and experienced coaches: McDermott, Willard, Cooley, Ben Howland, Mike Brey, Larry Krystokowiak, et cetera. Is Jim Boeheim in over his head?

• At the same time, 6 of the coaches here -- Mike Anderson, Steve Alford, Avery Johnson, Billy Kennedy, Chris Mullin and Bryce Drew -- were fired this year. Several of them (such as Alford and Johnson) rank not too far below Wojo. This season will be a critical one.

• I hope Shaka Smart has his resume up to date. His record at Texas has been thoroughly unimpressive. Same goes for Josh Pastner.

• If you didn't notice, Dave Leitao has the worst record of any P6 coach in Division I over the past 3 seasons. Yet he still has a job somehow. DePaul is simply pathetic. There are no words.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 04:31:40 PM
And here's a list of all the P6 coaches with 10 years of experience or less:
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 04:33:41 PM
This one pretty much speaks for itself. When you compare Wojo's record over the past 3 seasons to P6 coaches with a similar level of Division I head coaching experience, his resume looks much stronger. (The "5th quintile" label on this chart is a typo.)
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 04:43:37 PM
Apologies for all the posts, but I wanted to mention a couple caveats.

First, a handful of coaches like Chris Mack (Louisville) aren't included because they haven't been at their current school for the past 3 seasons. Mack, by the way, would slot into the 2nd quintile behind Rick Barnes.

Second, limiting the list to the Power 6 conferences obviously leaves out a number of great coaches: Mark Few, Eric Musselman, Kelvin Sampson, Randy Bennett, Gregg Marshall, Kermit Davis, Nate Oats, etc. I have no question that Mark Few would be successful at a P6 school. But the WCC is such a dramatic drop in quality from the P6 that it makes comparisons more difficult.

With all that in mind, it seems fair to say Wojo has performed like one of the top 25 or 30 coaches in the country over the past 3 seasons. Have we seen the best he has to offer? Or can he improve? The coming season may be his biggest test yet.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: SaveOD238 on June 11, 2019, 05:09:56 PM
And here's a list of all the P6 coaches with 10 years of experience or less:

Wojo is 4th on this list, but in a virtual tie with Enfield and Gard.  The only young coach proven to be significantly better is Chris Beard.  Looks like we have a good thing going
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 05:19:40 PM
Another typo -- I left Mike White off the list of coaches with 10 years of Division I experience or less. He would slot in between Beard and Enfield. Sloppy work, my apologies.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: asdfasdf on June 11, 2019, 05:29:15 PM
Thanks for posting these. I have some similar data that might help show this data graphically. Hard to argue that Wojo has done poorly in his time here.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 11, 2019, 05:40:45 PM
Wojo is 4th on this list, but in a virtual tie with Enfield and Gard.  The only young coach proven to be significantly better is Chris Beard.  Looks like we have a good thing going

We certainly do if our goal is to develop young coaches.  I don’t agree that is what we are trying to do as a program.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 06:03:10 PM
We certainly do if our goal is to develop young coaches.  I don’t agree that is what we are trying to do as a program.

I'd pose that just a bit differently. My read is that Marquette hired Wojo for two main reasons:

a) He showed the potential to develop into a great coach
b) He's a strong fit with the university

The goal isn't to develop young coaches. It's for the program to succeed long term -- which is only possible if both a) and b) hold true.

Buzz ultimately didn't mesh with this strategy. No matter what Buzz stated publicly -- "I'll stay as long as they'll have me," "Don't mess with happy," et cetera -- it seems clear he wasn't a good fit with the university and had no interest in staying long term. He's now left New Orleans, Marquette and Virginia Tech.

Now, if Wojo either plateaus/regresses (hiring young, unproven coaches is always a risk) or leaves for a higher profile job after achieving success at MU in a year or two, the strategy is worth questioning.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 11, 2019, 06:07:43 PM
I'd pose that just a bit differently. My read is that Marquette hired Wojo for two main reasons:

a) He showed the potential to develop into a great coach
b) He's a strong fit with the university

The goal isn't to develop young coaches. It's for the program to succeed long term -- which is only possible if both a) and b) hold true.

Buzz ultimately didn't mesh with this strategy. No matter what Buzz stated publicly -- "I'll stay as long as they'll have me," "Don't mess with happy," et cetera -- it seems clear he wasn't a good fit with the university and had no interest in staying long term. He's now left New Orleans, Marquette and Virginia Tech.

Now, if Wojo either plateaus/regresses (hiring young, unproven coaches is always a risk) or leaves for a higher profile job after achieving success at MU in a year or two, the strategy is worth questioning.

Neither a or b is about winning basketball games.  So maybe that’s the side stuff but I don’t think that was the objective of the program.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 06:15:29 PM
Neither a or b is about winning basketball games.  So maybe that’s the side stuff but I don’t think that was the objective of the program.

Big picture, Marquette athletic director Bill School has talked repeatedly about the goals of the program: success on the court, in the classroom and in the community. Having good coaches who are a good fit with the university is part of that. I can't say whether MU favors young coaches. But recent history (O'Neill, Crean, Williams, Wojo) seems to back it up.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 11, 2019, 06:29:31 PM
We certainly do if our goal is to develop young coaches.  I don’t agree that is what we are trying to do as a program.

The goal is to hire the coach that's going to elevate your program. This list certainly isn't the end all be all but by my count, there are only 5 coaches that Marquette could have possibly hired after Buzz that are above Wojo on this list:

#13 Chris Beard (and let's be honest, no one was hiring a D2 coach for a Marquette level job)
#18 Mike White (probably the most legit candidate on this list)
#20 Mike Anderson (not sure we could have hired him away from Arkansas at that point)
#22 Greg McDermott (not sure he would have left for an in-conference rival)
#25 Greg Gard (no way we hire a Wisconsin assistant)

I think it's fair to cross off Beard and Gard as no one would have hired them at that point for Marquette. So at worst, we made the 4th best hire and probably made the 2nd best hire we could of....again, based on this list which is not the end all be all.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 11, 2019, 06:36:03 PM
Big picture, Marquette athletic director Bill School has talked repeatedly about the goals of the program: success on the court, in the classroom and in the community. Having good coaches who are a good fit with the university is part of that. I can't say whether MU favors young coaches. But recent history (O'Neill, Crean, Williams, Wojo) seems to back it up.

Bill Scholl did say this at the contract extension.

Here are some Bill Cords quotes upon hire:
Interim Marquette athletic director Bill Cords said Wojciechowski was the only finalist who wasn't already a head coach but said he came highly recommended by Krzyzewski and Jerry Colangelo, the former owner of the Phoenix Suns and director of USA Basketball. Wojciechowski assisted Krzyzewski with the U.S. national team from 2006 to 2012.

"We were looking for someone who could take us to our vision of getting us to the top," interim athletics director Bill Cords said. "Steve has been to the top."
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Class71 on June 11, 2019, 07:01:33 PM
A few observations:

• There isn't a single coach in the 1st quintile with less than 13 years of experience as a Division I head coach.

• By this measure, Wojo is the 3rd best coach in the Big East — but in a virtually indistinguishable pack with Greg McDermott, Kevin Willard and even Ed Cooley.

• This is why anybody who says Wojo is in over his head has absolutely zero credibility. He's doing just fine; his performance over the past 3 seasons is on par with a number of more established and experienced coaches: McDermott, Willard, Cooley, Ben Howland, Mike Brey, Larry Krystokowiak, et cetera. Is Jim Boeheim in over his head?

• At the same time, 6 of the coaches here -- Mike Anderson, Steve Alford, Avery Johnson, Billy Kennedy, Chris Mullin and Bryce Drew -- were fired this year. Several of them (such as Alford and Johnson) rank not too far below Wojo. This season will be a critical one.

• I hope Shaka Smart has his resume up to date. His record at Texas has been thoroughly unimpressive. Same goes for Josh Pastner.

• If you didn't notice, Dave Leitao has the worst record of any P6 coach in Division I over the past 3 seasons. Yet he still has a job somehow. DePaul is simply pathetic. There are no words.

Wow, we are so, so lucky to have Wojo.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 11, 2019, 07:29:45 PM
Nice that all the stats look good and support my notion that Wojo stock is rising on the coaching carousel . Hopefully we have another solid year and then he gets hired away for a good money long term contract by a power 5 football school.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 11, 2019, 07:39:03 PM
Wow, we are so, so lucky to have Wojo.

The point was simply to provide an objective view of Wojo's on-court results so far relative to his peers. You can look at it a couple ways.

Some see a half-empty glass -- i.e. Wojo is an average coach who's produced average results so far and hasn't lived up to expectations at Marquette. That's fair. The third quintile is right in the middle, the very definition of average among P6 coaches. Certainly not great.

Others see a half-full glass -- i.e. Wojo has won more than most other young coaches competing today at the highest level of college basketball. And hopefully that points the way to even greater success in the future.

Can Wojo move up the list? That's my expectation as a fan. Just making the tournament isn't enough. I want MU in the running for Big East championships year after year, earning top seeds and winning games when it counts most: in the NCAA tournament. The standard should be Jay Wright, not Ed Cooley or Kevin Willard.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MUMonster03 on June 12, 2019, 01:59:56 AM
The point was simply to provide an objective view of Wojo's on-court results so far relative to his peers. You can look at it a couple ways.

Some see a half-empty glass -- i.e. Wojo is an average coach who's produced average results so far and hasn't lived up to expectations at Marquette. That's fair. The third quintile is right in the middle, the very definition of average among P6 coaches. Certainly not great.

Others see a half-full glass -- i.e. Wojo has won more than most other young coaches competing today at the highest level of college basketball. And hopefully that points the way to even greater success in the future.

Can Wojo move up the list? That's my expectation as a fan. Just making the tournament isn't enough. I want MU in the running for Big East championships year after year, earning top seeds and winning games when it counts most: in the NCAA tournament. The standard should be Jay Wright, not Ed Cooley or Kevin Willard.

I think everyone here wants a coach that turns into Jay Wright. But here's why my confusion comes with people wanting it to be so quick and wanting Wojo to leave:

Even though Wright came in with 7 years experience, it still took him until year 4 at Nova to get to the NCAA's. He had decent success after that but after the final four he had a run that by the recent Wojo hat on scoop would have everyone calling for his head.  His next 6 seasons after the final four included zero second weekends, 2 first round exits, and one missed NCAA.

So if Wright can still have a stretch of 6 years of not great NCAA results with 15 years of head coaching experience a guy with 5 shouldn't be hammered so hard. Would it be nice to have a win or two in the tournament in the last 5 years, yes, but would two second round exits have really calmed anyone down here?

Wright did not win a championship until year 15 at Nova and 22 overall. And the year they won in 2016 was there first second weekend since 2009.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MarquetteDano on June 12, 2019, 09:44:54 AM
Thanks for the rundown.  My only complaint is the rankings.  Something needs to be included for tourney success.  Frank Martin, with that Final Four run needs to be higher as does Billy Kennedy and his S16.

But the analysis does point out how hard it is to expect a young coach, with little experience, to compete with the big boys.  It is extremely rare.  If you are going to hire a young coach, and there is some success,  you have to stick with them for awhile otherwise it is a waste.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 12, 2019, 09:56:37 AM
Thanks for the rundown.  My only complaint is the rankings.  Something needs to be included for tourney success.  Frank Martin, with that Final Four run needs to be higher as does Billy Kennedy and his S16.

But the analysis does point out how hard it is to expect a young coach, with little experience, to compete with the big boys.  It is extremely rare.  If you are going to hire a young coach, and there is some success,  you have to stick with them for awhile otherwise it is a waste.

And they need to want to stick with you as well.  And you need to be prepared to defend them from others when they hit their stride.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 12, 2019, 10:27:27 AM
This nicely explains why I suggested a few months back that 5 years wasn't enough to get an idea, but it would take 10-15 before you really know the kind of coach you have. Long term success doesn't come without a long term commitment.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 12, 2019, 10:45:02 AM
Thanks for the rundown.  My only complaint is the rankings.  Something needs to be included for tourney success.  Frank Martin, with that Final Four run needs to be higher as does Billy Kennedy and his S16.

That's why I used the quintiles. It's not so much about an individual coach's ranking, or who's ranked #32 versus #36. It's meant as a way to look at coaching records and expectations more broadly.

There are, of course, more complicated rankings that assign different values for postseason accomplishments and such. Total wins are only the most basic measure.

(BTW, I'd argue Frank Martin is right about where he belongs. His Final Four looks more and more like an outlier to me -- it was his one and only NCAA bid in 7 seasons with South Carolina, followed by 17-16 and 16-16 seasons where he missed the postseason altogether. But that's for another thread.)
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 12, 2019, 10:48:10 AM
This nicely explains why I suggested a few months back that 5 years wasn't enough to get an idea, but it would take 10-15 before you really know the kind of coach you have. Long term success doesn't come without a long term commitment.

This makes sense for success of a program, but not for the success of a coach in my opinion.

Fr. Wild's bet in the late 90's paid off quicker than this.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 12, 2019, 11:07:40 AM
Thanks for the rundown.  My only complaint is the rankings.  Something needs to be included for tourney success.  Frank Martin, with that Final Four run needs to be higher as does Billy Kennedy and his S16.

But the analysis does point out how hard it is to expect a young coach, with little experience, to compete with the big boys.  It is extremely rare.  If you are going to hire a young coach, and there is some success,  you have to stick with them for awhile otherwise it is a waste.

I think this problem is very easy to solve...stop hiring young, unproven Coaches, right??
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 12, 2019, 11:08:01 AM
This makes sense for success of a program, but not for the success of a coach in my opinion.

Fr. Wild's bet in the late 90's paid off quicker than this.

The success of a coach IS the success of a program. If you change coaches every 5-10 years, you will most likely never reach the promised land. If you want to win year in and year out, it takes a coach installing a system and sticking with it for years. Long enough that the seniors teach the freshmen, that the culture is well established, and that the winning that attracts recruits isn't one flash-in-the-pan Final Four from the year before, but conference titles and tourney runs that come over a generation.

If you mean that some coaches show they CAN'T do it before then, I agree. But showing you can raise a program to an elite level rarely happens in less than a decade.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MarquetteDano on June 12, 2019, 11:09:03 AM
I think this problem is very easy to solve...stop hiring young, unproven Coaches, right??

Perhaps.  I am not arguing Wojo will work out or not.  The point is if you are going to hire a young coach it unfortunately takes some time to determine if they will be really good.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: wadesworld on June 12, 2019, 11:20:21 AM
I think this problem is very easy to solve...stop hiring young, unproven Coaches, right??

What old, proven coach would leave their situation and come to Marquette?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: mug644 on June 12, 2019, 11:27:31 AM
What old, proven coach would leave their situation and come to Marquette?

Ben Howland wanted MU, right? (Though he was unemployed at that point, I believe.)
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Uncle Rico on June 12, 2019, 11:41:52 AM
What old, proven coach would leave their situation and come to Marquette?


Tony Bennett, Chris Beard or Jay Wright
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 12, 2019, 11:46:50 AM
I think this problem is very easy to solve...stop hiring young, unproven Coaches, right??

All of the greatest coaches today were at one point young, unproven coaches.

When Villanova hired Jay Wright, he hadn't won an NCAA tournament game in his first 7 seasons as a Division I head coach at Hofstra. How did the AD ever get suckered into this young, unproven coach?

When Duke hired Mike Krzyzewski, he hadn't even made a single NCAA tournament in 5 seasons at Army. No way you hire this loser, right?

Jim Boeheim, Tom Izzo and Roy Williams hadn't served as head coach at any level before they were hired at Syracuse, Michigan State and Kansas, respectively. Pass on all three of these pretenders, surely?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 12, 2019, 12:04:37 PM
If you mean that some coaches show they CAN'T do it before then, I agree. But showing you can raise a program to an elite level rarely happens in less than a decade.

I dont agree the coach is the program in all cases...now winning championships or reaching iconic levels for a period of time, absolutely.  There are some though that have had great programs with a revolving door.

I would agree you 100% with the piece I quoted....that's why I'm more interested in the short-term signals that make you keep the bet on the table than some-sort of dream that Wojo be another Al in 15 years.

Personally I think Marquette is not good enough to place a decade bet on a coach.  Too much can happen for them and us.  They need to think in 3-5 year increments...since the past 5 haven't been great (versus the prior decade) the window needs to continually shorten.  I think most would agree the program won't have the same level of funding in 5 years if those years replicate the past 5.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Jay Bee on June 12, 2019, 12:27:30 PM
#10to15YearsToJudge
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 12, 2019, 12:42:08 PM
The success of a coach IS the success of a program. If you change coaches every 5-10 years, you will most likely never reach the promised land. If you want to win year in and year out, it takes a coach installing a system and sticking with it for years. Long enough that the seniors teach the freshmen, that the culture is well established, and that the winning that attracts recruits isn't one flash-in-the-pan Final Four from the year before, but conference titles and tourney runs that come over a generation.

If you mean that some coaches show they CAN'T do it before then, I agree. But showing you can raise a program to an elite level rarely happens in less than a decade.
Yes it is rare, however, in Year 5 of Tom Izzo, MSU won a national championship.  Izzo elavated the program significantly. Primarily through working much harder on recruiting, more depth in particular ,  and also as you point out putting in the right culture. The culture is what has sustained their  program for a long period of time. 

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 12, 2019, 12:45:46 PM
On this board, it was 5 years to judge a coach.  When the results didn’t come after Year 5, the goalposts moved and it became 10 to 15 years to judge, because you see it really is very hard to build any kind of culture or system in such a short half decade timeframe.  Got it.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: tower912 on June 12, 2019, 01:00:11 PM
You want a different coach.   Got it.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 12, 2019, 01:54:25 PM
On this board, it was 5 years to judge a coach.  When the results didn’t come after Year 5, the goalposts moved and it became 10 to 15 years to judge, because you see it really is very hard to build any kind of culture or system in such a short half decade timeframe.  Got it.

I can't speak for Brew but no goalposts have shifted for me. It is still 5 years to judge a coach. At the end of 5 years a coach has been through a whole recruiting cycle so they have had to win with their own players. This helps avoid things like Kevin Ollie. At the end of 5 years you should have a pretty good idea of whether or not your coach has the program trending up, down, or sideways. If it's up, you extend, if it's down you fire, if it's sideways you most likely fire but I could see a circumstance when you don't. In Wojo's case, he is clearly trending up so you extend.

The 10-15+ years is how long you will likely have to wait if you want elite results. Just a reality that building an elite program takes time. As long as you keep trending up towards being elite the best course of action is sticking with your coach. That's how all the top programs got to where they are today. Churning through coaches every 5 years because they haven't gotten elite results right away rarely (if ever?) works.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 12, 2019, 02:00:47 PM
Yes it is rare, however, in Year 5 of Tom Izzo, MSU won a national championship.  Izzo elavated the program significantly.

People always try to use Izzo or Beard as examples of the type of coach we should hire. Those guys are ridiculously rare. Sure, you can roll the dice every five years, and maybe you'll be the less than 1% of programs that in that time finds a guy who wins a title in his first 5 years as a head coach. Maybe it'll be Izzo. Maybe it'll be Ollie.

Two head coaches in the past 25 years have done it. You can play the odds, which aren't good, or you can try the Duke, Villanova, UConn (Calhoun), Syracuse, Maryland (Gary Williams), Arizona (Olson), Florida, Virginia route where you trust a coach for years and they eventually get you there.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: WhiteTrash on June 12, 2019, 02:04:50 PM
On this board, it was 5 years to judge a coach.  When the results didn’t come after Year 5, the goalposts moved and it became 10 to 15 years to judge, because you see it really is very hard to build any kind of culture or system in such a short half decade timeframe.  Got it.
Just think of how many NC's MU would have if the "Instant Results" fools running MU at the time just would have been patient with Deane? One can only dream; what a wasted opportunity that was.
I vote for tenure for all MU head coaches!
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 12, 2019, 02:10:56 PM
On this board, it was 5 years to judge a coach.  When the results didn’t come after Year 5, the goalposts moved and it became 10 to 15 years to judge, because you see it really is very hard to build any kind of culture or system in such a short half decade timeframe.  Got it.

Chicos said 5 years. I spent some time crunching numbers after this season and determined that number, which was someone else's, was inadequate. 10-15 is far more reasonable if your aspiration is, like mine, to win a national championship.

As far as I'm concerned, any aspiration less than that is inadequate. While Sweet 16s and Elite 8s are fun, they really don't mean anything in the long run. Maybe an indicator you're on the right path, but no one outside your program will give a rat's ass about your second weekend run six years ago.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 12, 2019, 02:15:31 PM
All of the greatest coaches today were at one point young, unproven coaches.

When Villanova hired Jay Wright, he hadn't won an NCAA tournament game in his first 7 seasons as a Division I head coach at Hofstra. How did the AD ever get suckered into this young, unproven coach?

When Duke hired Mike Krzyzewski, he hadn't even made a single NCAA tournament in 5 seasons at Army. No way you hire this loser, right?

Jim Boeheim, Tom Izzo and Roy Williams hadn't served as head coach at any level before they were hired at Syracuse, Michigan State and Kansas, respectively. Pass on all three of these pretenders, surely?

+1

I would rather hire a young unproven head coach who has upside and an unknown ceiling than an older "proven" coach whose ceiling is already known (and isn't at an elite level). Take Mike Anderson for example (I think he's an example of a "proven" high major coach that we could possibly lure away). He's been a D1 coach for 17 years now. In that time, his peaks have been a 3 seed at Mizzou (followed by a 10 seed the next year) and 5 seed at Arkansas (followed by no postseason the next year). He's been very solid all those 17 years, but I see no reason to believe that in his 18+ years that he is suddenly going to reach a new level that he never has before. St. John's IMHO made a high floor low ceiling type hire. I'd rather take a bet on a young coach with upside who may turn into the next Wright, Bennett, Beilein,  or Williams if given enough time.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 12, 2019, 02:20:41 PM
Just think of how many NC's MU would have if the "Instant Results" fools running MU at the time just would have been patient with Deane? One can only dream; what a wasted opportunity that was.
I vote for tenure for all MU head coaches!

Mike Deane was clearly trending down at the end of 5 years. 21-12, 23-8, 22-9, 20-11, 14-15....with a bad recruiting class coming in for year 6. It was clear once he didn't have KO's players to rely on that he couldn't be successful. That plus his off the court antics made the decision easier.

Patience doesn't mean a blank check. If the program is trending down or stagnating you cut your losses and look for your next coach.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 12, 2019, 02:23:28 PM
All of the greatest coaches today were at one point young, unproven coaches.

When Villanova hired Jay Wright, he hadn't won an NCAA tournament game in his first 7 seasons as a Division I head coach at Hofstra. How did the AD ever get suckered into this young, unproven coach?

When Duke hired Mike Krzyzewski, he hadn't even made a single NCAA tournament in 5 seasons at Army. No way you hire this loser, right?

Jim Boeheim, Tom Izzo and Roy Williams hadn't served as head coach at any level before they were hired at Syracuse, Michigan State and Kansas, respectively. Pass on all three of these pretenders, surely?

My preference is to have a coach that has had prior Head Coaching experience...The above named Coaches were never Head coaches and obviously look at them now..but it's just a personal preference of mine, and I also believe(no guarantee of course), that a guy that was a previous Head coach can accelerate the timeline a bit as opposed to someone that wasn't. Yes, their are exceptions.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 12, 2019, 02:38:06 PM
I can't speak for Brew but no goalposts have shifted for me. It is still 5 years to judge a coach. At the end of 5 years a coach has been through a whole recruiting cycle so they have had to win with their own players. This helps avoid things like Kevin Ollie. At the end of 5 years you should have a pretty good idea of whether or not your coach has the program trending up, down, or sideways. If it's up, you extend, if it's down you fire, if it's sideways you most likely fire but I could see a circumstance when you don't. In Wojo's case, he is clearly trending up so you extend.

The 10-15+ years is how long you will likely have to wait if you want elite results. Just a reality that building an elite program takes time. As long as you keep trending up towards being elite the best course of action is sticking with your coach. That's how all the top programs got to where they are today. Churning through coaches every 5 years because they haven't gotten elite results right away rarely (if ever?) works.

Again, for me...like with an athlete retiring, I see Coaches the same way..if you are going to get rid of them, it's better a year too early, then a year too late.

I hope it doesn't happen, but I'm going to be VERY curious to see what happens with pro Wojo supporters on this board, if this season isn't as good as last year was. That would be trending down like so many of you like to talk about. I'd bet anything he'd get a pass from a vast majority saying "it was a blip", he'll be fine, etc. He stays, And then what happens if the year after that is even worse?? Hence my point, better a year too soon then a year too late. Those two consecutive years of a downward trend, would in my opinion, be more detrimental to the program, then switching Coaches after next season IF it's worse than the previous year. I hope it doesn't happen.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 12, 2019, 02:41:57 PM
+1

I would rather hire a young unproven head coach who has upside and an unknown ceiling than an older "proven" coach whose ceiling is already known (and isn't at an elite level). Take Mike Anderson for example (I think he's an example of a "proven" high major coach that we could possibly lure away). He's been a D1 coach for 17 years now. In that time, his peaks have been a 3 seed at Mizzou (followed by a 10 seed the next year) and 5 seed at Arkansas (followed by no postseason the next year). He's been very solid all those 17 years, but I see no reason to believe that in his 18+ years that he is suddenly going to reach a new level that he never has before. St. John's IMHO made a high floor low ceiling type hire. I'd rather take a bet on a young coach with upside who may turn into the next Wright, Bennett, Beilein,  or Williams if given enough time.
I think for the Johnnies they made the right choice. They need stability in that program right now.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Warrior Code on June 12, 2019, 02:42:04 PM
On this board, it was 5 years to judge a coach.  When the results didn’t come after Year 5, the goalposts moved and it became 10 to 15 years to judge, because you see it really is very hard to build any kind of culture or system in such a short half decade timeframe.  Got it.

A lot of people this board seem to have interpreted 5 years to judge a coach as "the coach will be one of the best in the country in 5 years/we will be elite or near-elite in 5 years." That's crazy rare, as others have pointed out.

I think it's much more accurate to judge the program compared to where it was five years ago - is it improving, stagnant, or worse off? While I would love for us to be closer to the national title conversation right now, I do see Marquette as on its way toward the top. Can Wojo get us there? I don't know. But it seems to me that we are making progress toward that goal.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: WhiteTrash on June 12, 2019, 02:45:38 PM
Mike Deane was clearly trending down at the end of 5 years. 21-12, 23-8, 22-9, 20-11, 14-15....with a bad recruiting class coming in for year 6. It was clear once he didn't have KO's players to rely on that he couldn't be successful. That plus his off the court antics made the decision easier.

Patience doesn't mean a blank check. If the program is trending down or stagnating you cut your losses and look for your next coach.
Look, I agree with you. I think most of us do. As in most debates the fools at both extremes of each side hijack the debate (i.e. US politics). Those advocating firing Wojo after a couple of years or even now are one side and those advocating 10-15 years for Wojo to build a program are the other. I presume 90% of MU fans are in the middle. It appears MU is in the middle also as evidenced by their decision to extend him only a couple of years and only after a mostly successful season this past year. There is equal reason to be hopeful and doubtful of Wojo. 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: WhiteTrash on June 12, 2019, 02:59:23 PM
I think it's much more accurate to judge the program compared to where it was five years ago - is it improving, stagnant, or worse off?
Straw man argument.
If MU was a .500 team the last three years it would be an improvement over 5 years ago, correct? Would anyone be happy with that?
Most adequate coaches could have improved MU from 5 years ago. MU's history, facilities and financial commitment give the MU head coach an advantage over most programs in the nation.
IMO, Wojo is decent and possibly getting better, but a very strong argument could be made that last year may be Wojo's high water mark at MU. It does not appear MU is content with that because they did not throw a bunch of money or a long term extension at him. MU's administration, like most MU fans, seems to being taking a 'wait and see' approach with Wojo.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Warrior Code on June 12, 2019, 03:08:14 PM
Straw man argument.
If MU was a .500 team the last three years it would be an improvement over 5 years ago, correct? Would anyone be happy with that?
Most adequate coaches could have improved MU from 5 years ago. MU's history, facilities and financial commitment give the MU head coach an advantage over most programs in the nation.
IMO, Wojo is decent and possibly getting better, but a very strong argument could be made that last year may be Wojo's high water mark at MU. It does not appear MU is content with that because they did not throw a bunch of money or a long term extension at him. MU's administration, like most MU fans, seems to being taking a 'wait and see' approach with Wojo.

How in the world are you going to call my post a straw man in one sentence and the follow it with the bolded in the very next sentence? Lol

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 12, 2019, 03:21:03 PM
Again, for me...like with an athlete retiring, I see Coaches the same way..if you are going to get rid of them, it's better a year too early, then a year too late.

Disagree. Duke fans wanted K gone after year 3. They stuck with him, went to 6 of the next 9 Final Fours and won two titles. Villanova fans wanted Jay Wright gone in 2012. They thought he'd peaked. They stuck with him & have won 2 titles in the 7 years since.

Every coach has a rough year. Wojo has already earned more rope than K had. I do think the standards this year should be what we thought last year was going to be, but we would be better off staying with a guy a year too long because any time you push a reset button you are starting the clock at zero on a 10-15 year trip.

Better to sink one extra year and maybe discover the guy was on the brink of a breakthrough than to torpedo it all and start over. Obviously if there's a clear trend down you cut bait, but we don't have that. We're still just 4 months removed from being a top-10 team.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 12, 2019, 03:42:50 PM
Again, for me...like with an athlete retiring, I see Coaches the same way..if you are going to get rid of them, it's better a year too early, then a year too late.

In theory, I think you are right. I think it's a lot easier to tell with an athlete than with a coach. Personally, I don't like a year too early or too late, I prefer just right.

I hope it doesn't happen, but I'm going to be VERY curious to see what happens with pro Wojo supporters on this board, if this season isn't as good as last year was. That would be trending down like so many of you like to talk about. I'd bet anything he'd get a pass from a vast majority saying "it was a blip", he'll be fine, etc. He stays, And then what happens if the year after that is even worse?? Hence my point, better a year too soon then a year too late. Those two consecutive years of a downward trend, would in my opinion, be more detrimental to the program, then switching Coaches after next season IF it's worse than the previous year. I hope it doesn't happen.

Depends on what "isn't as good as last year" means. Do we get a 6 seed instead of a 5 seed? Don't care in the slightest. Do we end up barely making the tournament? Concerned but probably not close to firing depending on the recruiting outlook. Do we end up missing the NIT? Barring massive recruiting victories it is time to move on. This is all assuming no catastrophic injuries.

Also to nip this one in the bud as well....I would be very surprised if we don't take a step back in 20-21. Any program that graduates as much as we are going to next offseason is likely to take a step back the following year. That doesn't mean the program is regressing. All coaches have rebuidling years, it's part of college basketball. Now that doesn't mean the coach gets a free pass. I think a good way to judge is comparing it to the last rebuilding year which would be 17-18. If we finish better an NIT 2 seed I think it is a good indicator that the program has continued to improve.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 12, 2019, 05:22:26 PM
Eventually, I want to see Marquette get to the level of a school like Villanova -- which lost 4 players to the NBA after taking home the national championship and still won the Big East the next year. Big-time programs reload more than rebuild.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: WhiteTrash on June 12, 2019, 08:36:43 PM
How in the world are you going to call my post a straw man in one sentence and the follow it with the bolded in the very next sentence? Lol
GREAT! Let's all stop using straw man arguments. Agreed?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 12, 2019, 10:37:46 PM
Marcus:

Interesting study that has produced an interesting comment stream. Nicely done.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 12, 2019, 11:28:14 PM
Chicos said 5 years. I spent some time crunching numbers after this season and determined that number, which was someone else's, was inadequate. 10-15 is far more reasonable if your aspiration is, like mine, to win a national championship.

As far as I'm concerned, any aspiration less than that is inadequate. While Sweet 16s and Elite 8s are fun, they really don't mean anything in the long run. Maybe an indicator you're on the right path, but no one outside your program will give a rat's ass about your second weekend run six years ago.

In over 100 years of MU basketball, there has been one, yes one, coach who lasted more than 10 years. And, he was sub-500.

Worst yet, he was a Fradger.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 12, 2019, 11:40:32 PM
In over 100 years of MU basketball, there has been one, yes one, coach who lasted more than 10 years. And, he was sub-500.

Worst yet, he was a Fradger.

Two. Al also lasted more than 10 years.

That's why I feel either an alumni or an experienced coach is the way to go in the future. But for now, hope Wojo is the guy and sticks.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on June 13, 2019, 12:03:44 AM
Two. Al also lasted more than 10 years.

That's why I feel either an alumni or an experienced coach is the way to go in the future. But for now, hope Wojo is the guy and sticks.

Sorry. Obviously he did. Bad mistake. I meant 15. 

Crapshoot? 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MUMonster03 on June 13, 2019, 04:52:05 AM
Beard and Izzo are major outliers when you look at championship level successful coaches. Looking at the coaches below one of the things that has hindered Marquette recently is we hire first time coaches and none of them have stayed/been allowed to stay long enough to hit the successful window.

Also lets remember Creann made it to a FF in year 4 and has never been back, so the jury may still be out on Beard.

Coach K - 5 years at Army, First FF 6th year at Duke, 11 years total coaching, Championship in year 16 (11th at Duke)
Calhoun - 14 years at Northeastern, First FF 13th Year at UConn, 27 years coaching, Championship in year 27 (13th at UConn)
Knight - 6 years at Army, First FF 2nd year at IU, 8 years coaching, Championship in year 11 (5th at IU)
Wooden - 2 years Indiana St, First FF 14th year at UCLA, 16 years coaching, Championship in year 18 (16th at UCLA)
Wright - 7 years at Hofstra, First FF 8th year at Nova, 15 years coaching, Championship in year 22 (15th at Nova)
Self - 10 years at Oral Roberts, Tulsa, and Illinois, First FF 5th year at Kansas, 15 years coaching, Championship in year 15 (5th at Kansas)
Olsen - 10 years LBS and Iowa, First FF 6th year at Iowa, 7 years coaching, Championship in year 24 (14th at Arizona)

Pitino and Calipari who moved around a lot reached FF but still took awhile to win a championship
Pitino - First FF in 2nd year at Providence (7th overall) Championship in 14th year (7th at Kentucky)
Calipari - First FF in 8th year at UMASS, Championship in 20th year (3rd at Kentucky)

And last but not least
Al - 7 years at Belmont Abbey, First FF 10th year at MU, 17 years coaching, Championship in year 20 (13th at MU)

Since 1980 only 6 coaches have won a National Championship without at least 10 years of head coaching experience.
Crum 9th year
Brown 7th
Fischer 1st
Tubby 7th
Izzo 5th
Ollie 2nd

So the people preaching patience may be onto something, or we need to start hiring coaches with some D1 experience.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: willie warrior on June 13, 2019, 05:47:49 AM
#10to15YearsToJudge
The new mantra.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 13, 2019, 09:25:26 AM
Let's look at coaches with 10+ years at their current job by conference:

Big East: Jay Wright

Big 12: Bill Self, Bob Huggins, Scott Drew

Big 10: Tom Izzo, Matt Painter

ACC: Jim Boeheim, Mike Krzyzewski, Roy Williams, Leonard Hamilton, Mike Brey, Tony Bennett

SEC: John Calipari

Pac-12: Sean Miller

Is there anyone on that list who we wouldn't trade the past 10 years' results with? They've all at least made one Elite Eight. They account for 7 of the last 10 NCAA titles, with the others coming from two 10+ year tenures (Calhoun & Pitino) and another from serial outlier Kevin Ollie with Calhoun's players.

Maybe part of the reason we never get back to the success of Al is no one has stayed as long as Al.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: The Equalizer on June 13, 2019, 11:46:58 AM
The success of a coach IS the success of a program. If you change coaches every 5-10 years, you will most likely never reach the promised land. If you want to win year in and year out, it takes a coach installing a system and sticking with it for years. Long enough that the seniors teach the freshmen, that the culture is well established, and that the winning that attracts recruits isn't one flash-in-the-pan Final Four from the year before, but conference titles and tourney runs that come over a generation.

If you mean that some coaches show they CAN'T do it before then, I agree. But showing you can raise a program to an elite level rarely happens in less than a decade.

Butler and Xavier would be counter-examples to this. They change coaches frequently, and the replacement is often simply the promotion of an assistant.

Lets take Xavier: I don't know if they are considered "elite level", but with 19 NCAA appearances over the past 25 years, including 3 Elite Eights and 4 Sweet 16s, I would call that "winning year in and year out."  And they did it without a long tenured coach.

When Pete Gillen left, they hired former assistant Skip Prosser after a 1 year stint at Loyola MD.  When Prosser left, they hired Thad Matta from Butler--their only true outside hire in the past 25 years.  When Matta left they promoted Sean Miller. When Miller left, they promoted Chris Mack.  When Mack left they promoted Travis Steele.

And I don't think they ever navel gazed over who they should hire from the outside, should it be a top-level assistant or a rising mid-major coach, whether they were experienced enough, or prestigious enough or won enough.

Maybe its splitting hairs, but I don't see a single long-tenured coach as necessary. You can get the same kind of continuity if you hire from your own coaching and playing ranks. 



Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Pakuni on June 13, 2019, 01:55:04 PM
Let's look at coaches with 10+ years at their current job by conference:

Big East: Jay Wright

Big 12: Bill Self, Bob Huggins, Scott Drew

Big 10: Tom Izzo, Matt Painter

ACC: Jim Boeheim, Mike Krzyzewski, Roy Williams, Leonard Hamilton, Mike Brey, Tony Bennett

SEC: John Calipari

Pac-12: Sean Miller

Is there anyone on that list who we wouldn't trade the past 10 years' results with? They've all at least made one Elite Eight. They account for 7 of the last 10 NCAA titles, with the others coming from two 10+ year tenures (Calhoun & Pitino) and another from serial outlier Kevin Ollie with Calhoun's players.

Maybe part of the reason we never get back to the success of Al is no one has stayed as long as Al.

I tend to agree that consistency can be important to success, but couldn't one just as easily argue that the long tenures of these coaches is a product of their success, rather than success being a product of their long tenures?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 13, 2019, 03:12:05 PM
Butler and Xavier would be counter-examples to this. They change coaches frequently, and the replacement is often simply the promotion of an assistant.

Those are really interesting examples. They keep the general system in place by promoting from within. For Xavier it was mostly passing it down from Gillen, for Butler, from Collier. The closest Marquette ever came to this recently was Buzz, but I think those with long memories are still gunshy about how things with Majerus worked out.

I tend to agree that consistency can be important to success, but couldn't one just as easily argue that the long tenures of these coaches is a product of their success, rather than success being a product of their long tenures?

I think it's a bit of both. Programs like Villanova, Duke, & Baylor stuck through some rough early times. Scott Drew didn't make the tournament until his 5th year & didn't go back to back until his 12th.

Was Matt Painter appreciated that much before the past 2-3 years? He had 6 appearances & 8 wins in his first 7 seasons, but it was Purdue sticking through a two-year 31-35 stretch that led to the respect he's earning today. Leonard Hamilton didn't make the tourney until year 7 at FSU, had just 4 appearances in 14 years, but now seems to be pretty well regarded.

Winning does lead to long tenures, but patience also seems to lead to winning.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: asdfasdf on June 13, 2019, 03:19:48 PM
I wouldn't categorize Butler or Xavier as elite, but definitely successful. They both tend to have more turnover than Marquette without much downturn in their performance. Their ability to stay competitive at a high level despite the HC turnover is impressive, especially compared to Marquette's 'rebuild'.

I think there's some truth to the 5-years to judge mantra. If I were an AD, based on this figure, I would give my coach 5 years to prove him/herself. If they are doing alright (ie, wojo) I would focus my resources on supporting/keeping my coach if possible. There's just too much risk when replacing a coach, and coaches who stick around longer than 5 years trend nicely.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 13, 2019, 06:45:08 PM
Those are really interesting examples. They keep the general system in place by promoting from within. For Xavier it was mostly passing it down from Gillen, for Butler, from Collier. The closest Marquette ever came to this recently was Buzz, but I think those with long memories are still gunshy about how things with Majerus worked out.

I think it's a bit of both. Programs like Villanova, Duke, & Baylor stuck through some rough early times. Scott Drew didn't make the tournament until his 5th year & didn't go back to back until his 12th.

Was Matt Painter appreciated that much before the past 2-3 years? He had 6 appearances & 8 wins in his first 7 seasons, but it was Purdue sticking through a two-year 31-35 stretch that led to the respect he's earning today. Leonard Hamilton didn't make the tourney until year 7 at FSU, had just 4 appearances in 14 years, but now seems to be pretty well regarded.

Winning does lead to long tenures, but patience also seems to lead to winning.

Not always...I think a perfect example of that is Brad Brownell at Clemson...he will be going into year 10 this coming season and has two NCAA appearances..His first year(2010-2011) they made it in..They did not go back until 17-18 when they made the Sweet 16..two NIT appearances in between, and an NIT last year.

Paul Hewitt, former Ga Tech Coach is another example..Sure, we was the NCAA runner up in 03-04, and maybe that bought him some goodwill, but after that season..They had 3 more NCAA seasons in his final 7 years and never went past the 2nd round after that. Never finished better than 3rd in the ACC and that was a tie for third the year they were NCAA runner ups.

Billy Kennedy got 7 years at Texas A&M...he went to two sweet 16's in 7 years.

The above examples are reasons you shouldn't always be patient. And why i say better a year too early than a year too soon. Patience can get you a bunch of mediocrity as well.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 13, 2019, 09:23:25 PM
Yep, patience doesn't always work out. But is the only way to the big time.

I'd also say that Brownell and Hewitt are great examples of not relying on early tournament success to judge how good a coach is. Brownell led Clemson to it's first tournament win in 13 seasons in his first year. Probably bought him too much goodwill as you put it. Paul Hewitt went on a magical run in his 4th year....and then did nothing worth mentioning after that. Could be that's a bad way to judge a coach.

Kennedy was a special case. Patience was starting to pay of with him. Nothing his first season, CBI his second, NIT his third, Sweet 16 his fourth, dip his fifth, Sweet 16 his sixth, then his entire team went pro (despite some not getting drafted) and his 7th season was a flop. He wasn't fired because of the court results. There are a lot of concerns with his health, similar to Thad Matta. When Buzz made it known that he was available, it was a strategic move. Call it underhanded if you want, but that's how you change coaches.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 13, 2019, 09:45:36 PM
I will leave this here...in another thread, Tower said people don't fire Coaches that have won 84 games in 4 years like Wojo has...well...MU fired Mike Deane and he had won 100 games in 5 years...and before I hear about he was "trending down" and he couldn't recruit..I will kindly remind you that his class of Harris, Diggs, Henry etc, was his best class by far so you could make the case that his recruiting was trending up, unquestionably. And he was always going to be a good Coach. So there is precedent for it..at MU actually. It just took someone with stones to do it..Bill Cords. That turned out ok, no?? 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 13, 2019, 09:53:09 PM
I will leave this here...in another thread, Tower said people don't fire Coaches that have won 84 games in 4 years like Wojo has...well...MU fired Mike Deane and he had won 100 games in 5 years...and before I hear about he was "trending down" and he couldn't recruit..I will kindly remind you that his class of Harris, Diggs, Henry etc, was his best class by far so you could make the case that his recruiting was trending up, unquestionably. And he was always going to be a good Coach. So there is precedent for it..at MU actually. It just took someone with stones to do it..Bill Cords. That turned out ok, no??

1. Trending down  ;)
2. You have your years mixed up, Harris, Diggs, and Herny were not his last class, Krunti Hester was
3. Deane won 79 games in 4 years, so less than Wojo's 84
4. Deane's 79 wins were in the Great Midwest Conference, Wojo's were in the Big East

It didn't take stones to fire Mike Deane. It took common sense. There is no comparison to the current situation.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: IrwinFletcher on June 13, 2019, 09:53:32 PM
https://twitter.com/johngasaway/status/1139270177609195526?s=21

Should never have hired Al.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 13, 2019, 09:56:03 PM
https://twitter.com/johngasaway/status/1139270177609195526?s=21

Should never have hired Al.

I've always wondered, does anyone have context for why Al was hired? On paper, that looks like a terrible hire (though it obviously worked out). Did he do the 1960s version of winning the power point?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 13, 2019, 09:58:26 PM
I've always wondered, does anyone have context for why Al was hired? On paper, that looks like a terrible hire (though it obviously worked out). Did he do the 1960s version of winning the power point?

Al was magic with transparencies and an overhead projector.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 13, 2019, 10:05:04 PM
1. Trending down  ;)
2. You have your years mixed up, Harris, Diggs, and Herny were not his last class, Krunti Hester was
3. Deane won 79 games in 4 years, so less than Wojo's 84
4. Deane's 79 wins were in the Great Midwest Conference, Wojo's were in the Big East

It didn't take stones to fire Mike Deane. It took common sense. There is no comparison to the current situation.

I am now 110% convinced that regardless of how this MU season turns out, or the next season after that...or the one after that, that for you patience will always trump results, and you're in bed with Wojo and he's your guy no matter what. I guess we will see. But your obsession and love for him is weird for someone that really has done nothing of subsistence to deserve such love and adoration. Believe me, nothing would make me happier than for Wojo to prove me wrong, that means MU has been really successful...and that's what i want...but he could miss the tournament entirely this year(which would be a HUGE trend down) and you still would say he deserves more time. I'm certain of it.

You were probably too young, but did you say these same things when Crean was at MU?? He was a HELL of a lot more successful in 5 years than Wojo has been in 5 years. Yes, I know he wasn't fired...duh...but did you have the same kind of love for him??
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 13, 2019, 10:33:23 PM
I would love for you to point to an example of a post of mine loving or adoring Wojo. I think you might have a harder time finding one than you think you will. Not agreeing with you and loving Wojo aren't the same thing.

I'm pretty solidly in the middle. I tend not to go too overboard one way or the other. I don't get overly pissed off about setbacks and I don't get overly excited about small victories. Big picture is what matters. If there was someone as the over the top as you screaming about how Wojo was the greatest thing since sliced bread I would be responding to them too. Sadly, no one can match your zeal.

Actually when Crean was around I used to scream after every loss and demand that he be fired after almost every season. Then I turned 16 and I realized that was dumb.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 13, 2019, 10:36:41 PM
1. Trending down  ;)
2. You have your years mixed up, Harris, Diggs, and Herny were not his last class, Krunti Hester was
3. Deane won 79 games in 4 years, so less than Wojo's 84
4. Deane's 79 wins were in the Great Midwest Conference, Wojo's were in the Big East

It didn't take stones to fire Mike Deane. It took common sense. There is no comparison to the current situation.

Hmmm...

1994–95    Marquette    21–12    
1995–96    Marquette    23–8    
1996–97    Marquette    22–9    
1997–98    Marquette    20–11

Those were Mike Deane's first four years at MU...No matter how many times I add it up..I get 86 wins..which is ACTUALLY 2 more than Wojo had after 4 years.

Now let's look at these next column(s) side by side...

Coach A

Conf record(1st four years)..... 7-5  (T-3rd)
                                                10-4 (2nd)
                                                 9-5  (4th)
                                                 8-8  (4th)

Post Season(1st four years)     NIT Finals
                                                 NCAA 2nd round
                                                 NCAA 1st round
                                                 NIT Quarterfinals


Coach B

Conf record(1st 4 years)         4-14 (T-9th)
                                               8-10 (7th)
                                               10-8 (T-3rd)
                                                9-9  (T-6th)

Post season (1st 4 years)        None
                                                 None
                                                 NCAA Round 1
                                                 NIT Quarters


So...To recap...In the first 4 years...Deane had more overall wins..Higher finishes in the conference ALL 4 years, more post season success(whether you want to say the NIT matters or not, some here use that FOR Wojo)....Yet...Deane got fired...again..Deane was better in EVERY meaningful area than Wojo was his first 4 years..You are under the table for Wojo...and yet say it didn't take stones to fire Deane, it took logic?? Based on EVERY meaningful criteria that every Wojo backer here uses to SUPPORT Wojo, Deane was better. It took STONES to fire Deane...If all you can come back with is "uhhhh well, uhhh Wojo's trendline is better, and uhhh it's a stronger conference", that's moving the goalposts 110%.

So...if it took "logic" to fire Deane...being better in EVERY area(and Coaching aspect isn't even close), then it it definitely is/was MORE than logical to fire Wojo.

Do you need any more lessons, young man?? I'd be happy to teach you, like I just did here..took yo uto school...consider it post college education :)

Anyone else that chimes in...save all your weak ass arguments..you have NONE. ZERO, ZILCH. The numbers don't lie. Game...set...match.
                       
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 13, 2019, 10:48:22 PM
Do you need any more lessons, young man??

What is the difference between Great Midwest Conference and the Big East?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 13, 2019, 11:41:28 PM
Hmmm...

1994–95    Marquette    21–12    
1995–96    Marquette    23–8    
1996–97    Marquette    22–9    
1997–98    Marquette    20–11

Those were Mike Deane's first four years at MU...No matter how many times I add it up..I get 86 wins..which is ACTUALLY 2 more than Wojo had after 4 years.

Now let's look at these next column(s) side by side...

Coach A

Conf record(1st four years)..... 7-5  (T-3rd)
                                                10-4 (2nd)
                                                 9-5  (4th)
                                                 8-8  (4th)

Post Season(1st four years)     NIT Finals
                                                 NCAA 2nd round
                                                 NCAA 1st round
                                                 NIT Quarterfinals


Coach B

Conf record(1st 4 years)         4-14 (T-9th)
                                               8-10 (7th)
                                               10-8 (T-3rd)
                                                9-9  (T-6th)

Post season (1st 4 years)        None
                                                 None
                                                 NCAA Round 1
                                                 NIT Quarters


So...To recap...In the first 4 years...Deane had more overall wins..Higher finishes in the conference ALL 4 years, more post season success(whether you want to say the NIT matters or not, some here use that FOR Wojo)....Yet...Deane got fired...again..Deane was better in EVERY meaningful area than Wojo was his first 4 years..You are under the table for Wojo...and yet say it didn't take stones to fire Deane, it took logic?? Based on EVERY meaningful criteria that every Wojo backer here uses to SUPPORT Wojo, Deane was better. It took STONES to fire Deane...If all you can come back with is "uhhhh well, uhhh Wojo's trendline is better, and uhhh it's a stronger conference", that's moving the goalposts 110%.

So...if it took "logic" to fire Deane...being better in EVERY area(and Coaching aspect isn't even close), then it it definitely is/was MORE than logical to fire Wojo.

Do you need any more lessons, young man?? I'd be happy to teach you, like I just did here..took yo uto school...consider it post college education :)

Anyone else that chimes in...save all your weak ass arguments..you have NONE. ZERO, ZILCH. The numbers don't lie. Game...set...match.
                       

TAMU was talking about Deane's last 4 years and Wojo's last 4 years. Unlike Deane -- who was handed Miller, Eford, McCaskill, Pieper and Abraham from a team that went to the S16 under K.O. -- Wojo had some rebuilding to do in Year 1.

In his fifth and final year, Deane won 14 games, finished last in Conference USA American division and recruited terribly; Wojo won 23 games, finished second in the Big East and already has snagged a 4-star recruit and a transfer big. Deane was clearly trending down in Year 5, Wojo was clearly trending up.

Game ... set ... match.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Uncle Rico on June 13, 2019, 11:44:45 PM
TAMU was talking about Deane's last 4 years and Wojo's last 4 years. Unlike Deane -- who was handed Miller, Eford, McCaskill, Pieper and Abraham from a team that went to the S16 under K.O. -- Wojo had some rebuilding to do in Year 1.

In his fifth and final year, Deane won 14 games, finished last in Conference USA American division and recruited terribly; Wojo won 23 games, finished second in the Big East and already has snagged a 4-star recruit and a transfer big. Deane was clearly trending down in Year 5, Wojo was clearly trending up.

Game ... set ... match.

If Wojo has a year like Mike Deane this year, Wojo won’t be back.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 13, 2019, 11:47:59 PM
If Wojo has a year like Mike Deane this year, Wojo won’t be back.


Yep, and none of us even got into creepy Deane getting drunk and trying to pick up 20-year-olds.

It's such a silly comparison that it should be way beneath guru ... but when you strongly dislike a coach or athlete as guru strongly dislikes Wojo, you get desperate to twist facts and make a case that isn't there.

Mike Deane. That's hilarious.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Uncle Rico on June 13, 2019, 11:57:05 PM

Yep, and none of us even got into creepy Deane getting drunk and trying to pick up 20-year-olds.

It's such a silly comparison that it should be way beneath guru ... but when you strongly dislike a coach or athlete as guru strongly dislikes Wojo, you get desperate to twist facts and make a case that isn't there.

Mike Deane. That's hilarious.

The ‘96 Tournament team lost as 4-seed to 12-seed Arkansas in the second round.  Thank god scoop wasn’t around for that “debacle”.

The ‘97 Tournament team needed 4 straight wins in St. Louis to make the NCAA Tournament.  Kudos to Deane and the team for doing so, but it took some luck to get in where they promptly got waxed by Providence, the 10-seed.

Things went downhill from there.  They had a nice run in the ‘98 NIT but the talent had dropped a lot from what O’Neill left.  It’s no surprise Crean came in and did a full rebuild.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 14, 2019, 12:58:43 AM
Hmmm...

1994–95    Marquette    21–12    
1995–96    Marquette    23–8    
1996–97    Marquette    22–9    
1997–98    Marquette    20–11

Those were Mike Deane's first four years at MU...No matter how many times I add it up..I get 86 wins..which is ACTUALLY 2 more than Wojo had after 4 years.

You seemed to have forgotten the conversation we were having. Let me remind you. You posted this:

I will leave this here...in another thread, Tower said people don't fire Coaches that have won 84 games in 4 years like Wojo has.

The 84 games Wojo has won have come in the last 4 years, not his first 4 years. Since you brought this up and started comparing him to Deane, I compared Dean's last 4 years to Wojo's last 4. Wojo won 5 more games in his last 4 years than Deane did, despite playing in a much tougher conference. Also, Wojo's best season came in the final of those seasons (trending up) while Deane's worst season came in the final season (trending down)

Now let's look at these next column(s) side by side...

Coach A

Low majorConf record([1stLast four years).....
                                                10-4 (2nd)
                                                 9-5  (4th)
                                                 8-8  (4th)
                                                 6-10 (6th)

Post Season(1stLast four years)     
                                                 NCAA 2nd round
                                                 NCAA 1st round
                                                 NIT Quarterfinals
                                                 No Postseason

Coach B

High MajorConf record(1stLast 4 years)         
                                               8-10 (7th)
                                               10-8 (T-3rd)
                                                9-9  (T-6th)
                                               12-6 (2nd)

Post season (1stLast 4 years)       
                                                 None
                                                 NCAA Round 1
                                                 NIT Quarters
                                                 NCAA Round 1

I made some edits to properly reflect what we were talking about.

So...To recap...In the first 4 years...Deane had more overall wins..Higher finishes in the conference ALL 4 years, more post season success(whether you want to say the NIT matters or not, some here use that FOR Wojo)....Yet...Deane got fired...again..Deane was better in EVERY meaningful area than Wojo was his first 4 years..You are under the table for Wojo...and yet say it didn't take stones to fire Deane, it took logic?? Based on EVERY meaningful criteria that every Wojo backer here uses to SUPPORT Wojo, Deane was better. It took STONES to fire Deane...If all you can come back with is "uhhhh well, uhhh Wojo's trendline is better, and uhhh it's a stronger conference", that's moving the goalposts 110%.

So...if it took "logic" to fire Deane...being better in EVERY area(and Coaching aspect isn't even close), then it it definitely is/was MORE than logical to fire Wojo.

Numbers don't lie....but is it lying when you present them in a way that doesn't show the whole picture? Cause it seems like you intentionally removed Deane's worst year (which was also his last) and Wojo's best year (which was also his last). You also are equating Conference USA to the Big East, which if anyone else was doing you would call them a moron.

No goalposts have been shifted. You just ignored the only thing that matters when judging a coach. Is he improving the program as he goes along? Or making it worse? Wojo took over a team that missed the postseason and lost 6/7 of its top players in minutes played and now has teams capable of earning 5 seeds in the NCAA tournament. Deane took over a team coming of a Sweet 16 that did lose three key players but kept everyone else and in 5 years managed to piss it all away.

You keep wanting to ignore trend because you know it defeats your argument. Since you like Deane/Wojo comparison, how about another comparison?

Coach A First Six Years:
118-73 record (.617)
44-54 conference record (.448)
No Postseason
NIT Finals
NIT Quarterfinals
NCAA (Elite Eight)
NCAA (Sweet 16)
NCAA (Round of 32)

Coach B Full 6 Years:
127-79 record (.617)
59-49 conference record (.546)
No Postseason (due to postseason ban, would have been a high seed)
NCAA (National Champions)
NIT First Round
NCAA (Second Round)
No Postseason
No Postseason

Since you say numbers don't lie, you would have to say Coach B is the better coach. Same record, better conference record, national championship trumps Elite Eight and Sweet 16, sure Coach A has one more NIT instead of a no postseason but who cares about the NIT?

I think most people would notice that Coach A started poorly and then built his program into a yearly contender whereas Coach B started really strong (likely with their predecessor's recruits) and then started tanking the program. I would go with Coach A.

If you didn't guess already, Coach A is Jim Calhoun, Coach B is Kevin Ollie.

Do you need any more lessons, young man?? I'd be happy to teach you, like I just did here..took yo uto school...consider it post college education :)

Anyone else that chimes in...save all your weak ass arguments..you have NONE. ZERO, ZILCH. The numbers don't lie. Game...set...match.               

I think I am good. But I would like to hear your justification on how a recruiting class of Krunti Hester was evidence that Deane's recruiting was trending up.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MUMonster03 on June 14, 2019, 01:21:21 AM
Butler and Xavier would be counter-examples to this. They change coaches frequently, and the replacement is often simply the promotion of an assistant.

Lets take Xavier: I don't know if they are considered "elite level", but with 19 NCAA appearances over the past 25 years, including 3 Elite Eights and 4 Sweet 16s, I would call that "winning year in and year out."  And they did it without a long tenured coach.

When Pete Gillen left, they hired former assistant Skip Prosser after a 1 year stint at Loyola MD.  When Prosser left, they hired Thad Matta from Butler--their only true outside hire in the past 25 years.  When Matta left they promoted Sean Miller. When Miller left, they promoted Chris Mack.  When Mack left they promoted Travis Steele.

And I don't think they ever navel gazed over who they should hire from the outside, should it be a top-level assistant or a rising mid-major coach, whether they were experienced enough, or prestigious enough or won enough.

Maybe its splitting hairs, but I don't see a single long-tenured coach as necessary. You can get the same kind of continuity if you hire from your own coaching and playing ranks.

But is our goal really to be a Butler or Xavier? Two schools with 0 NC's and 2 FF's?

They have continued to be successful, in terms o making the tournament, but think about where the could be if Stevens and Miller or Matta hadn't left. Butler would definitely be better if they hadn't had so much churn in the last few years and while Xavier did okay in year 1 with Steele we have seen many coaches come out of the gate fast only to flame out in a year or two.

It seems most successful schools either have given their coach plenty of time as the success slowly grows over a decade, or have hired someone with 5 or so years at a smaller school where they have been able to establish a system and can implement it quickly at a bigger school with better talent. There will always be an outlier or two.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: tower912 on June 14, 2019, 03:06:27 AM
Deane also had said that Marquette fans should be content with occasional trips to the dance.    Wojo's statements indicate he is not willing to settle for such mediocrity.   Still has work to do, but has higher expectations for the program.      Shocking that you would celebrate someone willing to settle for mediocrity and criticize someone with higher goals he is working toward.   
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Galway Eagle on June 14, 2019, 03:10:23 AM
You seemed to have forgotten the conversation we were having. Let me remind you. You posted this:

The 84 games Wojo has won have come in the last 4 years, not his first 4 years. Since you brought this up and started comparing him to Deane, I compared Dean's last 4 years to Wojo's last 4. Wojo won 5 more games in his last 4 years than Deane did, despite playing in a much tougher conference. Also, Wojo's best season came in the final of those seasons (trending up) while Deane's worst season came in the final season (trending down)

I made some edits to properly reflect what we were talking about.

Numbers don't lie....but is it lying when you present them in a way that doesn't show the whole picture? Cause it seems like you intentionally removed Deane's worst year (which was also his last) and Wojo's best year (which was also his last). You also are equating Conference USA to the Big East, which if anyone else was doing you would call them a moron.

No goalposts have been shifted. You just ignored the only thing that matters when judging a coach. Is he improving the program as he goes along? Or making it worse? Wojo took over a team that missed the postseason and lost 6/7 of its top players in minutes played and now has teams capable of earning 5 seeds in the NCAA tournament. Deane took over a team coming of a Sweet 16 that did lose three key players but kept everyone else and in 5 years managed to piss it all away.

You keep wanting to ignore trend because you know it defeats your argument. Since you like Deane/Wojo comparison, how about another comparison?

Coach A First Six Years:
118-73 record (.617)
44-54 conference record (.448)
No Postseason
NIT Finals
NIT Quarterfinals
NCAA (Elite Eight)
NCAA (Sweet 16)
NCAA (Round of 32)

Coach B Full 6 Years:
127-79 record (.617)
59-49 conference record (.546)
No Postseason (due to postseason ban, would have been a high seed)
NCAA (National Champions)
NIT First Round
NCAA (Second Round)
No Postseason
No Postseason

Since you say numbers don't lie, you would have to say Coach B is the better coach. Same record, better conference record, national championship trumps Elite Eight and Sweet 16, sure Coach A has one more NIT instead of a no postseason but who cares about the NIT?

I think most people would notice that Coach A started poorly and then built his program into a yearly contender whereas Coach B started really strong (likely with their predecessor's recruits) and then started tanking the program. I would go with Coach A.

If you didn't guess already, Coach A is Jim Calhoun, Coach B is Kevin Ollie.

I think I am good. But I would like to hear your justification on how a recruiting class of Krunti Hester was evidence that Deane's recruiting was trending up.

This. So much this.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TSmith34 on June 14, 2019, 07:51:32 AM
Do you need any more lessons, young man?? I'd be happy to teach you, like I just did here..took yo uto school...consider it post college education :)

Anyone else that chimes in...save all your weak ass arguments..you have NONE. ZERO, ZILCH. The numbers don't lie. Game...set...match.
                       
Ah yes, the Make a Horrible and Inaccurate Argument and Do A Victory Dance approach.  What an ass.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TSmith34 on June 14, 2019, 07:52:25 AM
TAMU was talking about Deane's last 4 years and Wojo's last 4 years. Unlike Deane -- who was handed Miller, Eford, McCaskill, Pieper and Abraham from a team that went to the S16 under K.O. -- Wojo had some rebuilding to do in Year 1.

In his fifth and final year, Deane won 14 games, finished last in Conference USA American division and recruited terribly; Wojo won 23 games, finished second in the Big East and already has snagged a 4-star recruit and a transfer big. Deane was clearly trending down in Year 5, Wojo was clearly trending up.

Game ... set ... match.
^This.  Nice post 82
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 08:17:32 AM
Anyone who thinks that at the end of Deane's tenure the basketball program was in a *better* place than it is now, needs to have their head examined.  That is an insanely dumb comment.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2019, 08:56:39 AM
guru:

This Deane argument you tried to make -- and failed horribly at it -- is why some Scoopers can't take you seriously. You are so blinded by your dislike of the current coach, and are so desperate to prove that he is a failure (and that you are a basketball savant), that you ignore facts and reason.

Your claims that you see things others miss, that you are more competitive than others, and that you have forgotten more about basketball than the rest of us know ... well, those can now be joined by a couple of new ones that will live on in infamy:

"Do you need any more lessons, young man??" and "Game...set...match."

guru, most of us (and certainly I) appreciate your passion for Marquette hoops. We all want the team to win big. Your continued claims that you know more about basketball (and specifically MU hoops) than anybody else does and care more about the program than anybody else does ... those ring hollow when you make (to quote you) "weak ass arguments."

Hang in there, big guy. You aren't the first to be schooled by TAMU (and others).             
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 14, 2019, 09:41:07 AM
Deane also had said that Marquette fans should be content with occasional trips to the dance.    Wojo's statements indicate he is not willing to settle for such mediocrity.   Still has work to do, but has higher expectations for the program.      Shocking that you would celebrate someone willing to settle for mediocrity and criticize someone with higher goals he is working toward.

At the time Deane made that comment, he might not have been far off.  We were in a middling conference, had crap facilities, and aside from a brief revival courtesy of KO, it had been 20 years since we’d been any good.  I wholeheartedly disagree with what he said, but I can see where he was coming from.  Thankfully we got rid of him and brought in a coach who knew we could be more.

Wojo’s comments on the subject of postseason success have been guarded at best.  He’s talked about how “the only expectations I care about are the expectations we have internally” and also said, “This is a program that will win a lot of games in March.”  In the recent Athletic article, he basically restated that second one and added, “It just hasn’t happened yet,” while not giving any sort of timeline on when it would, lest he paint himself into a corner.  Sure, he wants to win postseason games, but given the resources we have now as opposed to where we were under Deane, that’s the expectation.

While I do believe Wojo is better than Deane, he’s building a similar culture:  Recruit well-behaved student athletes who make the dance occasionally.  Wojo should be held to the standard of Crean and Buzz (our two most successful coaches since Al) and he hasn’t been so far.  Saying he’s better than Deane is faint praise.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2019, 09:57:29 AM
Wojo should be held to the standard of Crean and Buzz (our two most successful coaches since Al) and he hasn’t been so far.  Saying he’s better than Deane is faint praise.

We agree on this, and I'm pretty sure most other Scoopers do, too.

I believe he will be held to that higher standard when he faces similar circumstances, and I believe that time is approaching. Or at least I hope it is.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 09:57:37 AM
We were not in a "middling" conference back then.  In Deane's last year, CUSA was third in conference RPI - ahead of both the ACC and the Big East.  Ended the year with four NCAA bids - same as the Pac 10 and one more than the ACC.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2019, 10:01:05 AM
We were not in a "middling" conference back then.  In Deane's last year, CUSA was third in conference RPI - ahead of both the ACC and the Big East.  Ended the year with four NCAA bids - same as the Pac 10 and one more than the ACC.

Good stats. Thanks.

Of course, Deane's final team finished dead last in its division and had a losing record. Regardless of how strong the league is, that's unacceptable.

Put it together with his middling body of work, his terrible recruiting, his downward trend and his off-court behavior, and it was an easy decision to fire him.

Any comparisons between Deane and Wojo remain silly. Maybe we should bring back the Dukiet-to-Wojo comparisons. Those were fun, too.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 10:07:06 AM
At the time Deane made that comment, he might not have been far off.  We were in a middling conference, had crap facilities, and aside from a brief revival courtesy of KO, it had been 20 years since we’d been any good.  I wholeheartedly disagree with what he said, but I can see where he was coming from.  Thankfully we got rid of him and brought in a coach who knew we could be more.

Wojo’s comments on the subject of postseason success have been guarded at best.  He’s talked about how “the only expectations I care about are the expectations we have internally” and also said, “This is a program that will win a lot of games in March.”  In the recent Athletic article, he basically restated that second one and added, “It just hasn’t happened yet,” while not giving any sort of timeline on when it would, lest he paint himself into a corner.  Sure, he wants to win postseason games, but given the resources we have now as opposed to where we were under Deane, that’s the expectation.

While I do believe Wojo is better than Deane, he’s building a similar culture:  Recruit well-behaved student athletes who make the dance occasionally. Wojo should be held to the standard of Crean and Buzz (our two most successful coaches since Al) and he hasn’t been so far.  Saying he’s better than Deane is faint praise.

Here's what I think the Wojo supporters fail to get...Both Crean and Buzz had better first 5 years than Wojo has...yet, no one seems to care about that(or they say it's irrelevant for some reason). Wojo doesn't seem to be held to that same standard.

For some reason, some fans have seem to fallen into that "recruits good kids that make the dance occasionally" trap. Suddenly that's acceptable, since that's part of the refrain they always recite when judging Wojo. It's also acceptable to the administration seemingly. The apathy surrounding the program from the outside is noticeable, and it's sad.

Here's the deal...I want to unite us all...have us all want the same thing...so here's my offer to the fellow scoopers...if Wojo wins a National Championship in the next two years, you will not see me ever again(be on too much of a high the rest of my life to care about anything else, especially posting).

Plus...and this is sincere, I will throw in a pair(unworn) of MU powder blue air Jordan low's(to one lucky scooper) that they were selling a couple of years ago..

Now...I hope you will all join me in rooting for MU to win the Natty in the next couple of years...they win, we ALL win!  ;)
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 10:12:38 AM
Here's what I think the Wojo supporters fail to get...Both Crean and Buzz had better first 5 years than Wojo has...yet, no one seems to care about that(or they say it's irrelevant for some reason). Wojo doesn't seem to be held to that same standard.


I'm sorry but what are you talking about here?  It's obvious that Wojo hasn't met the same standards as Crean or Buzz.  Is anyone disputing that?

But since neither one of those guys was fired, how that that be a reason to get rid of Wojo now? 


For some reason, some fans have seem to fallen into that "recruits good kids that make the dance occasionally" trap. Suddenly that's acceptable, since that's part of the refrain they always recite when judging Wojo.

Who has said this?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2019, 10:22:33 AM
Here's what I think the Wojo supporters fail to get...Both Crean and Buzz had better first 5 years than Wojo has...yet, no one seems to care about that(or they say it's irrelevant for some reason). Wojo doesn't seem to be held to that same standard.

For some reason, some fans have seem to fallen into that "recruits good kids that make the dance occasionally" trap. Suddenly that's acceptable, since that's part of the refrain they always recite when judging Wojo. It's also acceptable to the administration seemingly. The apathy surrounding the program from the outside is noticeable, and it's sad.

Here's the deal...I want to unite us all...have us all want the same thing...so here's my offer to the fellow scoopers...if Wojo wins a National Championship in the next two years, you will not see me ever again(be on too much of a high the rest of my life to care about anything else, especially posting).

Plus...and this is sincere, I will throw in a pair(unworn) of MU powder blue air Jordan low's(to one lucky scooper) that they were selling a couple of years ago..

Now...I hope you will all join me in rooting for MU to win the Natty in the next couple of years...they win, we ALL win!  ;)

Nice attempt to deflect from being totally schooled by TAMU and others on the ridiculous Deane comparisons, even if this new post also makes strawman arguments.

You keep making various "bets" that involve you never posting on Scoop again. I don't want that and I don't think most others do, either. We just want you to make sense when you do post, and to not post with such an obvious agenda.

We certainly agree on wanting the Warriors to be great again.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 14, 2019, 10:32:30 AM
Here's what I think the Wojo supporters fail to get...Both Crean and Buzz had better first 5 years than Wojo has...yet, no one seems to care about that(or they say it's irrelevant for some reason). Wojo doesn't seem to be held to that same standard.

This is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

For some reason, some fans have seem to fallen into that "recruits good kids that make the dance occasionally" trap. Suddenly that's acceptable, since that's part of the refrain they always recite when judging Wojo. It's also acceptable to the administration seemingly. The apathy surrounding the program from the outside is noticeable, and it's sad.

No one has ever said that. No one has ever indicated that would be acceptable. The pro-Wojo argument is that building a successful program takes time. You can't have sustained success without the time necessary to determine if it's being sustained.

Here's the deal...I want to unite us all...have us all want the same thing...so here's my offer to the fellow scoopers...if Wojo wins a National Championship in the next two years, you will not see me ever again(be on too much of a high the rest of my life to care about anything else, especially posting).

This is a really weird pivot.

Plus...and this is sincere, I will throw in a pair(unworn) of MU powder blue air Jordan low's(to one lucky scooper) that they were selling a couple of years ago.

This is an even weirder pivot. The goodbye guru sweepstakes?

Now...I hope you will all join me in rooting for MU to win the Natty in the next couple of years...they win, we ALL win!  ;)

I don't think anyone expects that in the next two years. I am hoping in the next 10. Very few coaches win titles in the first 7 years of their career.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 14, 2019, 10:38:46 AM
TAMU was talking about Deane's last 4 years and Wojo's last 4 years. Unlike Deane -- who was handed Miller, Eford, McCaskill, Pieper and Abraham from a team that went to the S16 under K.O. -- Wojo had some rebuilding to do in Year 1.

In his fifth and final year, Deane won 14 games, finished last in Conference USA American division and recruited terribly; Wojo won 23 games, finished second in the Big East and already has snagged a 4-star recruit and a transfer big. Deane was clearly trending down in Year 5, Wojo was clearly trending up.

Game ... set ... match.
Wojo had no rebuilding to do in year one. He threw Deonte Burton, who played in the NBA this year under the bus. John Dawson who has played in the G League was part of the collateral damage as well. All self inflicted wounds. Ners has documented all this in great depth in case you need more detail.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: tower912 on June 14, 2019, 10:38:53 AM
IMO, So far,  Wojo is basically Crean without Wade.    Although I think Wojo is a more consistent recruiter.    Also, I still believe Wojo has a higher ceiling than Crean, as evidenced by what Crean has done in the 17 seasons as a D1 coach without Wade.   Now, the everlasting eternal debate point is this..... is that enough?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 14, 2019, 10:52:24 AM
Wojo had no rebuilding to do in year one. He threw Deonte Burton, who played in the NBA this year under the bus. John Dawson who has played in the G League was part of the collateral damage as well. All self inflicted wounds. Ners has documented all this in great depth in case you need more detail.

He didn't throw Burton under the bus. Burton transferred as stated repeatedly due to family issues. John Dawson was clearly not a high major player. He had one quality high major game, against Georgetown. The G League is full of bit players like Dawson that were not high major quality.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 11:03:47 AM
Nice attempt to deflect from being totally schooled by TAMU and others on the ridiculous Deane comparisons, even if this new post also makes strawman arguments.

You keep making various "bets" that involve you never posting on Scoop again. I don't want that and I don't think most others do, either. We just want you to make sense when you do post, and to not post with such an obvious agenda.

We certainly agree on wanting the Warriors to be great again.

Was NOT schooled by TAMU(he wishes). TAMU was using what he THOUGHT Tower was saying...because that's the only way it fit his argument.

This is exactly what tower said....." But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

He did NOT say the last 4 years specifically...he said averages 21 wins a season FOR 4 years. So TAMU somehow, wants to say Tower SAID Wojo's last 4 years...he NEVER said that. TAMU made an assumption(perhaps logically). However, that disregards Wojo's first year, which was absolute trash. Factor that in, and Wojo has NOT averaged 21 years over 4 years. So that's disingenuous. I got accused of "disregarding" Deane's last year. Well apparently Tower "threw out" Wojo's first year...so we must be "disregarding" both Coaches worst season's to date, and getting our averages that way, right??

But, let's cherry pick to fit our argument however we want. So let's use Wojo's FIRST four years instead...no one liked me NOT including Deane's last year(I used his first 4)...so let's do APPLES to APPLES...Shall we??

Mike Deane: 86 wins his first 4 years..Hmmm that averages 21.5 wins per year. Let's go back to what Tower said EXACTLY shall we?? But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

Wojo had: 73 wins his first four years...that averages 18.25 wins per year. Now the cries are going to be "totally unfair to dismiss Wojo's season last year, it was his best year".  ::) Remember..Tower never said specifically the LAST 4 years.

But it fits the Pro Wojo crowd to say the last 4 years, because this trendline thing that they take as freaking gospel.

Mike Deane was 100-55(.645) in his 5 years

Wojo is 97-69(.584) in his 5 years.

Everyone wants to "disregard" Wojo's first year because he had to "rebuild". The season happened, you can't just ignore it when it's convenient. 4 years is 4 years. Numbers are numbers..Guy averages 21 wins over a 4 year span, he averages 21 wins over a 4 year span...throwing out a year, middle years, last four, first 4, it doesn't matter...it's all the same #'s. Unless of course you want to make excuse, THEN it matters.

School will continue to be in session for anyone that's interested in attending...free of charge. Just sign up here, and we can get started.

Tower's EXACT quote again...But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

Except Marquette did just that. I'd bet anyone MASSIVE amounts of coin if Cords were still the AD, Wojo would be on VERY thin ice, if not gone. Cords had stones.


Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 11:43:31 AM
Okay, for all of you "you must be patient" people..Let's say Wojo is here another 5 years, and produces relatively the same results as the first 5...now it's been 10 years, and where has it gotten you?? What I'm saying is..regardless of HIS or anyone's trend line(which so many use as gospel here), that doesn't guarantee you squat about how the future will play out with him. That's why I find it ironic, that the people that say patience is the way to go, yet point to his trend line like that is some "magical" future telling device. It's not.

Sometimes, you just have to go with your gut, don't you?? Either this guy is going to take us where we ultimately want to go, or he isn't. That can be done after 3 years, 4 years 5 years etc. You have to just "feel" it. What if this is Wojo's ceiling, and he still gets another 3-4 years(minimum). Then what?/ You have essentially wasted at least those last 3-4 years, hoping you'd find a unicorn, when if you would have acted sooner, you would have been able to recover quicker.

Now of course, it also matters what the expectations of the people running the show REALLY are(not what they say in public). You can see SOME indications, this is fine with them.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 11:47:46 AM
Okay, for all of you "you must be patient" people..Let's say Wojo is here another 5 years, and produces relatively the same results as the first 5...now it's been 10 years, and where has it gotten you?? What I'm saying is..regardless of HIS or anyone's trend line(which so many use as gospel here), that doesn't guarantee you squat about how the future will play out with him. That's why I find it ironic, that the people that say patience is the way to go, yet point to his trend line like that is some "magical" future telling device. It's not.

Sometimes, you just have to go with your gut, don't you?? Either this guy is going to take us where we ultimately want to go, or he isn't. That can be done after 3 years, 4 years 5 years etc. You have to just "feel" it. What if this is Wojo's ceiling, and he still gets another 3-4 years(minimum). Then what?/ You have essentially wasted at least those last 3-4 years, hoping you'd find a unicorn, when if you would have acted sooner, you would have been able to recover quicker.


And maybe MU "feels" that this isn't his ceiling and he can be better.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Lazar's Headband on June 14, 2019, 11:52:10 AM
Guru-

You are schooling no one.  I wouldn't say you're being schooled either, just that you and TAMU have different opinions.

I understand you don't like Wojo.  But you seem to be on a crusade to convert everyone to your opinion.  As if your opinion is some sort of irrefutable fact.  In doing so, you come across as an arrogant jerk.  And you wonder why people don't like you.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 14, 2019, 11:58:25 AM
He didn't throw Burton under the bus. Burton transferred as stated repeatedly due to family issues. John Dawson was clearly not a high major player. He had one quality high major game, against Georgetown. The G League is full of bit players like Dawson that were not high major quality.
The average G League roster is predominately good high major players.

Here is the team Dawson played on:
https://greensboro.gleague.nba.com/roster/
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 12:02:02 PM
Guru-

You are schooling no one.  I wouldn't say you're being schooled either, just that you and TAMU have different opinions.

I understand you don't like Wojo.  But you seem to be on a crusade to convert everyone to your opinion.  As if your opinion is some sort of irrefutable fact.  In doing so, you come across as an arrogant jerk.  And you wonder why people don't like you.

People attack me like my OPINIONS are irrelevant, and that their beliefs are the correct way things are supposed to be done. That's what irritates me about it. They have opinions, I have opinions, no one knows who is right or wrong.

I'm not an arrogant jerk...just VERY impatient. We all want MU to win a National championship(s). I think that's irrefutable. I would just prefer it happen MUCH sooner as opposed to later. What's wrong with wanting that?? Yet, as soon as I say that...I get ridiculed and told that's not being realistic. People think I am DEMANDING that...of course I'm not...I just want it SO badly, and I'd prefer to not have to wait for it, that's all. Every year that goes by that they don't accomplish that, I'm another year closer to being dead.

The sooner they do it, the sooner it's out of the way, and I can move on with my life and leave everyone alone. Once you have it, it's known and no one can take it away from you. I'd rather know NOW, that way it's assured it will happen again in my lifetime. Right now, I don't know if that will or won't happen again..that's what drives me to be the way I am. I don't like thinking/fearing it may not happen again in my lifetime. Just do it...the sooner the better so I can relax.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 14, 2019, 12:12:19 PM
The average G League roster is predominately good high major players.

Here is the team Dawson played on:
https://greensboro.gleague.nba.com/roster/

5 of the 12 players on the roster are mid or low majors. That's over 40%. Thanks for confirming my case.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 14, 2019, 12:25:14 PM
5 of the 12 players on the roster are mid or low majors. That's over 40%. Thanks for confirming my case.
7 of the 12 are from Ohio State, Xavier, Texas Tech, Syracuse, Louisville , Virginia and Arkanas. It is that way with every team in the league.

The other players were all very significant players on their college teams.

It is not easy to make the G League. Lazar for example cant get back in it.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 14, 2019, 12:45:43 PM
Of all the players who have transferred from Marquette or left early, John Dawson wouldn't make the Top 50 for most fans in terms of impact.

As a freshman at MU, Dawson contributed little as the 5th or 6th player off the bench on a 17-15 team that went nowhere.

At Liberty, he was perhaps the equivalent of Joseph Chartouny at Fordham -- one of the better players on forgettable teams (making a single postseason appearance in the 2017 CIT) in a truly awful conference (the Big South ranks as one of the 5 worst in the country, far weaker than the Atlantic 10 today).

Good for him if he's had some success in the G League. He was not and never would have been a difference maker at Marquette.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Lazar's Headband on June 14, 2019, 12:47:51 PM
Guru-

Thanks for the reply.  I think that's the most reasonable post you've had about your expectations. 

 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 14, 2019, 12:51:30 PM
7 of the 12 are from Ohio State, Xavier, Texas Tech, Syracuse, Louisville , Virginia and Arkanas. It is that way with every team in the league.

The other players were all very significant players on their college teams.

It is not easy to make the G League. Lazar for example cant get back in it.

So about half the league couldn't cut it at the high major level. Regardless, John Dawson specifically was not good enough to play regular minutes for Marquette while he was here. That was the determination of Buzz who only once gave him more than 20 minutes in a game & Wojo who did the same. It was also the determination of 64 other high major coaches that didn't offer him when he left Marquette. Which ties nicely to the thread title as no P6 coach thought he deserved a P6 scholarship.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2019, 01:23:41 PM
Was NOT schooled by TAMU(he wishes). TAMU was using what he THOUGHT Tower was saying...because that's the only way it fit his argument.

This is exactly what tower said....." But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

He did NOT say the last 4 years specifically...he said averages 21 wins a season FOR 4 years. So TAMU somehow, wants to say Tower SAID Wojo's last 4 years...he NEVER said that. TAMU made an assumption(perhaps logically). However, that disregards Wojo's first year, which was absolute trash. Factor that in, and Wojo has NOT averaged 21 years over 4 years. So that's disingenuous. I got accused of "disregarding" Deane's last year. Well apparently Tower "threw out" Wojo's first year...so we must be "disregarding" both Coaches worst season's to date, and getting our averages that way, right??

But, let's cherry pick to fit our argument however we want. So let's use Wojo's FIRST four years instead...no one liked me NOT including Deane's last year(I used his first 4)...so let's do APPLES to APPLES...Shall we??

Mike Deane: 86 wins his first 4 years..Hmmm that averages 21.5 wins per year. Let's go back to what Tower said EXACTLY shall we?? But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

Wojo had: 73 wins his first four years...that averages 18.25 wins per year. Now the cries are going to be "totally unfair to dismiss Wojo's season last year, it was his best year".  ::) Remember..Tower never said specifically the LAST 4 years.

But it fits the Pro Wojo crowd to say the last 4 years, because this trendline thing that they take as freaking gospel.

Mike Deane was 100-55(.645) in his 5 years

Wojo is 97-69(.584) in his 5 years.

Everyone wants to "disregard" Wojo's first year because he had to "rebuild". The season happened, you can't just ignore it when it's convenient. 4 years is 4 years. Numbers are numbers..Guy averages 21 wins over a 4 year span, he averages 21 wins over a 4 year span...throwing out a year, middle years, last four, first 4, it doesn't matter...it's all the same #'s. Unless of course you want to make excuse, THEN it matters.

School will continue to be in session for anyone that's interested in attending...free of charge. Just sign up here, and we can get started.

Tower's EXACT quote again...But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

Except Marquette did just that. I'd bet anyone MASSIVE amounts of coin if Cords were still the AD, Wojo would be on VERY thin ice, if not gone. Cords had stones.

Amazingly arrogant, guru. You schooled nobody. You will say or do anything in your desperate attempt to "fire" Wojo. It really must frost your flakes that you have no say in it whatsoever.

The trend line isn't "gospel." It's merely a fact, one of many that can be used to support or rip the coach. Wojo happens to be trending up by just about any available measure. (I won't even mention Deane again; I've said my piece, and the comparison is so ludicrous it doesn't deserve another second of time from either of us.)

I was a major Wojo supporter until Hausershima; now he has to prove himself all over again to me. I think he can, and I certainly hope he can. If not, I won't lose a second of sleep over him leaving.

Then we can hire another career assistant or mid-major hopeful who may or may not work out, a guy we all can debate the merits of for years. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 14, 2019, 01:27:30 PM
Ners has documented all this in great depth in case you need more detail.

Ners also documented that Rowsey could never possibly be as good a college player as Dawson.

Ners also documented that Wojo's play for Sam at Creighton was stupid ... even though it worked exactly as planned.

Ners also documented a lot of things that were ridiculous. Citing Ners as some kind of "proof" of your arguments is pretty darn funny.

But yes, Wojo was handed a potential NCAA championship team. If only he had given the ball to Magic Dawson, we'd have won a couple titles by now.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 01:56:32 PM
People attack me like my OPINIONS are irrelevant, and that their beliefs are the correct way things are supposed to be done. That's what irritates me about it. They have opinions, I have opinions, no one knows who is right or wrong.


People don't attack you for your opinions.  They challenge you when you say things like "For some reason, some fans have seem to fallen into that "recruits good kids that make the dance occasionally" trap. Suddenly that's acceptable, since that's part of the refrain they always recite when judging Wojo."

No one has said this.  When you exaggerate, or just make something up to bolster your opinion, you are going to get called on it.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 14, 2019, 02:12:12 PM
Here's what I think the Wojo supporters fail to get...Both Crean and Buzz had better first 5 years than Wojo has...yet, no one seems to care about that(or they say it's irrelevant for some reason). Wojo doesn't seem to be held to that same standard.

Have you seen any one say Wojo is better than Crean or Buzz? I think it's unquestionable that both Crean and Buzz did better than Wojo in their first 5 years. Neither Buzz nor Crean got fired so I'm not sure why this is relevant.

Was NOT schooled by TAMU(he wishes). TAMU was using what he THOUGHT Tower was saying...because that's the only way it fit his argument.

This is exactly what tower said....." But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

No. This is the quote in question:

I will leave this here...in another thread, Tower said people don't fire Coaches that have won 84 games in 4 years like Wojo has...

There is only one four year period in which Wojo won 84 games, the last four years, not the first four years. I didn't think that's what Tower said, I knew that's what Tower said. I don't know if you were genuinely confused on what Tower was talking about or if you intentionally misinterpreted him because it would fit your argument better. Either way, it was a mistake on your part.

Also, in a conversation about whether or not a coach should/should've been fired, I don't know why anyone would think the first four years of a coach's career are more relevant than the last 4 years.

He did NOT say the last 4 years specifically...he said averages 21 wins a season FOR 4 years. So TAMU somehow, wants to say Tower SAID Wojo's last 4 years...he NEVER said that. TAMU made an assumption(perhaps logically). However, that disregards Wojo's first year, which was absolute trash. Factor that in, and Wojo has NOT averaged 21 years over 4 years. So that's disingenuous. I got accused of "disregarding" Deane's last year. Well apparently Tower "threw out" Wojo's first year...so we must be "disregarding" both Coaches worst season's to date, and getting our averages that way, right??

Not being disingenuous at all. If you think the last five years are relevant, then compare Wojo's last five years with Deane's last five years. I just don't understand an argument where you would only look at the first four years and ignore the most recent year when deciding when to fire a coach.

But, let's cherry pick to fit our argument however we want. So let's use Wojo's FIRST four years instead...no one liked me NOT including Deane's last year(I used his first 4)...so let's do APPLES to APPLES...Shall we??

Mike Deane: 86 wins his first 4 years..Hmmm that averages 21.5 wins per year. Let's go back to what Tower said EXACTLY shall we?? But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

Wojo had: 73 wins his first four years...that averages 18.25 wins per year. Now the cries are going to be "totally unfair to dismiss Wojo's season last year, it was his best year".  ::) Remember..Tower never said specifically the LAST 4 years.

But it fits the Pro Wojo crowd to say the last 4 years, because this trendline thing that they take as freaking gospel.

Actually the trendline argument is stronger when you factor in Wojo's first year. It makes the improvement look even better.

And trendline isn't gospel. Just because a coach has been improving every year doesn't mean he'll keep improving and vice versa. But I do think most people would rather have a coach that has been improving (Wojo/Jim Calhoun) vs one that has been regressing (Deane/Kevin Ollie).

Everyone wants to "disregard" Wojo's first year because he had to "rebuild". The season happened, you can't just ignore it when it's convenient. 4 years is 4 years. Numbers are numbers..Guy averages 21 wins over a 4 year span, he averages 21 wins over a 4 year span...throwing out a year, middle years, last four, first 4, it doesn't matter...it's all the same #'s. Unless of course you want to make excuse, THEN it matters.

Yes, Mike Deane averaged 21 wins over his first four years. And he wasn't fired, just like Wojo wasn't fired after this past year. Then, he went another year and his four year average dropped and he was fired. Unless the argument you think Tower was making was that if a coach averages 21 wins over a 4 year period at any point in his career it makes him immune from being fired ever. That would be a dumb argument and if that's what Tower meant than I disagree. I suspect you suspect that Tower wasn't making that argument.

School will continue to be in session for anyone that's interested in attending...free of charge. Just sign up here, and we can get started.

Yes, please school me on the following subjects:
1. How winning in the Great Midwest/CUSA is equal to winning in the Big East?
2. Why was Kevin Ollie fired and Jim Calhoun retained when Ollie's first years were so much better than Calhoun's? Did UConn make a mistake?
3. How is a recruiting class of Krunti Hester a sign that Deane's recruiting was trending up?

Tower's EXACT quote again...But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".

Again, here is the exact quote that started this conversation:

I will leave this here...in another thread, Tower said people don't fire Coaches that have won 84 games in 4 years like Wojo has...

Tower has also said what you said as well but since you wanted that exact quote I wanted to point it out.

Except Marquette did just that. I'd bet anyone MASSIVE amounts of coin if Cords were still the AD, Wojo would be on VERY thin ice, if not gone. Cords had stones.

I can promise you that you would lose that bet. Cords is still around and is nowhere near the fire Wojo camp.

Okay, for all of you "you must be patient" people..Let's say Wojo is here another 5 years, and produces relatively the same results as the first 5...now it's been 10 years, and where has it gotten you?? What I'm saying is..regardless of HIS or anyone's trend line(which so many use as gospel here), that doesn't guarantee you squat about how the future will play out with him. That's why I find it ironic, that the people that say patience is the way to go, yet point to his trend line like that is some "magical" future telling device. It's not.

Has anyone guaranteed success if we are patient? Maybe someone has but I can't remember anyone saying anything like that. I think some are optimistic but nothing's a guarantee. We could be patient and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and hire Coach K with Tony Bennett, Jay Wright, and Mark Few as assistant coaches and things could get worse. I've seen enough from Wojo that I'm not ready to roll the dice with a new hire yet. You are ready. That's fine, we can disagree.

Sometimes, you just have to go with your gut, don't you?? Either this guy is going to take us where we ultimately want to go, or he isn't. That can be done after 3 years, 4 years 5 years etc. You have to just "feel" it. What if this is Wojo's ceiling, and he still gets another 3-4 years(minimum). Then what?/ You have essentially wasted at least those last 3-4 years, hoping you'd find a unicorn, when if you would have acted sooner, you would have been able to recover quicker.

Now of course, it also matters what the expectations of the people running the show REALLY are(not what they say in public). You can see SOME indications, this is fine with them.

This is great. This is an irrefutable opinion. You have watched Wojo the past five years, you haven't been impressed, and you have a gut feeling that it won't get any better. That's a completely reasonable opinion to have. I have a different opinion which is fine.

People attack me like my OPINIONS are irrelevant, and that their beliefs are the correct way things are supposed to be done. That's what irritates me about it. They have opinions, I have opinions, no one knows who is right or wrong.

Honestly, Guru, I can't speak for everyone on this site but I don't believe I've ever attacked you for one of your opinions. You don't think Wojo is the guy and I respect that. Comparing Wojo's results to Deane's results is not an opinion. It's an argument. Not accepting your arguments on face value and challenging what you say is not an attack. It's a discussion, it's what sports forums are for so nerds like us can debate a sport/team that we love.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 14, 2019, 02:23:14 PM
Wojo had no rebuilding to do in year one. He threw Deonte Burton, who played in the NBA this year under the bus. John Dawson who has played in the G League was part of the collateral damage as well. All self inflicted wounds. Ners has documented all this in great depth in case you need more detail.

I've asked you, Ners, and others this before and have yet to get an answer so I'll ask again.

What was the last team that missed the NIT, lost their coach, lost 6/7 of their top players in minutes played, lost 3/4 members of their incoming recruiting class (and the one you kept was the 2nd highest ranked and had the 3rd best career out of all four), that made the NCAA the following year? NIT? Bonus points if you can find a team where the one returning player from that top 7 was as bad as Derrick Wilson.

If someone can actually answer that question successfully, I might be more inclined to believe that Wojo didn't need to rebuild. If not, you can say Wojo didn't need to rebuild all you want, but it means you were asking him to do something that had never been done before.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 02:38:14 PM
I've asked you, Ners, and others this before and have yet to get an answer so I'll ask again.

What was the last team that missed the NIT, lost their coach, lost 6/7 of their top players in minutes played, lost 3/4 members of their incoming recruiting class (and the one you kept was the 2nd highest ranked and had the 3rd best career out of all four), that made the NCAA the following year? NIT? Bonus points if you can find a team where the one returning player from that top 7 was as bad as Derrick Wilson.

If someone can actually answer that question successfully, I might be more inclined to believe that Wojo didn't need to rebuild. If not, you can say Wojo didn't need to rebuild all you want, but it means you were asking him to do something that had never been done before.

Don't you think the word "chose to" is more appropriate. I certainly do.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 14, 2019, 02:47:29 PM
Don't you think the word "chose to" is more appropriate. I certainly do.

No I don't. I don't think any coach could have gotten that team to the NCAAs in year 1. Not even the ghost of Al McGuire.

Do you have an answer for the question? Surely if rebuilding is a choice there must be lots of examples of coaches walking into situations as bad as Wojos and getting it done in the first year.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 14, 2019, 03:00:44 PM
We agree on this, and I'm pretty sure most other Scoopers do, too.

I believe he will be held to that higher standard when he faces similar circumstances, and I believe that time is approaching. Or at least I hope it is.

What do you mean when you say similar circumstances?  Crean had it far worse than Wojo when he got here in terms of just about everything.  As far as overall state of the program, Crean got the keys to a beat up Corolla, Wojo a shiny new Lexus.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: jesmu84 on June 14, 2019, 03:22:50 PM
Have you seen any one say Wojo is better than Crean or Buzz? I think it's unquestionable that both Crean and Buzz did better than Wojo in their first 5 years. Neither Buzz nor Crean got fired so I'm not sure why this is relevant.

No. This is the quote in question:

There is only one four year period in which Wojo won 84 games, the last four years, not the first four years. I didn't think that's what Tower said, I knew that's what Tower said. I don't know if you were genuinely confused on what Tower was talking about or if you intentionally misinterpreted him because it would fit your argument better. Either way, it was a mistake on your part.

Also, in a conversation about whether or not a coach should/should've been fired, I don't know why anyone would think the first four years of a coach's career are more relevant than the last 4 years.

Not being disingenuous at all. If you think the last five years are relevant, then compare Wojo's last five years with Deane's last five years. I just don't understand an argument where you would only look at the first four years and ignore the most recent year when deciding when to fire a coach.

Actually the trendline argument is stronger when you factor in Wojo's first year. It makes the improvement look even better.

And trendline isn't gospel. Just because a coach has been improving every year doesn't mean he'll keep improving and vice versa. But I do think most people would rather have a coach that has been improving (Wojo/Jim Calhoun) vs one that has been regressing (Deane/Kevin Ollie).

Yes, Mike Deane averaged 21 wins over his first four years. And he wasn't fired, just like Wojo wasn't fired after this past year. Then, he went another year and his four year average dropped and he was fired. Unless the argument you think Tower was making was that if a coach averages 21 wins over a 4 year period at any point in his career it makes him immune from being fired ever. That would be a dumb argument and if that's what Tower meant than I disagree. I suspect you suspect that Tower wasn't making that argument.

Yes, please school me on the following subjects:
1. How winning in the Great Midwest/CUSA is equal to winning in the Big East?
2. Why was Kevin Ollie fired and Jim Calhoun retained when Ollie's first years were so much better than Calhoun's? Did UConn make a mistake?
3. How is a recruiting class of Krunti Hester a sign that Deane's recruiting was trending up?

Again, here is the exact quote that started this conversation:

Tower has also said what you said as well but since you wanted that exact quote I wanted to point it out.

I can promise you that you would lose that bet. Cords is still around and is nowhere near the fire Wojo camp.

Has anyone guaranteed success if we are patient? Maybe someone has but I can't remember anyone saying anything like that. I think some are optimistic but nothing's a guarantee. We could be patient and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and hire Coach K with Tony Bennett, Jay Wright, and Mark Few as assistant coaches and things could get worse. I've seen enough from Wojo that I'm not ready to roll the dice with a new hire yet. You are ready. That's fine, we can disagree.

This is great. This is an irrefutable opinion. You have watched Wojo the past five years, you haven't been impressed, and you have a gut feeling that it won't get any better. That's a completely reasonable opinion to have. I have a different opinion which is fine.

Honestly, Guru, I can't speak for everyone on this site but I don't believe I've ever attacked you for one of your opinions. You don't think Wojo is the guy and I respect that. Comparing Wojo's results to Deane's results is not an opinion. It's an argument. Not accepting your arguments on face value and challenging what you say is not an attack. It's a discussion, it's what sports forums are for so nerds like us can debate a sport/team that we love.

Game. Set. Match.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 03:27:55 PM
What do you mean when you say similar circumstances?  Crean had it far worse than Wojo when he got here in terms of just about everything.  As far as overall state of the program, Crean got the keys to a beat up Corolla, Wojo a shiny new Lexus.

A Lexus?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 14, 2019, 04:27:32 PM
A Lexus?

I don’t know, I’m not a big car guy.  A Mercedes, then?

My point was, Crean had sh!t to work with as far as resources when he got here, and Wojo had champagne. 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 04:49:20 PM
Game. Set. Match.

You wish...You obviously still are lost...www.wearedepaul.com That's what you're looking for.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Marcus92 on June 14, 2019, 04:57:02 PM
This is arguing different points. (As per usual here on Scoop.)

Those who talk about the cupboard being empty when Wojo arrived are referring to the roster. Period.

Following the 2013-14 season, Marquette lost 4 seniors -- including our leading scorer and 2nd leading rebounder (Davonte Gardner), our 2nd leading scorer (Jamil Wilson), our 4th leading scorer (Jake Thomas) and Chris Otule. The team's 3rd leading scorer, Todd Mayo, decided to turn pro.

That's 4 starters and a key reserve from a team that wasn't all that good to begin with, finishing at 17-15. All of those departures were out of Wojo's control. Whether or not Deonte Burton, John Dawson or anybody else transferred, that's a total rebuild.

On the other side, the Marquette men's basketball program was obviously stronger when Wojo arrived with the building of the Al McGuire center, etc.

Is this somehow not as clear as it seems to me?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 14, 2019, 04:59:10 PM
I don’t know, I’m not a big car guy.  A Mercedes, then?

My point was, Crean had sh!t to work with as far as resources when he got here, and Wojo had champagne. 

Not really.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 05:16:38 PM
Have you seen any one say Wojo is better than Crean or Buzz? I think it's unquestionable that both Crean and Buzz did better than Wojo in their first 5 years. Neither Buzz nor Crean got fired so I'm not sure why this is relevant.

No. This is the quote in question:

There is only one four year period in which Wojo won 84 games, the last four years, not the first four years. I didn't think that's what Tower said, I knew that's what Tower said. I don't know if you were genuinely confused on what Tower was talking about or if you intentionally misinterpreted him because it would fit your argument better. Either way, it was a mistake on your part.

Also, in a conversation about whether or not a coach should/should've been fired, I don't know why anyone would think the first four years of a coach's career are more relevant than the last 4 years.

Not being disingenuous at all. If you think the last five years are relevant, then compare Wojo's last five years with Deane's last five years. I just don't understand an argument where you would only look at the first four years and ignore the most recent year when deciding when to fire a coach.

Actually the trendline argument is stronger when you factor in Wojo's first year. It makes the improvement look even better.

And trendline isn't gospel. Just because a coach has been improving every year doesn't mean he'll keep improving and vice versa. But I do think most people would rather have a coach that has been improving (Wojo/Jim Calhoun) vs one that has been regressing (Deane/Kevin Ollie).

Yes, Mike Deane averaged 21 wins over his first four years. And he wasn't fired, just like Wojo wasn't fired after this past year. Then, he went another year and his four year average dropped and he was fired. Unless the argument you think Tower was making was that if a coach averages 21 wins over a 4 year period at any point in his career it makes him immune from being fired ever. That would be a dumb argument and if that's what Tower meant than I disagree. I suspect you suspect that Tower wasn't making that argument.

Yes, please school me on the following subjects:
1. How winning in the Great Midwest/CUSA is equal to winning in the Big East?
2. Why was Kevin Ollie fired and Jim Calhoun retained when Ollie's first years were so much better than Calhoun's? Did UConn make a mistake?
3. How is a recruiting class of Krunti Hester a sign that Deane's recruiting was trending up?

Again, here is the exact quote that started this conversation:

Tower has also said what you said as well but since you wanted that exact quote I wanted to point it out.

I can promise you that you would lose that bet. Cords is still around and is nowhere near the fire Wojo camp.

Has anyone guaranteed success if we are patient? Maybe someone has but I can't remember anyone saying anything like that. I think some are optimistic but nothing's a guarantee. We could be patient and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and hire Coach K with Tony Bennett, Jay Wright, and Mark Few as assistant coaches and things could get worse. I've seen enough from Wojo that I'm not ready to roll the dice with a new hire yet. You are ready. That's fine, we can disagree.

This is great. This is an irrefutable opinion. You have watched Wojo the past five years, you haven't been impressed, and you have a gut feeling that it won't get any better. That's a completely reasonable opinion to have. I have a different opinion which is fine.

Honestly, Guru, I can't speak for everyone on this site but I don't believe I've ever attacked you for one of your opinions. You don't think Wojo is the guy and I respect that. Comparing Wojo's results to Deane's results is not an opinion. It's an argument. Not accepting your arguments on face value and challenging what you say is not an attack. It's a discussion, it's what sports forums are for so nerds like us can debate a sport/team that we love.


Ok TAMU, this is a genuine question..I want you to ignore the trend line, and the overall records etc, for this question and tell me what have YOU seen from Wojo, that you like so much/that he does well(in your opinion), and things he needs to work on. You think he CAN get it done..that's fair...but why?? What do you see??

I will answer this as well...There are several things I look for in a Coach, that convinces me whether he is the guy or not. That being said, I personally put priority on two things more than anything else(and others may have diff things they look at). My #1 thing is in game adjustments/creativity. It has been 5 years now for Wojo, and I still have not seen any in game adjustments that make me go "oh yeah, he's got it". He might tweak a thing or two, here or there, but he doesn't do anything that to me, can change the course of the game.

For example, and they were both young/inexperienced Coaches as well..but two examples that I come up with are: Crean- A game against Wisconsin, he put Chris Grimm on Alando Tucker...no one, and i mean NO ONE saw that coming...it worked to perfection. There are plenty of other examples, but that's just one.

Buzz...There are a couple of examples here...now I don't remember the specific game(s), he did this in, but they were struggling, and after a timeout, he came out in zone. They hadn't shown it all day..got them back in the game and they went on to win..brilliant! He also pulled out zones other times as well. Another was putting Jimmy Butler on Xavier's Tu Holloway in the NCAA tournament...ball game.

Wojo has never done anything like that...he doesn't seem to have a "bag of tricks". I would have thought, after 5 years and learning from one of the greatest Coaches of all time, he would have some things in his back pocket that he could go to. A press, a trap, a zone...something...anything. And a couple of possessions here and there does NOT count as doing it or being creative.

To be fair...I do like his offense and they were much improved defensively this year, but his in game Coaching to me, is incredibly poor and could have during the course of a season swung a game or two, and that could be huge in the end.

The other thing that bothers me, and I really hate to say this because it was truly the one thing I thought he would be EXCEPTIONAL at is...recruiting. He has been ok/good...but I REALLY and truly believed with his reputation around college basketball he would Excel at MU in this area, like no other Coach before him had. Yes, he has landed some really good players..Henry and Markus come right to mind, but, if he is ultimately going to take this program where everyone wants it to go, he NEEDS to start landing top talents more consistently. Obviously he isn't going to land Duke type talent consistently, but it NEEDS to be better.

Admittedly, that's where a lot of my frustration has come in with him for me..I TRULY believed, he would hit the ground running recruiting from day 1, and the results would be better to this point than they have been, based on sheer talent alone. Right or wrong, that's the way I felt. Yes, recruiting is hit or miss, and you miss on a lot of guys, more than you hit, but if I'm honest, Crean recruited better through this part of their tenures than Wojo has...IN MY OPINION. Just on the class of Dominic, Jerel and Wesley alone, Crean wins that. Haven't seen a class like that yet from Wojo, and I thought classes like that would be the norm for him. I really did.

If you remember, what ultimately drove TC away was his failure to land Iman Shumpert...that was the nail in the coffin. At that point, after swinging and missing on so many top guys through the years, he believed he could never land enough top talent to keep the program going at a high level. Those are the types of guys I thought Wojo would be better at landing. This far, he really hasn't been.

Just my opinions.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: 79Warrior on June 14, 2019, 06:26:22 PM

What drove TC away was the frigging shot by Lopez in Anaheim😀
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 14, 2019, 06:53:36 PM
MUGURU....never...always....you sure that the eagle eye of yours has NEVER seen Wojo make any major adjustments in 5 years?

You sure about that? 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 14, 2019, 07:04:15 PM
Crean recruited in the mammoth Big East, which helped....that was arguably the greatest basketball conference in history, and the best at the time in my opinion.

He also was coming off a Final Four not far back to land the three amigos.  Shiny new practice facility only a year or two old when they signed.  Timing and situations matter. 
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 07:11:37 PM
MUGURU....never...always....you sure that the eagle eye of yours has NEVER seen Wojo make any major adjustments in 5 years?

You sure about that?

Yes, I'm positive...show me a game where out of the blue, he started trapping, or pressing(not loose pressing, full court Louisville style), forcing turnovers to get back into games?? Show me where, over his five years, he has pulled out a zone(out of nowhere) to change the complexion of a game?? Again, those are the kinds of things I(me, no one else) looks for as far as in game Coaching goes.

Again a few possessions here and there don't cut it, for me...those aren't fair examples. Where he really lost me was this last year...game against Georgetown at home, BE title on the line...the FRESHMAN(and I emphasize the word Freshman) Guards from Georgetown are getting to the lane at will on MU. Argue if you want, they were getting calls etc, throwing up bad shots and they were going in, whatever you want to say about that, I respect that. That being said, none of those things happen if you keep them out of the lane altogether. How do you do that?? The BEST way is to be in their F'n grill with two longer, players(let's just say Cain and Bailey), be so tight on them they can hear your breath.

What's going to happen do you think, to two FRESHMAN Guards on the road, being hounded like that constantly(after about the third time they got in the lane at will, I'd have put an end to that). Most assuredly they WILL turn it over..at least a handful of times. There is NO disputing that, I don't think. So they turn it over, you get a few run outs, you get a couple of baskets, it changes the game, you win and are BE champions. Point being, what in the hell would it have hurt to TRY it?? The worst that happens is you get called for a couple of fouls on a couple of diff possessions. But the positives of it, FAR outweigh the negatives. I assure you of that. Even seasoned veteran Guards would turn it over in that situation more than a few times. Freshman most certainly will.

He(Wojo), has this seemingly strange obsession with doing the same thing over and over and over again(maybe a minor tweak here or there). It's like he thinks "okay, this time down we'll get a stop, it HAS to work this time". Except in al ot of cases it doesn't...didn't. That's when you NEED a bag of tricks.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 14, 2019, 07:21:13 PM
Crean recruited in the mammoth Big East, which helped....that was arguably the greatest basketball conference in history, and the best at the time in my opinion.

He also was coming off a Final Four not far back to land the three amigos.  Shiny new practice facility only a year or two old when they signed.  Timing and situations matter.

But I hear constantly from people on this board how good/great the Big East is now. Granted, they say not as good as the old big east, but people hear continually rave about it. Besides, don't kids typically commit to Coaches..NOT schools and conferences?? I mean, yes, of course they do, that's why when a Coach leaves you see so many players leave said school.

Timing and situations matter...but so too do reputations..Wojo had/has the Duke pedigree when he came to MU. He might have been the ONE assistant in CBB that EVERYONE knew who he was..he had a reputation. Worked for Coach k. Monster recruiter was his reputation(yes, some of it was Duke, but even still).

Again...I admittedly, right or wrong, thought he would hit the ground running recruiting at MU. We'd see the best classes we have seen at MU, that's his reputation. We haven't yet. I'm not saying his recruiting has been poor..it hasn't. But it hasn't been as good as I thought/expected it to be either. I really believed his reputation would be the difference.

I will say it again, just so people don't think I never admit when I'm wrong...My frustrations with not having better results thus far(than what I expected), were because I truly thought his recruiting would be at a level that it masked some of his weaknesses as a Head Coach. That just hasn't happened. And now, because some of those weaknesses have shown themselves, it's probably affecting his recruiting to an extent. It's a conundrum.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: TAMU Eagle on June 14, 2019, 08:32:07 PM
Ok TAMU, this is a genuine question..I want you to ignore the trend line, and the overall records etc, for this question and tell me what have YOU seen from Wojo, that you like so much/that he does well(in your opinion), and things he needs to work on. You think he CAN get it done..that's fair...but why?? What do you see??

Thanks for asking.

I think Wojo is an overrated recruiter and underrated game coach. I think people prematurely declared him a great recruiter because he landed Henry. He deserves props for it for sure, but I feel like recruiting has gone down from there. 2020 will be a big test for him. Landing Symir was a great start but I'd like to see 3/5 of the open spots (or maybe 2 if they are elite recruits) filled by the early signing period to feel comfortable moving forward.

Wojo is a systems coach who likes to play a certain way. On the offensive side it has consistently produced elite results. The defensive side was a struggle but once the right players were in place it was best in (a down) Big East. I think Wojo's lack of adjustments is a myth. He does stick to his system but he adjusts within it. Just because a coach doesn't throw out a zone doesn't mean an adjustment wasn't made. Whose covering who, where the screen is coming from, when help comes/when it doesn't, etc.

One of the better indicators IMO of quality in game coaching is out of time out plays. Marquette's points per possession out of time outs, both offensive and defensive, have been at elite levels the past few years. He has a knack for knowing when to call a timeout and drawing up the right play. I've liked his roster management, it's been pretty rare that I've thought he was playing the wrong lineup or riding a player too long.

Mostly, it's because Wojo has improved as a coach every year. Each year, there seems to be a major bugaboo that gets addressed. No shooters, next season we're one of the elite shooting teams in the country. No defense? Next season were top in conference. This year the big problem was lack of slashers. Next season it looks like that will be addressed with the additions of McEwen, Elliott, Torrence. Now just because he's improved every season doesn't mean he will continue to improve going forward but I think it's good evidence.

I don't know if Wojo is the answer. I've seen enough good that I have hope and I haven't seen enough bad to want him gone. I don't fault anyone who does....though I think if you do, you have to recognize that no program would fire a coach with Wojo's resume at this point. I'm not sure that a coach has ever been fired immediately after earning a 5 seed or better without off the court issues.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 15, 2019, 12:24:54 AM
One of the better indicators IMO of quality in game coaching is out of time out plays. Marquette's points per possession out of time outs, both offensive and defensive, have been at elite levels the past few years. He has a knack for knowing when to call a timeout and drawing up the right play. I've liked his roster management, it's been pretty rare that I've thought he was playing the wrong lineup or riding a player too long.

This is what I was thinking. The thing with adjustments like these is that they require careful analysis, usually after the game is over, to see. Wojo doesn't make big, reactionary adjustments, he tinkers. His offense was ranked 8th, 12th, & had surged into the top-20 before Markus' injury sank it to a still respectable 32.

Defensively, we went from two years of sub-160, "can't coach defense", to top-50, which the vast majority of people on this site didn't think could be done. That may not always happen with big, obvious adjustments the casual fan will notice, but when you break it down after, it's clear that it worked.

This is why Paint Touches is such a good follow. They highlight just this kind of stuff. I've come to appreciate Wojo a great deal more thanks to their articles & Twitter feed.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 15, 2019, 12:40:22 AM
Thanks for asking.

I think Wojo is an overrated recruiter and underrated game coach. I think people prematurely declared him a great recruiter because he landed Henry. He deserves props for it for sure, but I feel like recruiting has gone down from there. 2020 will be a big test for him. Landing Symir was a great start but I'd like to see 3/5 of the open spots (or maybe 2 if they are elite recruits) filled by the early signing period to feel comfortable moving forward.

Wojo is a systems coach who likes to play a certain way. On the offensive side it has consistently produced elite results. The defensive side was a struggle but once the right players were in place it was best in (a down) Big East. I think Wojo's lack of adjustments is a myth. He does stick to his system but he adjusts within it. Just because a coach doesn't throw out a zone doesn't mean an adjustment wasn't made. Whose covering who, where the screen is coming from, when help comes/when it doesn't, etc.

One of the better indicators IMO of quality in game coaching is out of time out plays. Marquette's points per possession out of time outs, both offensive and defensive, have been at elite levels the past few years. He has a knack for knowing when to call a timeout and drawing up the right play. I've liked his roster management, it's been pretty rare that I've thought he was playing the wrong lineup or riding a player too long.

Mostly, it's because Wojo has improved as a coach every year. Each year, there seems to be a major bugaboo that gets addressed. No shooters, next season we're one of the elite shooting teams in the country. No defense? Next season were top in conference. This year the big problem was lack of slashers. Next season it looks like that will be addressed with the additions of McEwen, Elliott, Torrence. Now just because he's improved every season doesn't mean he will continue to improve going forward but I think it's good evidence.

I don't know if Wojo is the answer. I've seen enough good that I have hope and I haven't seen enough bad to want him gone. I don't fault anyone who does....though I think if you do, you have to recognize that no program would fire a coach with Wojo's resume at this point. I'm not sure that a coach has ever been fired immediately after earning a 5 seed or better without off the court issues.

I will say, at times last year, he had lineups on the floor that were offensively bankrupt. I remember many instances when Sam was the only true offensive threat on the floor(surrounded by some combo usually of Sacar, Bailey, Cain, Morrow/Theo). That always made me grimace seeing that combo. And sure enough, they almost always struggled to score in those situations.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 15, 2019, 08:01:35 AM
I will say, at times last year, he had lineups on the floor that were offensively bankrupt. I remember many instances when Sam was the only true offensive threat on the floor(surrounded by some combo usually of Sacar, Bailey, Cain, Morrow/Theo). That always made me grimace seeing that combo. And sure enough, they almost always struggled to score in those situations.

So he had the #2, #4, and either the (virtually tied) #5 or 6 scorer on the floor together? Sometimes you have to rest Markus & Joey at the same time. Sometimes someone will be in foul trouble at the same time another guy needs a breather.

If this is your biggest complaint, frankly that seems a little silly.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 15, 2019, 09:44:15 AM
Thanks for asking.

I think Wojo is an overrated recruiter and underrated game coach. I think people prematurely declared him a great recruiter because he landed Henry. He deserves props for it for sure, but I feel like recruiting has gone down from there. 2020 will be a big test for him. Landing Symir was a great start but I'd like to see 3/5 of the open spots (or maybe 2 if they are elite recruits) filled by the early signing period to feel comfortable moving forward.

Wojo is a systems coach who likes to play a certain way. On the offensive side it has consistently produced elite results. The defensive side was a struggle but once the right players were in place it was best in (a down) Big East. I think Wojo's lack of adjustments is a myth. He does stick to his system but he adjusts within it. Just because a coach doesn't throw out a zone doesn't mean an adjustment wasn't made. Whose covering who, where the screen is coming from, when help comes/when it doesn't, etc.

One of the better indicators IMO of quality in game coaching is out of time out plays. Marquette's points per possession out of time outs, both offensive and defensive, have been at elite levels the past few years. He has a knack for knowing when to call a timeout and drawing up the right play. I've liked his roster management, it's been pretty rare that I've thought he was playing the wrong lineup or riding a player too long.

Mostly, it's because Wojo has improved as a coach every year. Each year, there seems to be a major bugaboo that gets addressed. No shooters, next season we're one of the elite shooting teams in the country. No defense? Next season were top in conference. This year the big problem was lack of slashers. Next season it looks like that will be addressed with the additions of McEwen, Elliott, Torrence. Now just because he's improved every season doesn't mean he will continue to improve going forward but I think it's good evidence.

I don't know if Wojo is the answer. I've seen enough good that I have hope and I haven't seen enough bad to want him gone. I don't fault anyone who does....though I think if you do, you have to recognize that no program would fire a coach with Wojo's resume at this point. I'm not sure that a coach has ever been fired immediately after earning a 5 seed or better without off the court issues.

Fair enough...now another question, which I'm sure you have answered before, but I don't feel like digging through numerous threads to try to find it. But, what would MU have to do(or maybe more appropriately NOT do), this upcoming season, for you to be ready to move on?? Would not making the tournament be enough?? How bad would it have to be for you??

You also brought up a point about Wojo liking to play to his system..well this next year I think will be another HUGE test to see exactly what he's capable of. He doesn't have the luxury of relying on his offense to make 3's like they have been next year, so is he capable of/willing to revamp the ffense so it's more predicated on slashing(which I think all of us feel needs to happen).

What about defensively?? Will he run a more pressure style defensive that allows his athletes to try to make more plays, gain more possessions defensively. These would be pretty massive changes for him. That has me very concerned as we haven't seen him, to this point, willing to, or capable of making massive changes like that. Yet, the season may be predicated on it.

A lot of people here seem to be ASSUMING that's the way MU will play this next year, like it's a given. I hesitate to say that. I need to see it, to believe it first, or will he just play the same way with some tweaks here or there?? Honestly, next season, and his job COULD be predicated on whether or not he is capable of getting out of his "comfort" zone and doing something almost completely different than what he has to this point. If he doesn't...things COULD potentially be disastrous.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 15, 2019, 09:58:41 AM
So he had the #2, #4, and either the (virtually tied) #5 or 6 scorer on the floor together? Sometimes you have to rest Markus & Joey at the same time. Sometimes someone will be in foul trouble at the same time another guy needs a breather.

If this is your biggest complaint, frankly that seems a little silly.

Understandably, those things have to happen, so in a lot of cases he didn't/doesn't have a choice...but therein lies the problem, and the biggest concern I have had with him to date(because I thought it would be his greatest strength), is why isn't the talent better?? Again, I really and truly thought he'd have recruited far better than what he has to this point, I thought he would excel in that area, and the talent he would bring in would make up for any Coaching flaws he had. His recruiting hasn't been poor...it's been okay/good, but not at the level I expected/thought it would be at by now. I don't think ,given his reputation around college BB that it was unreasonable to think his recruiting would be better than what it has been.

Granted, not expecting Duke level, and he has had some hits in Markus and Henry as far as the big time recruits, but again, I really thought recruiting was going to be the least of concerns five years in. Thought the talent would be consistently good, and why I think I have been so frustrated to this point, and why i thought the results would have been better thus far. The talent just hasn't been where I assumed it would be at this point. Not sure why.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: IrwinFletcher on June 15, 2019, 10:55:28 AM
Fair enough...now another question, which I'm sure you have answered before, but I don't feel like digging through numerous threads to try to find it. But, what would MU have to do(or maybe more appropriately NOT do), this upcoming season, for you to be ready to move on?? Would not making the tournament be enough?? How bad would it have to be for you??

You also brought up a point about Wojo liking to play to his system..well this next year I think will be another HUGE test to see exactly what he's capable of. He doesn't have the luxury of relying on his offense to make 3's like they have been next year, so is he capable of/willing to revamp the ffense so it's more predicated on slashing(which I think all of us feel needs to happen).

What about defensively?? Will he run a more pressure style defensive that allows his athletes to try to make more plays, gain more possessions defensively. These would be pretty massive changes for him. That has me very concerned as we haven't seen him, to this point, willing to, or capable of making massive changes like that. Yet, the season may be predicated on it.

A lot of people here seem to be ASSUMING that's the way MU will play this next year, like it's a given. I hesitate to say that. I need to see it, to believe it first, or will he just play the same way with some tweaks here or there?? Honestly, next season, and his job COULD be predicated on whether or not he is capable of getting out of his "comfort" zone and doing something almost completely different than what he has to this point. If he doesn't...things COULD potentially be disastrous.


The type of defensive scheme he plays is immaterial.  If he wants to play pack line or 40 minutes of hell, who gives a rip.  Just be good at whatever system you choose to run.  That is all I care about.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 15, 2019, 11:12:17 AM
Understandably, those things have to happen, so in a lot of cases he didn't/doesn't have a choice...but therein lies the problem, and the biggest concern I have had with him to date(because I thought it would be his greatest strength), is why isn't the talent better?? Again, I really and truly thought he'd have recruited far better than what he has to this point, I thought he would excel in that area, and the talent he would bring in would make up for any Coaching flaws he had. His recruiting hasn't been poor...it's been okay/good, but not at the level I expected/thought it would be at by now. I don't think ,given his reputation around college BB that it was unreasonable to think his recruiting would be better than what it has been.

Granted, not expecting Duke level, and he has had some hits in Markus and Henry as far as the big time recruits, but again, I really thought recruiting was going to be the least of concerns five years in. Thought the talent would be consistently good, and why I think I have been so frustrated to this point, and why i thought the results would have been better thus far. The talent just hasn't been where I assumed it would be at this point. Not sure why.

The talent won us 24 games & had us ranked in the top-10 before our best player got injured. The talent included a vastly improved defense so that the lineup you mentioned would have a ton of length on the floor and make it tough to score on.

Over the past 5 games of the season, Pomeroy had one lineup listed that had only one of Markus/Sam/Joey. It was a lineup of Chartouny/Anim/Bailey/Sam/Morrow. That lineup was responsible for 4% of the possessions. So based on our average tempo, that lineup was on the floor a little less than 3 possessions per game. What I gather looking at it is that sometimes Howard needed to rest & it's more of a defensive lineup, but still has 3 of our top-5 scorers. It also has our only other point guard (that was a miss, but he had to play some minutes) and Bailey, who played well offensively in that stretch (114.8 ORtg, 7 ppg, 38.9 3PFG%).

So for less than 3 possessions per game, Wojo played 3 of our 5 best offensive options, the hottest bench player, and our backup PG. Again...that complaint seems a little silly.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 15, 2019, 11:18:31 AM
And how often was that line up used in game end situations when they were just running out the clock. Or for 30 seconds before a TV timeout?

It is statistically insignificant.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 15, 2019, 04:25:26 PM
But I hear constantly from people on this board how good/great the Big East is now. Granted, they say not as good as the old big east, but people hear continually rave about it. Besides, don't kids typically commit to Coaches..NOT schools and conferences?? I mean, yes, of course they do, that's why when a Coach leaves you see so many players leave said school.

Timing and situations matter...but so too do reputations..Wojo had/has the Duke pedigree when he came to MU. He might have been the ONE assistant in CBB that EVERYONE knew who he was..he had a reputation. Worked for Coach k. Monster recruiter was his reputation(yes, some of it was Duke, but even still).

Again...I admittedly, right or wrong, thought he would hit the ground running recruiting at MU. We'd see the best classes we have seen at MU, that's his reputation. We haven't yet. I'm not saying his recruiting has been poor..it hasn't. But it hasn't been as good as I thought/expected it to be either. I really believed his reputation would be the difference.

I will say it again, just so people don't think I never admit when I'm wrong...My frustrations with not having better results thus far(than what I expected), were because I truly thought his recruiting would be at a level that it masked some of his weaknesses as a Head Coach. That just hasn't happened. And now, because some of those weaknesses have shown themselves, it's probably affecting his recruiting to an extent. It's a conundrum.

You are conflating again.  The Big East is a very good conference, that doesn’t mean it was as good as the old Big East for that 4 to 6 year stretch.  You know that, so why even pretend to make it a thing like you have?

Recruiting requires relationships, stability, etc.  Young coach, not from the area, former coach bad mouthing conference on his way out and couldn’t do dick in the new conference, clamp down on who could be recruited because previous coach abused that so badly....those things matter
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 15, 2019, 05:40:14 PM
Yes, I'm positive...show me a game where out of the blue, he started trapping, or pressing(not loose pressing, full court Louisville style), forcing turnovers to get back into games?? Show me where, over his five years, he has pulled out a zone(out of nowhere) to change the complexion of a game?? Again, those are the kinds of things I(me, no one else) looks for as far as in game Coaching goes.

Again a few possessions here and there don't cut it, for me...those aren't fair examples. Where he really lost me was this last year...game against Georgetown at home, BE title on the line...the FRESHMAN(and I emphasize the word Freshman) Guards from Georgetown are getting to the lane at will on MU. Argue if you want, they were getting calls etc, throwing up bad shots and they were going in, whatever you want to say about that, I respect that. That being said, none of those things happen if you keep them out of the lane altogether. How do you do that?? The BEST way is to be in their F'n grill with two longer, players(let's just say Cain and Bailey), be so tight on them they can hear your breath.

What's going to happen do you think, to two FRESHMAN Guards on the road, being hounded like that constantly(after about the third time they got in the lane at will, I'd have put an end to that). Most assuredly they WILL turn it over..at least a handful of times. There is NO disputing that, I don't think. So they turn it over, you get a few run outs, you get a couple of baskets, it changes the game, you win and are BE champions. Point being, what in the hell would it have hurt to TRY it?? The worst that happens is you get called for a couple of fouls on a couple of diff possessions. But the positives of it, FAR outweigh the negatives. I assure you of that. Even seasoned veteran Guards would turn it over in that situation more than a few times. Freshman most certainly will.

He(Wojo), has this seemingly strange obsession with doing the same thing over and over and over again(maybe a minor tweak here or there). It's like he thinks "okay, this time down we'll get a stop, it HAS to work this time". Except in al ot of cases it doesn't...didn't. That's when you NEED a bag of tricks.

Games where adjustments were made....Let's see just this past season alone:

Louisville we trailed at the half. Louisville ended up being a good team.  We won the second half, forced OT and won the game.

At Georgetown, our best player goes down in the opening minutes, we make massive adjustments and win the game on the road.

Wisconsin, with our best player struggling, we made several adjustments at the half and OT to win the game.

Nationally ranked Buffalo I think was tied at the half or maybe up one point....we won by 20 against the guy you love...Oats.

At Creighton, losing at halftime....came back to force OT and won the game.

Vs Providence at home, we were trailing by 8 points at halftime.  Adjustments, and won the second half by 19 to crush the Friars.

At Xavier, tie game at half, won on the road.

Butler at home, trailed at the half and won going away.

I could go on.  In some cases it was because guys weren't playing well, or guys in foul trouble (Theo, Ed, Markus) and changes had to be made.  Going to a zone to switch things up.  Whatever.  But for you to say NEVER, when I can rattle off a bunch this season alone, not to mention the previous four years, it again begs the question how blinded by hatred are you that you make these statements completely void of facts?

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 15, 2019, 05:47:40 PM
Games where adjustments were made....Let's see just this past season alone:

Louisville we trailed at the half. Louisville ended up being a good team.  We won the second half, forced OT and won the game.

At Georgetown, our best player goes down in the opening minutes, we make massive adjustments and win the game on the road.

Wisconsin, with our best player struggling, we made several adjustments at the half and OT to win the game.

Nationally ranked Buffalo I think was tied at the half or maybe up one point....we won by 20 against the guy you love...Oats.

At Creighton, losing at halftime....came back to force OT and won the game.

Vs Providence at home, we were trailing by 8 points at halftime.  Adjustments, and won the second half by 19 to crush the Friars.

At Xavier, tie game at half, won on the road.

Butler at home, trailed at the half and won going away.

I could go on.  In some cases it was because guys weren't playing well, or guys in foul trouble (Theo, Ed, Markus) and changes had to be made.  Going to a zone to switch things up.  Whatever.  But for you to say NEVER, when I can rattle off a bunch this season alone, not to mention the previous four years, it again begs the question how blinded by hatred are you that you make these statements completely void of facts?

This is good stuff. For some details, just from memory, against Kansas State, the refs were very loose with the whistles. Offensively, we focused on driving, largely through Markus, to foul multiple players out and take advantage of the Wildcats' short bench. Against Georgetown, not only did we lose our starting PG, but our only other PG (Chartouny) was awful. Rather than trying to ride him until he got hot, Wojo ran the offense through the Hausers & Anim. It was a very unconventional approach and led to the Point Joey comments.

I'm sure those aren't the only exact adjustments, but both helped us win games.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 15, 2019, 09:37:28 PM
Understandably, those things have to happen, so in a lot of cases he didn't/doesn't have a choice...but therein lies the problem, and the biggest concern I have had with him to date(because I thought it would be his greatest strength), is why isn't the talent better?? Again, I really and truly thought he'd have recruited far better than what he has to this point, I thought he would excel in that area, and the talent he would bring in would make up for any Coaching flaws he had. His recruiting hasn't been poor...it's been okay/good, but not at the level I expected/thought it would be at by now. I don't think ,given his reputation around college BB that it was unreasonable to think his recruiting would be better than what it has been.

Granted, not expecting Duke level, and he has had some hits in Markus and Henry as far as the big time recruits, but again, I really thought recruiting was going to be the least of concerns five years in. Thought the talent would be consistently good, and why I think I have been so frustrated to this point, and why i thought the results would have been better thus far. The talent just hasn't been where I assumed it would be at this point. Not sure why.
In order to viably compete for the higher level talent the program has to be a consistent winner and in the national conversation.

As long as we remain at the level we are at ,the type of players we can recruit and sign are going to be similar to what we have now.

The administration told the world they are happy with the level we are at. That means the current coach has his job and if the results are going to change he must become a more effective coach.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 15, 2019, 10:46:01 PM
Games where adjustments were made....Let's see just this past season alone:

Louisville we trailed at the half. Louisville ended up being a good team.  We won the second half, forced OT and won the game.

At Georgetown, our best player goes down in the opening minutes, we make massive adjustments and win the game on the road.

Wisconsin, with our best player struggling, we made several adjustments at the half and OT to win the game.

Nationally ranked Buffalo I think was tied at the half or maybe up one point....we won by 20 against the guy you love...Oats.

At Creighton, losing at halftime....came back to force OT and won the game.

Vs Providence at home, we were trailing by 8 points at halftime.  Adjustments, and won the second half by 19 to crush the Friars.

At Xavier, tie game at half, won on the road.

Butler at home, trailed at the half and won going away.

I could go on.  In some cases it was because guys weren't playing well, or guys in foul trouble (Theo, Ed, Markus) and changes had to be made.  Going to a zone to switch things up.  Whatever.  But for you to say NEVER, when I can rattle off a bunch this season alone, not to mention the previous four years, it again begs the question how blinded by hatred are you that you make these statements completely void of facts?

Obviously you just "glossed" over what I said, and the kinds of adjustments I personally look for...I never once said he makes NO adjustments(show me where i said that)?? This is what  I said EXACTLY...I guess you just didn't use that part of what I said because well...it wouldn't fit your narrative...I also specifically said(I bolded it for you), that I(me no one else), looks for these types of adjustments. It's personal preference.

Yes, I'm positive...show me a game where out of the blue, he started trapping, or pressing(not loose pressing, full court Louisville style), forcing turnovers to get back into games?? Show me where, over his five years, he has pulled out a zone(out of nowhere) to change the complexion of a game?? Again, those are the kinds of things I(me, no one else) looks for as far as in game Coaching goes.

Also...I think a couple of games you mentioned get overlooked. I mean, let's be honest..yes, at the end of the day MU got the W, but...if that two had correctly been ruled a 3 in the UL game, MU loses. In the creighton game, Sam actually released that shot a tick to late..if that's ruled correctly, MU loses that one to. Those two change the season DRAMATICALLY, don't you agree?? They don't get a 5 seed, two more losses etc. Pomeroy said(which you use a lot) that MU was one of the luckiest teams in the country last year. How different does the season look without some of that luck?? Yet, that too gets conveniently "forgotten" when people praise Wojo for the "great" year he had. That HAS to be considered doesn't it?? the season maybe, really turly looks a bit better than what it actually was all things considered.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 12:58:43 AM
Yes, I'm positive...show me a game where out of the blue, he started trapping, or pressing(not loose pressing, full court Louisville style), forcing turnovers to get back into games?? Show me where, over his five years, he has pulled out a zone(out of nowhere) to change the complexion of a game?? Again, those are the kinds of things I(me, no one else) looks for as far as in game Coaching goes.

So because, apparently ignoring the games I mentioned, and ignoring Wojo's ATO efficiency, you aren't able to see the adjustments Wojo makes, he's not making adjustments. LOL okay.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 01:31:14 AM
So because, apparently ignoring the games I mentioned, and ignoring Wojo's ATO efficiency, you aren't able to see the adjustments Wojo makes, he's not making adjustments. LOL okay.

Seriously Brew?? Once again...let me put it in ALL CAPS for you...I HAVE NEVER ONCE SAID HE DOESN'T MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. Point to me where i said that, Please, I'm begging you...show me..Why do people continually INSIST on twisting what i say to make it fit their own Narratives?? I'm f'n tired of it. Follow along ONE MORE TIME....show me a game where out of the blue, he started trapping, or pressing(not loose pressing, full court Louisville style), forcing turnovers to get back into games?? Show me where, over his five years, he has pulled out a zone(out of nowhere) to change the complexion of a game?? Again, those are the kinds of things I(me, no one else) looks for as far as in game Coaching goes.

This is also what i said in an earlier post...He might tweak a thing or two, here or there, but he doesn't do anything that to me, can change the course of the game.

See the bolded part?? That is saying He does make adjustments...it does not in ANY way say he doesn't make them at all, does it?? Now I would appreciate people NOT trying to twist things i say, or flat out omit things i say to try to fit their narratives, when they aren't what i said.

I clearly do see the adjustments he makes during games, but...I cannot express this enough Brew...the adjustments I like seeing made that is an important factor for me to determine how good of a Coach is/isn't. I did it with Crean, I did it with Buzz, I do it with Wojo...It's PERSONAL PREFERENCE.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 16, 2019, 06:16:00 AM
So unless he adjusts the way you want him to adjust, he's not making adjustments?  Many coaches don't trap and press.  Why is that how you judge a coach?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 07:06:07 AM
This is also what i said in an earlier post...He might tweak a thing or two, here or there, but he doesn't do anything that to me, can change the course of the game.

See the bolded part?? That is saying He does make adjustments...it does not in ANY way say he doesn't make them at all, does it?? Now I would appreciate people NOT trying to twist things i say, or flat out omit things i say to try to fit their narratives, when they aren't what i said.

I do. I do see the bolded part. To me it feels like more an admission of not understanding what Wojo is changing.

Here's the thing. You continually blast the talent. Then you continually blast the coach. So how is it we were in the top-10? If the talent is lacking and the coach is inept, how do we magically stumble into the top-10? Because somehow Marquette is preordained to be there? No. It's because we had a good roster last year. Not just the main scorers, but the defenders, the reserves, the supporting cast. And it's because our coach knew what he was doing. We have won 10 straight overtime games. Is that just luck? Sure. Maybe. But the odds of that happening, assuming you have a 50% chance of winning is 0.098%. You don't think maybe, just maybe, coaching had something to do with that, even if you don't recognize what moves Wojo is making?

At the end of last season, I was very much on the fence on Wojo. However you are convincing me otherwise. Your constant attacks have forced me to confront Wojo's record, and it's pretty freaking good. The overtime wins. The defensive improvements. The offensive stability that again had us as a top-20 offense before Howard's injury. If you want to know why the Wojo defenders defend Wojo, you are the reason. Your inability to understand how the adjustments he makes leads to wins, to realize just how his scripting out of timeouts matters, and how he either must be recruiting far better than you say or coaching far better than you say to get such a talentless bunch into the top-10 reinforces what a good coach Wojo surely must be.

So congratulations. Your arguments have been effective. Effective at convincing me we need to keep this guy. If you ever want to know why I defend the guy, and I suspect why many others do the same, look in the mirror. Your inability to craft a cohesive and accurate argument against him is the reason. And that despite being handed evidence, the Georgetown game, the K-State game, and the reliability of his after timeout plays, you still don't understand how even small adjustments can "turn the course of a game."

The metrics, which I generally trust, told us we weren't a top-10 team. Apparently the talent wasn't adequate to be a top-10 team. The critics all had reasons why we were overrated. Yet there we were. And Wojo was at the helm. Did he trust Markus too much after the injury? Sure. Did he not have a backup plan at that point? I'll concede that. But he's also a 5th year coach, he's still learning, and he got us to that point from the dustbin of what Buzz left behind. He put together a team that could play as a team, win as a team, defend as a team, and didn't need to make radical adjustments to get there, because the team was well enough coached that they still won 23 out of 27 games.

Just because he doesn't make the adjustments you want doesn't mean the adjustments he makes aren't effective. They clearly are. The results were there, you just didn't like how we got there. Deal with it.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 08:23:03 AM
I do. I do see the bolded part. To me it feels like more an admission of not understanding what Wojo is changing.

Here's the thing. You continually blast the talent. Then you continually blast the coach. So how is it we were in the top-10? If the talent is lacking and the coach is inept, how do we magically stumble into the top-10? Because somehow Marquette is preordained to be there? No. It's because we had a good roster last year. Not just the main scorers, but the defenders, the reserves, the supporting cast. And it's because our coach knew what he was doing. We have won 10 straight overtime games. Is that just luck? Sure. Maybe. But the odds of that happening, assuming you have a 50% chance of winning is 0.098%. You don't think maybe, just maybe, coaching had something to do with that, even if you don't recognize what moves Wojo is making?

At the end of last season, I was very much on the fence on Wojo. However you are convincing me otherwise. Your constant attacks have forced me to confront Wojo's record, and it's pretty freaking good. The overtime wins. The defensive improvements. The offensive stability that again had us as a top-20 offense before Howard's injury. If you want to know why the Wojo defenders defend Wojo, you are the reason. Your inability to understand how the adjustments he makes leads to wins, to realize just how his scripting out of timeouts matters, and how he either must be recruiting far better than you say or coaching far better than you say to get such a talentless bunch into the top-10 reinforces what a good coach Wojo surely must be.

So congratulations. Your arguments have been effective. Effective at convincing me we need to keep this guy. If you ever want to know why I defend the guy, and I suspect why many others do the same, look in the mirror. Your inability to craft a cohesive and accurate argument against him is the reason. And that despite being handed evidence, the Georgetown game, the K-State game, and the reliability of his after timeout plays, you still don't understand how even small adjustments can "turn the course of a game."

The metrics, which I generally trust, told us we weren't a top-10 team. Apparently the talent wasn't adequate to be a top-10 team. The critics all had reasons why we were overrated. Yet there we were. And Wojo was at the helm. Did he trust Markus too much after the injury? Sure. Did he not have a backup plan at that point? I'll concede that. But he's also a 5th year coach, he's still learning, and he got us to that point from the dustbin of what Buzz left behind. He put together a team that could play as a team, win as a team, defend as a team, and didn't need to make radical adjustments to get there, because the team was well enough coached that they still won 23 out of 27 games.

Just because he doesn't make the adjustments you want doesn't mean the adjustments he makes aren't effective. They clearly are. The results were there, you just didn't like how we got there. Deal with it.

The adjustments you cite, which did happen, yes, I saw them, I can see when something is different(but that's a nice shot you were taking at me), are normal adjustments you would expect any Coach to make during the course of a game. That's what basketball is. I haven't once said he has never made adjustments. What I said was..He hasn't demonstrated to me, yet, something I like to see a Coach have in his arsenal..A bag of tricks. Like the examples I cited with Crean and Buzz. To you, to fluffy, to Cheeks, to big bird, to snuffulupagus those types of things may not matter...and you know what?? That's fine. They don't have to matter to you, or anyone else. That's why it's called an opinion.

You, Cheeks, the count, Mr Rogers, Ernie and Bert may think he's doing a great job, and that he's the next coming of Al. Wonderful! You can think that way..You're entitled to! Me, Research report, the doc, and whoever else may think he's NOT the next coming of Al, and has a long ways to go to prove anything to us. Guess what?? That's our OPINION. We can have that opinion.

You and others, might think his recruiting has been phenomenal. Novel concept...you are allowed to think that. I personally have stated, I think his recruiting needs to get better...novel concept #2...I have every right to have that opinion.

But you know what?? I have stated numerous times before, I hope my OPINION of him is wrong. I hope you and big bird and the rest of the sesame street gang are correct, and he wins big and leads MU to a National Championship...nothing would make me happier. That's all I care about. I don't care who the Coach is that does it..If that's Wojo(highly doubtful IMO), outstanding, then you can all beat your chests and say "I told you so". That'd be totally fine by me, because I'd be too busy basking in the glow of them winning it all, and too busy watching every single Badger fan have epic meltdowns, and too busy rubbing their noses in it, that I wouldn't even notice you thumping your chest exclaiming "I was right, I was right, I was right!" You would be right, and nothing would make me happier, believe me.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 16, 2019, 08:29:38 AM
The adjustments you cite, which did happen, yes, I saw them, I can see when something is different(but that's a nice shot you were taking at me), are normal adjustments you would expect any Coach to make during the course of a game. That's what basketball is. I haven't once said he has never made adjustments. What I said was..He hasn't demonstrated to me, yet, something I like to see a Coach have in his arsenal..A bag of tricks. Like the examples I cited with Crean and Buzz. To you, to fluffy, to Cheeks, to big bird, to snuffulupagus those types of things may not matter...and you know what?? That's fine. They don't have to matter to you, or anyone else. That's why it's called an opinion.

You, Cheeks, the count, Mr Rogers, Ernie and Bert may think he's doing a great job, and that he's the next coming of Al. Wonderful! You can think that way..You're entitled to! Me, Research report, the doc, and whoever else may think he's NOT the next coming of Al, and has a long ways to go to prove anything to us. Guess what?? That's our OPINION. We can have that opinion.

You and others, might think his recruiting has been phenomenal. Novel concept...you are allowed to think that. I personally have stated, I think his recruiting needs to get better...novel concept #2...I have every right to have that opinion.

But you know what?? I have stated numerous times before, I hope my OPINION of him is wrong. I hope you and big bird and the rest of the sesame street gang are correct, and he wins big and leads MU to a National Championship...nothing would make me happier. That's all I care about. I don't care who the Coach is that does it..If that's Wojo(highly doubtful IMO), outstanding, then you can all beat your chests and say "I told you so". That'd be totally fine by me, because I'd be too busy basking in the glow of them winning it all, and too busy watching every single Badger fan have epic meltdowns, and too busy rubbing their noses in it, that I wouldn't even notice you thumping your chest exclaiming "I was right, I was right, I was right!" You would be right, and nothing would make me happier, believe me.


No one said he was the second coming of Al. No one said his recruiting is “phenomenal.”

It is the sign of an incredibly weak argument that you constantly have to resort to exaggeration to make your point.

Other people who aren’t really fans of Wojo don’t really resort to such dishonesty.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 16, 2019, 08:35:38 AM
Football Coach X ran a fake punt and it helped win a game! Why doesn't our coach ever run a fake punt? So what if he wins 75% of his games ... we need a fake punt!
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 08:36:08 AM

No one said he was the second coming of Al. No one said his recruiting is “phenomenal.”

It is the sign of an incredibly weak argument that you constantly have to resort to exaggeration to make your point.

Other people who aren’t really fans of Wojo don’t really resort to such dishonesty.

I never said you and the rest of the Sesame Street gang said those things. But if they do feel that way, they are allowed to. That was my point. You want to hang posters of him all over your wall, go right ahead, you're allowed to do that too. You want to have a job being his go to guy for coffee runs, go right ahead, you can do that. You are allowed to feel however you want to feel about him as a Coach. I am allowed to feel how I want to feel about him as a Coach. They are called..OPINIONS. You do understand what those are grover, right??
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 08:38:22 AM
Football Coach X ran a fake punt and it helped win a game! Why doesn't our coach ever run a fake punt? So what if he wins 75% of his games ... we need a fake punt!

So what's your point?? You don't like fake punts or what?? Good, no one says you have to MU 82!
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 16, 2019, 09:05:07 AM
So what's your point?? You don't like fake punts or what?? Good, no one says you have to MU 82!

The hidden-ball trick worked for Genius Manager X once in the last 30 years. Why doesn't my manager call for the hidden-ball trick?!?!?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 09:09:56 AM
The hidden-ball trick worked for Genius Manager X once in the last 30 years. Why doesn't my manager call for the hidden-ball trick?!?!?

I'm not sure why he doesn't?? He should probably have it available to him as an option to use at some point though. It actually might work more than you realize. Pulled off something similar once in High School playing 1B..it was called our "99" play. Worked to perfection.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 09:23:53 AM
Do you really not know who Blueteaux is?  :o
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 09:27:49 AM
And the point, Iceman, is the argument you are trying to make is having the opposite effect you intend it to have. It is anti-persuasive to your point. It seems your only recourse is to yell about the things you don't see louder. That doesn't make your opinion look more valid, it only makes it look more biased and uninformed.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 09:30:32 AM
Do you really not know who Blueteaux is?  :o

Tell me about him...Is he a Coaching candidate at MU in the future?? What's his experience?? I'm intrigued.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 09:37:12 AM
And the point, Iceman, is the argument you are trying to make is having the opposite effect you intend it to have. It is anti-persuasive to your point. It seems your only recourse is to yell about the things you don't see louder. That doesn't make your opinion look more valid, it only makes it look more biased and uninformed.

For one, I'm not sure why you think I am trying to persuade anyone?? That's what gets so lost in all of this. I don't care if people like him as the Coach or think he's doing a good job. They can, it's their opinion. I can not like him and think he's not the right guy for the MU job, and that should be okay too(but apparently for some reason it's not).

You can keep assaulting my basketball intelligence and saying I don't see things, if that's what makes you feel good about yourself..then you do you man! It's your opinion that I don't see those things. You're entitled to be completely uninformed.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: 4everwarriors on June 16, 2019, 09:44:54 AM
Do you really not know who Blueteaux is?  :o



 Watchin' Blueteaux orr da First Warrior is like shovin' a glass rod up yo johnson and hittin' it with a hammer, hey?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 16, 2019, 09:57:47 AM
Guru.....you made a false statement about adjustments as you have on other things...then you are called out on it....and here we are.

Have a wonderful Father’s Day
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 16, 2019, 10:00:50 AM
Guru.....you made a false statement about adjustments as you have on other things...then you are called out on it....and here we are.

Have a wonderful Father’s Day

Merry Xmas!
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 10:15:27 AM
Guru.....you made a false statement about adjustments as you have on other things...then you are called out on it....and here we are.

Have a wonderful Father’s Day

Again, I did NOT make a false statement about adjustments...you can keep saying that, but that doesn't make it true. Of course he makes adjustments in game, they are obvious. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't, and sometimes I wish he would have another bag of tricks to go to(that's what I said). I prefer to see things(sometimes) that maybe others don't. That shouldn't make me wrong, and it shouldn't make you wrong, right?? I like seeing my Coaches be able to reach down into their bag of tricks sometimes when the adjustments to the adjustments aren't working, and not just keep doing the same thing because you feel like you are out of things to try.

It's why i was finally glad the Packers moved on from McCarthy...he kept doing the same things OVER AND OVER AND Over again(with some minor adjustments) with the mentality "this is who we are". Well eventually, "this is who we are" with being too stubborn to get out of your comfort zone(and defenses have figured you out and you are out of minor adjustments to make), costs him his job.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 11:17:04 AM
Okay, Iceman. If Wojo isn't making adjustments that are effective enough to win games, and if the talent level is disappointingly low, how were we ranked in the top-10? If it's not the coach and not the players, how did that happen? Is the rest of the country simply that inept? Were we just very lucky for 27 games?

Explain how that happens.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 12:32:15 PM
Okay, Iceman. If Wojo isn't making adjustments that are effective enough to win games, and if the talent level is disappointingly low, how were we ranked in the top-10? If it's not the coach and not the players, how did that happen? Is the rest of the country simply that inept? Were we just very lucky for 27 games?

Explain how that happens.

Now this is a fair question...one I respect. I can tell you this, and I will answer the question this way...The talent and Coaching is/was good enough, to win games for a stretch. But it was NOT good enough to maintain that for the entire season and into the postseason. There's proof of that. Let's also keep in mind, if we are honest, there was an egregious missed 3 that was ruled a 2 against Louisville, that would/should have caused MU to lose that game. We aren't talking about a missed block/charge call or something like that that's open to judgment, that was blatant. We all know it.

We also know, that upon review, Sam did NOT get that shot off quite in time against Creighton, it was just too close to overturn. Take those two games and put them in the L column(where they really should have been), and they are never in the top 10, are they?? In fact, the whole complexity of the season is different, isn't it??

You asked me a fair question, so I will now ask you a fair question..obviously whether they should have been or not, the UL and Creighton games were wins, which then put them in a position to win an outright BE title. However, this same team and same Coach that were good enough to be in the top 10(which you are citing as a positive, and that's fair) during the year, absolutely gagged down the stretch, lost 6 of 7, needing 1 win with 4 to go(2 at home) to win an outright BE title, and couldn't get it done.

Then, they go into the tournament as a 5 seed and absolutely get blown out by a mid major in embarrassing fashion. So, I ask you...if the talent WAS good enough, and the Coaching WAS good enough to be in the top 10 during the year, why was that same talent and Coach NOT good enough to finish it off down the stretch?? What happened there??

There were several people at the end of the year after the loss to Murray State, that said the season was "smoke and mirrors" when they were in the top 10. With the evidence we have in front of us, is that an unfair characterization??

Do we really want a team/program that has enough talent/Coaching to win games for a stretch of the season, but NOT consistently good enough to "finish" it off when it matters the most??

Is it not hard to argue that better talent/Coaching never has the stretch at the end of the season?? Wouldn't better talent/Coaching "finished" the deal so to speak??

Can it be argued that the talent/Coaching is "good", but NOT good enough(which is what I have said) to be consistent enough and good enough, to not have the ending they had?? I think the proof is in the pudding.

Let's also keep in mind(by everyone's admission), last year was NOT a very strong year for the Big East, which also played a role in it.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 12:48:52 PM
Now this is a fair question...one I respect. I can tell you this, and I will answer the question this way...The talent and Coaching is/was good enough, to win games for a stretch. But it was NOT good enough to maintain that for the entire season and into the postseason. There's proof of that. Let's also keep in mind, if we are honest, there was an egregious missed 3 that was ruled a 2 against Louisville, that would/should have caused MU to lose that game. We aren't talking about a missed block/charge call or something like that that's open to judgment, that was blatant. We all know it.

We also know, that upon review, Sam did NOT get that shot off quite in time against Creighton, it was just too close to overturn. Take those two games and put them in the L column(where they really should have been), and they are never in the top 10, are they?? In fact, the whole complexity of the season is different, isn't it??

No and no. This is revisionist history. If that's the argument you're making, I'm going to void the losses to Villanova, Creighton, Seton Hall, & Georgetown after Markus' injury.

You play the game that is. The missed three would've changed the entire complexion of the game. It would've changed how both teams played. Not valid.

Same for Sam's three. The evidence wasn't there to overturn it, thus it's a good shot.

And if you get those, I get the other 4 wins, Marquette wins an outright Big East title, 1-seed in the BET, & 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. It just doesn't work like that, so your argument is null and void.

You asked me a fair question, so I will now ask you a fair question..obviously whether they should have been or not, the UL and Creighton games were wins, which then put them in a position to win an outright BE title. However, this same team and same Coach that were good enough to be in the top 10(which you are citing as a positive, and that's fair) during the year, absolutely gagged down the stretch, lost 6 of 7, needing 1 win with 4 to go(2 at home) to win an outright BE title, and couldn't get it done.

Then, they go into the tournament as a 5 seed and absolutely get blown out by a mid major in embarrassing fashion. So, I ask you...if the talent WAS good enough, and the Coaching WAS good enough to be in the top 10 during the year, why was that same talent and Coach NOT good enough to finish it off down the stretch?? What happened there??

Markus got hurt. Wojo failed to adapt to that injury. It's a learning process. The former sucks, the latter should improve with time.

There were several people at the end of the year after the loss to Murray State, that said the season was "smoke and mirrors" when they were in the top 10. With the evidence we have in front of us, is that an unfair characterization??

Do we really want a team/program that has enough talent/Coaching to win games for a stretch of the season, but NOT consistently good enough to "finish" it off when it matters the most??

If Wojo sucks for that, Buzz sucks for 2009. K sucks for how Duke played without Zion (who cares about wins over bad Miami & Wake teams?).

Part of any season is the luck of injuries. How would 2003 have ended had Wade been injured late? 2012 without Crowder, 2013 without a fully healthy Blue?

Is it not hard to argue that better talent/Coaching never has the stretch at the end of the season?? Wouldn't better talent/Coaching "finished" the deal so to speak??

Crean didn't without Diener. Buzz didn't without James. Hell, Buzz must be a far worse coach than Wojo. Acker was a better backup than Chartouny and they still puked on their shoes in 2009.

Can it be argued that the talent/Coaching is "good", but NOT good enough(which is what I have said) to be consistent enough and good enough, to not have the ending they had?? I think the proof is in the pudding.

Let's also keep in mind(by everyone's admission), last year was NOT a very strong year for the Big East, which also played a role in it.

And we appropriately dominated the league until Howard got hurt. What would Michigan State have been with 50% Cassius Winston? Murray State with 50% Ja Morant? It's a missed opportunity, that's all. It happens to dozens of teams every year. That doesn't mean you pull a Vandy and fire your coach.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 16, 2019, 01:23:37 PM
No and no. This is revisionist history. If that's the argument you're making, I'm going to void the losses to Villanova, Creighton, Seton Hall, & Georgetown after Markus' injury.

You play the game that is. The missed three would've changed the entire complexion of the game. It would've changed how both teams played. Not valid.

Same for Sam's three. The evidence wasn't there to overturn it, thus it's a good shot.

And if you get those, I get the other 4 wins, Marquette wins an outright Big East title, 1-seed in the BET, & 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. It just doesn't work like that, so your argument is null and void.

Markus got hurt. Wojo failed to adapt to that injury. It's a learning process. The former sucks, the latter should improve with time.

If Wojo sucks for that, Buzz sucks for 2009. K sucks for how Duke played without Zion (who cares about wins over bad Miami & Wake teams?).

Part of any season is the luck of injuries. How would 2003 have ended had Wade been injured late? 2012 without Crowder, 2013 without a fully healthy Blue?

Crean didn't without Diener. Buzz didn't without James. Hell, Buzz must be a far worse coach than Wojo. Acker was a better backup than Chartouny and they still puked on their shoes in 2009.

And we appropriately dominated the league until Howard got hurt. What would Michigan State have been with 50% Cassius Winston? Murray State with 50% Ja Morant? It's a missed opportunity, that's all. It happens to dozens of teams every year. That doesn't mean you pull a Vandy and fire your coach.

Blaming the late season collapse on Markus’ injury (an injury where he missed no time and still took as many shots as ever) is also revisionist history.  In the game immediately following his injury, at home against Creighton, Markus played 39 minutes, took 21 shots, and scored 33 points.  Against Georgetown in the last regular season game, he played 31 minutes, took 25 shots, and scored 28 points.  He scored 30 against STJ in the BET.  He scored 26 points on 27 shots against Murray State.  I mean, how injured was he?

His two truly bad games during that stretch were against Seton Hall, where he shot a combined 3-26.  Some of that may have been due to injury, but a bad game against the same team twice might also just mean they did a good job stopping him.

If Markus had gone down like senior year Dominic, I’d say injury is a valid excuse.  Here, I don’t think it holds water.  We got to 23-4 by beating a few good teams at home, winning a couple we probably shouldn’t have, and generally having everything fall our way.  But the conference was mediocre, the luck evened out, and the season ended how it ended.  It’s not how you start or where you were after 27 games, it’s how you finish.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 16, 2019, 01:25:06 PM
Superb response, brew.

When guru began with wins that could have been losses while not acknowledging losses that could have been wins, it made your job as a debater much easier!
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Loose Cannon on June 16, 2019, 01:26:29 PM
A Lexus?

Nah, maybe a Doozie.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 01:35:06 PM
No and no. This is revisionist history. If that's the argument you're making, I'm going to void the losses to Villanova, Creighton, Seton Hall, & Georgetown after Markus' injury.

You play the game that is. The missed three would've changed the entire complexion of the game. It would've changed how both teams played. Not valid.

Same for Sam's three. The evidence wasn't there to overturn it, thus it's a good shot.

And if you get those, I get the other 4 wins, Marquette wins an outright Big East title, 1-seed in the BET, & 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. It just doesn't work like that, so your argument is null and void.

Markus got hurt. Wojo failed to adapt to that injury. It's a learning process. The former sucks, the latter should improve with time.

If Wojo sucks for that, Buzz sucks for 2009. K sucks for how Duke played without Zion (who cares about wins over bad Miami & Wake teams?).

Part of any season is the luck of injuries. How would 2003 have ended had Wade been injured late? 2012 without Crowder, 2013 without a fully healthy Blue?

Crean didn't without Diener. Buzz didn't without James. Hell, Buzz must be a far worse coach than Wojo. Acker was a better backup than Chartouny and they still puked on their shoes in 2009.

And we appropriately dominated the league until Howard got hurt. What would Michigan State have been with 50% Cassius Winston? Murray State with 50% Ja Morant? It's a missed opportunity, that's all. It happens to dozens of teams every year. That doesn't mean you pull a Vandy and fire your coach.

So now we are playing the Markus was hurt card, huh?? Somehow, after I made my post, I said to myself "Brew is going to play the "Markus was hurt card" as his way of trying to defend the end of the season stretch...lo and behold...there it was.

To use your words..."you play the game as it was". Markus played every single one of those games down the stretch, right?? If Markus was 50%, or whatever it was...then, isn't it incumbent upon the Coach to make sure the game plan is ADJUSTED to factor that in?? Wouldn't a good Coach be able to scheme his way around that??

Or even if you say "he did the best he could", okay...then...if the team was talented enough, they should have been able to overcome a banged up Markus, right?? If the talent was good enough, maybe you don't have to play Markus so much when he is banged up because his replacement would be adequate enough to get you through. Either way..the injury wasn't the problem..The Coaching/talent wasn't good enough down the stretch to overcome it, IF it truly affected him that much. Cannot argue that, at all. You can try, but you will look foolish.

I like that you cite the Zion being out example...First of all, SURELY you realize he MISSED games, like didn't play at all. Markus played. BIG difference. 2nd of all, Zion being completely out didn't cause Duke to lose 6 of 7, did it?? Again, he was completely out, not just playing banged up.

Again, citing the examples of Buzz without James and Crean without Diener. You seem to think your clever trying to disguise and twist to fit your narrative. James was COMPLETELY out, as was Diener. Certainly, you see the difference there, right?? It's no different than your Zion example...but, you tried, I give you credit for that.

If Markus was so injured that it was affecting the team that badly...then HIS Coach shouldn't have played him, right?? EXCEPT..the talent that would have replaced him wasn't nearly good enough to have that option. No matter how you slice it, that is either A. Not good enough Coaching B. Not good enough talent. There is no other option. You want there to be, but there isn't. I know it kills you, it tears you up inside to admit it, because that makes me right on this particular point. Which I am, and that's okay to admit. You've been right on things before to, we all have been, and I admit that.

When you're tired of being taken behind the woodshed, let me know.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 01:41:39 PM
Blaming the late season collapse on Markus’ injury (an injury where he missed no time and still took as many shots as ever) is also revisionist history.  In the game immediately following his injury, at home against Creighton, Markus played 39 minutes, took 21 shots, and scored 33 points.  Against Georgetown in the last regular season game, he played 31 minutes, took 25 shots, and scored 28 points.  He scored 30 against STJ in the BET.  He scored 26 points on 27 shots against Murray State.  I mean, how injured was he?

His two truly bad games during that stretch were against Seton Hall, where he shot a combined 3-26.  Some of that may have been due to injury, but a bad game against the same team twice might also just mean they did a good job stopping him.

If Markus had gone down like senior year Dominic, I’d say injury is a valid excuse.  Here, I don’t think it holds water.  We got to 23-4 by beating a few good teams at home, winning a couple we probably shouldn’t have, and generally having everything fall our way.  But the conference was mediocre, the luck evened out, and the season ended how it ended.  It’s not how you start or where you were after 27 games, it’s how you finish.

This thread can now be closed, or at least this argument can be. Well done Research! Brew isn't just staggering against the ropes, he got knocked out cold...not once(by me), but now twice(by you). 

After getting beaten and bloodied as badly as he just has by both of us...I would hope for his own good, he would "retire" from sparring. I like him, and would hate to see him suffer irreparable harm from the injuries and beatings we just inflicted.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 01:47:39 PM
That's why I'm not making that argument. I'm not saying those losses don't count. They do. That's why the salient point was this:

Markus got hurt. Wojo failed to adapt to that injury. It's a learning process. The former sucks, the latter should improve with time.

Yes, we went out behind the woodshed, but I left you bloody and beaten. You tried to revise history. I called that BS. Your response was to focus on the BS, not the actual argument. Good god, man, you make this too easy.

Should Wojo have done better? Yes. Frankly, he should have sat Markus. But he's a young coach. He's learning. He's proven he can elevate a team. And he's earned the rope to continue showing he can improve and learn.

That's the point. That's why debating Louisville, at Creighton, at Villanova, Creighton, at Seton Hall, and at Georgetown as reverse results is a fool's errand. And both you & RR were all too happy to play that fool.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 02:09:14 PM
That's why I'm not making that argument. I'm not saying those losses don't count. They do. That's why the salient point was this:

Yes, we went out behind the woodshed, but I left you bloody and beaten. You tried to revise history. I called that BS. Your response was to focus on the BS, not the actual argument. Good god, man, you make this too easy.

Should Wojo have done better? Yes. Frankly, he should have sat Markus. But he's a young coach. He's learning. He's proven he can elevate a team. And he's earned the rope to continue showing he can improve and learn.

That's the point. That's why debating Louisville, at Creighton, at Villanova, Creighton, at Seton Hall, and at Georgetown as reverse results is a fool's errand. And both you & RR were all too happy to play that fool.

Wrong again...But this is great Brew..You revised history trying to compare Markus's injury as the same as Zion's, Diener's and James's.

So you admit above Wojo's coaching wasn't good enough(he should have done better), and you also admit that the talent isn't good enough...which is EXACTLY what this whole discussion was about. Not during any of this PARTICULAR discussion did I say Wojo should be fired(although you seem to want to inject that into this particular discussion). I simply stated in a post or two earlier in this thread, that I have been disappointed in his recruiting this far, that it's been ok/good, but not good enough, and that I'm a little surprised by that because I really thought this was an area he would excel at(isn't that given Wojo credit for something)?

And i also stated that to this point, he hasn't shown enough in the way of in game adjustments(to me), that it gives me concern. Now, after debating this over several posts, you have admitted(though in a round about way), that Wojo's coaching/adjustments should/could be better, and you even gave a reason why(he should have benched Markus). All you did was drag this out unnecessarily when you just admitted what I had originally stated and what started THIS particular discussion to begin with. We came to the same conclusion.

Bottom line is, to this point, I(as well as others), have significant concerns about whether or not he's going to get it done. You(as well as others) think he can/will get it done. You're willing to wait it out...but my question is...how long?? It's been 5 years already, how much longer do you think he deserves?? What if he misses the tournament this year?? Would that be enough for you?? What if they just barely squeak in?? What's your tipping point, so to speak??

You have to be careful...I cited several examples in this thread about Coaches that have been given multiple plus years and all they have produced to this point is mediocrity(Brad Brownell comes right to mind). You can't just keep kicking the can down the road, right??
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: The Deane Team on June 16, 2019, 02:33:58 PM

Wojo has never done anything like that.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: tower912 on June 16, 2019, 02:37:31 PM
Markus got hurt.  Hausers torpedoed.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 03:00:33 PM


I swear, what is it with people here trying to interpret things I say to mean what THEY want them to say(so they can come after me), as opposed to what they REALLY mean, when it SHOULD be obvious. You bolded the part "never" to try to make your point...Here was the statement(which I noticed you only conveniently clipped the art you wanted. Here is what I said...

Buzz...There are a couple of examples here...now I don't remember the specific game(s), he did this in, but they were struggling, and after a timeout, he came out in zone. They hadn't shown it all day..got them back in the game and they went on to win..brilliant! He also pulled out zones other times as well. Another was putting Jimmy Butler on Xavier's Tu Holloway in the NCAA tournament...ball game.

Which was then followed by this: Wojo has never done anything like that...he doesn't seem to have a "bag of tricks". I would have thought, after 5 years and learning from one of the greatest Coaches of all time, he would have some things in his back pocket that he could go to. A press, a trap, a zone...something...anything. And a couple of possessions here and there does NOT count as doing it or being creative.

It' seems pretty obvious to me(and it should to anyone) what the word NEVER in that paragraph was in reference to. Somehow though, people twisted that into saying I meant "make adjustments at all". As in NEVER makes any kind of adjustments when it was CLEARLY in reference to the type of adjustments I like/want to see(from time to time). Which is touched on in the above referenced paragraph about Buzz, and the previous one about Crean, and the one following the buzz paragraph in my original post about this.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 16, 2019, 03:59:47 PM

Markus got hurt. Wojo failed to adapt to that injury. It's a learning process. The former sucks, the latter should improve with time.


I don't know how hurt or exhausted Markus was, but I do know that Wojo's solution (i.e., adjustment) resulted in M's already off the charts usage INCREASING in the final 7 games by more than 10%.

Look, I think Wojo made a lot of positive adjustments to help put us in the running for a magical season. He deserves credit. That said, he also gets credit for the collapse.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 16, 2019, 04:17:53 PM
Markus got hurt.  Hausers torpedoed.

When I see posts like this, I think, “Jesus Christ, somebody has to say something.”

Call me “Mr. Hauser” or accuse me of not being a “true fan” or whatever, but to say that the Hausers, specifically Sam, tanked the season is just a big fat load of BS.  In the loss at Seton Hall, Sam played all 40 minutes, went 9 of 19 from the floor, scored 25 points, and grabbed 9 rebounds.  He was indispensable in that game, but yeah, he definitely tanked it.  He went for 10 and 7 in the blowout of STJ, was 7 of 15 with 22pts and 9 rebounds in the Seton Hall BET game, and played 37 minutes against Murray State while putting up 16 points and grabbing 10 boards.  But yeah, he definitely missed all the shots he missed on purpose.

Joey hit the freshman wall, but still averaged 10 points a game for the season.  If he was still on the team, people would be talking about the huge leap he’d be taking as a sophomore.  Instead, he conspired with Sam to help us lose 6 of our last 7.  If Dexter has a bad second half next year, we’ll know what happened!

Your post takes all the blame off Wojo and Markus and uses the excuses of an injury we don’t know the severity of (and that the player played through while he and the coach maximized his usage) and two players purposely playing bad (even though one of them didn’t) because they were unhappy with their roles.  I don’t think that’s a fair assessment of what happened.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 16, 2019, 04:32:38 PM
That's why I'm not making that argument. I'm not saying those losses don't count. They do. That's why the salient point was this:

Yes, we went out behind the woodshed, but I left you bloody and beaten. You tried to revise history. I called that BS. Your response was to focus on the BS, not the actual argument. Good god, man, you make this too easy.

Should Wojo have done better? Yes. Frankly, he should have sat Markus. But he's a young coach. He's learning. He's proven he can elevate a team. And he's earned the rope to continue showing he can improve and learn.

That's the point. That's why debating Louisville, at Creighton, at Villanova, Creighton, at Seton Hall, and at Georgetown as reverse results is a fool's errand. And both you & RR were all too happy to play that fool.

Where in my post did I reverse results?  I said we won a few games we shouldn’t have, which isn’t the same thing as discounting those wins.  In every season in every sport, you’re gonna win some you shouldn’t and lose some you shouldn’t, too.  The Georgetown game is an example of one we shouldn’t have lost, but Akinjo morphed into Steph Curry and so it went.  Everything usually evens out in the end, just like it did for us.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 16, 2019, 04:47:33 PM
When I see posts like this, I think, “Jesus Christ, somebody has to say something.”

Call me “Mr. Hauser” or accuse me of not being a “true fan” or whatever, but to say that the Hausers, specifically Sam, tanked the season is just a big fat load of BS.  In the loss at Seton Hall, Sam played all 40 minutes, went 9 of 19 from the floor, scored 25 points, and grabbed 9 rebounds.  He was indispensable in that game, but yeah, he definitely tanked it.  He went for 10 and 7 in the blowout of STJ, was 7 of 15 with 22pts and 9 rebounds in the Seton Hall BET game, and played 37 minutes against Murray State while putting up 16 points and grabbing 10 boards.  But yeah, he definitely missed all the shots he missed on purpose.

Joey hit the freshman wall, but still averaged 10 points a game for the season.  If he was still on the team, people would be talking about the huge leap he’d be taking as a sophomore.  Instead, he conspired with Sam to help us lose 6 of our last 7.  If Dexter has a bad second half next year, we’ll know what happened!

Your post takes all the blame off Wojo and Markus and uses the excuses of an injury we don’t know the severity of (and that the player played through while he and the coach maximized his usage) and two players purposely playing bad (even though one of them didn’t) because they were unhappy with their roles.  I don’t think that’s a fair assessment of what happened.

+1
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 05:12:29 PM
When I see posts like this, I think, “Jesus Christ, somebody has to say something.”

Call me “Mr. Hauser” or accuse me of not being a “true fan” or whatever, but to say that the Hausers, specifically Sam, tanked the season is just a big fat load of BS.  In the loss at Seton Hall, Sam played all 40 minutes, went 9 of 19 from the floor, scored 25 points, and grabbed 9 rebounds.  He was indispensable in that game, but yeah, he definitely tanked it.  He went for 10 and 7 in the blowout of STJ, was 7 of 15 with 22pts and 9 rebounds in the Seton Hall BET game, and played 37 minutes against Murray State while putting up 16 points and grabbing 10 boards.  But yeah, he definitely missed all the shots he missed on purpose.

Joey hit the freshman wall, but still averaged 10 points a game for the season.  If he was still on the team, people would be talking about the huge leap he’d be taking as a sophomore.  Instead, he conspired with Sam to help us lose 6 of our last 7.  If Dexter has a bad second half next year, we’ll know what happened!

Your post takes all the blame off Wojo and Markus and uses the excuses of an injury we don’t know the severity of (and that the player played through while he and the coach maximized his usage) and two players purposely playing bad (even though one of them didn’t) because they were unhappy with their roles.  I don’t think that’s a fair assessment of what happened.

+1
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 05:26:16 PM
Oh reading comprehension...

Wojo's coaching needs work but has improved consistently.

The talent level is fine. Wojo has done well landing top-100 players regularly, has hit big on some transfers, and is getting quality out of his three stars (John, Anim, Elliott, Cain).

My point in talking about subpar coaching and talent is that YOU are making that argument. I don't agree, largely because if both were true, the results we've seen would be impossible.

Brad Brownell is a really odd example. Barring absolute disaster, he will be the winningest coach in Clemson history by January. They are traditionally a bad program and Oliver Purnell is seriously one of their most successful coaches ever. They aren't worth comparing to Marquette.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Herman Cain on June 16, 2019, 05:54:03 PM


 Watchin' Blueteaux orr da First Warrior is like shovin' a glass rod up yo johnson and hittin' it with a hammer, hey?
the visual on that is horrible.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 16, 2019, 05:55:00 PM
When I see posts like this, I think, “Jesus Christ, somebody has to say something.”

Call me “Mr. Hauser” or accuse me of not being a “true fan” or whatever, but to say that the Hausers, specifically Sam, tanked the season is just a big fat load of BS.  In the loss at Seton Hall, Sam played all 40 minutes, went 9 of 19 from the floor, scored 25 points, and grabbed 9 rebounds.  He was indispensable in that game, but yeah, he definitely tanked it.  He went for 10 and 7 in the blowout of STJ, was 7 of 15 with 22pts and 9 rebounds in the Seton Hall BET game, and played 37 minutes against Murray State while putting up 16 points and grabbing 10 boards.  But yeah, he definitely missed all the shots he missed on purpose.

Joey hit the freshman wall, but still averaged 10 points a game for the season.  If he was still on the team, people would be talking about the huge leap he’d be taking as a sophomore.  Instead, he conspired with Sam to help us lose 6 of our last 7.  If Dexter has a bad second half next year, we’ll know what happened!

Your post takes all the blame off Wojo and Markus and uses the excuses of an injury we don’t know the severity of (and that the player played through while he and the coach maximized his usage) and two players purposely playing bad (even though one of them didn’t) because they were unhappy with their roles.  I don’t think that’s a fair assessment of what happened.


Thanks Mr. Hauser.  Tell me, is the old lady in Virginia or Michigan tonight to tuck in one of her boys?  Does the one left out cry himself to sleep?  I'm sure she knitted him a nick blanket to help him cope.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Lennys Tap on June 16, 2019, 06:03:17 PM

Thanks Mr. Hauser.  Tell me, is the old lady in Virginia or Michigan tonight to tuck in one of her boys?  Does the one left out cry himself to sleep?  I'm sure she knitted him a nick blanket to help him cope.

Do you keep your whiddle fluffy blue monster with your blankie?
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 16, 2019, 06:07:03 PM
Do you keep your whiddle fluffy blue monster with your blankie?

I don't need a blanket.  I'm not a Hauser boy who runs home to momma.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 16, 2019, 06:23:17 PM

Thanks Mr. Hauser.  Tell me, is the old lady in Virginia or Michigan tonight to tuck in one of her boys?  Does the one left out cry himself to sleep?  I'm sure she knitted him a nick blanket to help him cope.

This is an odd and somewhat disturbing post.  You realize I’m not actually Mr. Hauser, right?  And that throwing personal, non-basketball related insults at the Hauser family doesn’t actually matter to me, right?  If you want to insult the Hausers on a personal level, I think it’s kind of messed up and makes Marquette fans look bad, but hey, be my guest.  If you want to say the Hausers tanked the season because it’ll convince someone somewhere that Wojo was in no way at fault for the collapse, well, that’s just false and if I see it, I’ll put in my two cents.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 16, 2019, 06:25:25 PM
When I see posts like this, I think, “Jesus Christ, somebody has to say something.”

Call me “Mr. Hauser” or accuse me of not being a “true fan” or whatever, but to say that the Hausers, specifically Sam, tanked the season is just a big fat load of BS.  In the loss at Seton Hall, Sam played all 40 minutes, went 9 of 19 from the floor, scored 25 points, and grabbed 9 rebounds.  He was indispensable in that game, but yeah, he definitely tanked it.  He went for 10 and 7 in the blowout of STJ, was 7 of 15 with 22pts and 9 rebounds in the Seton Hall BET game, and played 37 minutes against Murray State while putting up 16 points and grabbing 10 boards.  But yeah, he definitely missed all the shots he missed on purpose.

Joey hit the freshman wall, but still averaged 10 points a game for the season.  If he was still on the team, people would be talking about the huge leap he’d be taking as a sophomore.  Instead, he conspired with Sam to help us lose 6 of our last 7.  If Dexter has a bad second half next year, we’ll know what happened!

Your post takes all the blame off Wojo and Markus and uses the excuses of an injury we don’t know the severity of (and that the player played through while he and the coach maximized his usage) and two players purposely playing bad (even though one of them didn’t) because they were unhappy with their roles.  I don’t think that’s a fair assessment of what happened.

Where did Tower say they tanked anything?  Torpedoed doesn’t equal tanking.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 16, 2019, 06:26:17 PM
Guru....so he made adjustments, just not the ones you can identify or want to give him credit for.  To use your words...NEVER has he done so.   Got it.

Have a wonderful Father’s Day
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 16, 2019, 06:33:49 PM
Where did Tower say they tanked anything?  Torpedoed doesn’t equal tanking.

Please explain the difference.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 06:34:09 PM
Oh reading comprehension...

Wojo's coaching needs work but has improved consistently.

The talent level is fine. Wojo has done well landing top-100 players regularly, has hit big on some transfers, and is getting quality out of his three stars (John, Anim, Elliott, Cain).

My point in talking about subpar coaching and talent is that YOU are making that argument. I don't agree, largely because if both were true, the results we've seen would be impossible.

Brad Brownell is a really odd example. Barring absolute disaster, he will be the winningest coach in Clemson history by January. They are traditionally a bad program and Oliver Purnell is seriously one of their most successful coaches ever. They aren't worth comparing to Marquette.

The talent level is fine. Wojo has done well landing top-100 players regularly, has hit big on some transfers, and is getting quality out of his three stars (John, Anim, Elliott, Cain).


Okay cool...you're happy with the talent..And as i said, It's been ok/good, but not at the level I thought it would be, and that is the biggest reason why I have been so frustrated with his tenure thus far. I really and truly believed his recruiting would be stellar at this point, and thus, the results would have been better at this point. Maybe I overrated him as a recruiter, but he came with the rep of being one of the best in the country. I hope we'd both agree, that the talent NEEDS to be better if MU is ultimately going to go where we want them to go(win a Natty).

I don't agree, largely because if both were true, the results we've seen would be impossible.

So you're trying to prop him up, basically saying the results thus far have been good. That means one of two things and ONLY one of two things...A. You're completely satisfied with results like this from the MU program(that's your right, and spare me the patience thing) B. You don't really have the high aspirations that you say you do for the program(again spare me the patience thing). Should they have won a Natty by now?? Certainly not. Should they have had a conference title and at least a few tournament wins by now?? IN MY OPINION...without question...and again, that is because I really thought his recruiting would be better at this point.

Ironically enough, he would have had his most talented team he has had at MU this upcoming year, but two of his three most talented players, decided to leave the program.

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: muguru on June 16, 2019, 06:44:16 PM
Guru....so he made adjustments, just not the ones you can identify or want to give him credit for.  To use your words...NEVER has he done so.   Got it.

Have a wonderful Father’s Day

You seriously have a reading/comprehension problem don't you chicos?? I mean that in all sincerity, you can get help for that. For the umpteenth time...go back and read what i said(i'm imploring you). I absolutely have said he makes adjustments, I identify every single one he makes(I played the game). He just had not made "bag of tricks" type adjustments, which I have said at least three times, not that he has never made any adjustments. He makes them, sometimes they work, sometimes they don't...and the second part of that is VERY important to understand...when they DON'T work, and he adjusts again and those don't work, you NEED something else to go to...Hence the bag of tricks. I think EVERY Coach should have them not just Wojo. I thought Bo Ryan was an idiot for never playing zone, when their were times it probably would have really worked.

Wojo has shown NO propensity for adjusting to his adjustments that don't work, in TERMS of what I would like to see from him..I cited some examples..(going zone for stretches(not just a possession or two), Trapping and pressing Louisville style, Things like that.

So yes...ONE MORE TIME for my obviously impaired friend...He HAS made adjustments, I have recognized his adjustments, sometimes they have worked, sometimes they haven't...but if something isn't working repeatedly, and then your adjustments to those aren't working, it's MY OPINION he should have more to use, and/or try. I guess i don't see how that would be such a bad thing. People here talk about it like it would be stupid or dumb, and that NO Coaches do things like that. Hell, his mentor Coach K, who has always been known for his man defense played almost exclusively zone a couple of years ago. Amazing, right??

Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 16, 2019, 06:54:50 PM
This is an odd and somewhat disturbing post.  You realize I’m not actually Mr. Hauser, right?  And that throwing personal, non-basketball related insults at the Hauser family doesn’t actually matter to me, right?  If you want to insult the Hausers on a personal level, I think it’s kind of messed up and makes Marquette fans look bad, but hey, be my guest.  If you want to say the Hausers tanked the season because it’ll convince someone somewhere that Wojo was in no way at fault for the collapse, well, that’s just false and if I see it, I’ll put in my two cents.

Nice excuse Mr. Hauser. Now why don’t you run along now. I hear poor Joey skinned his knee and needs a hug.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: brewcity77 on June 16, 2019, 07:31:38 PM
That means one of two things and ONLY one of two things...A. You're completely satisfied with results like this from the MU program(that's your right, and spare me the patience thing) B. You don't really have the high aspirations that you say you do for the program(again spare me the patience thing).

No. That's one of the dumbest things I've ever seen stated on Scoop. No. No, man, no. It doesn't mean either of those things. FFS.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: MU82 on June 16, 2019, 08:37:26 PM
Please explain the difference.
I can't speak for tower so I won't. Just my own opinion ...

I don't think the Hausers tanked. I don't really know what he meant by torpedoed, but I wouldn't have used that word either.

They shot poorly down the stretch, as did Markus. Joey continued his trend of poor basketball over the last 2 months - turnovers, horrid D and meh shooting. I think both tried their hardest, as did Markus. And Wojo, for that matter.

Some Scoopers are convinced that one or two Warriors are "to blame." I believe there is plenty to go around.

Our guys picked a bad stretch to have a bad stretch.

I know that's not very satisfying for those who think Wojo should be fired, who want to villainize Joey, who think Markus is a "cancer," and who think Sam is selfish ... but it's the best I've got
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Silent Verbal on June 16, 2019, 08:51:47 PM
I can't speak for tower so I won't. Just my own opinion ...

I don't think the Hausers tanked. I don't really know what he meant by torpedoed, but I wouldn't have used that word either.

They shot poorly down the stretch, as did Markus. Joey continued his trend of poor basketball over the last 2 months - turnovers, horrid D and meh shooting. I think both tried their hardest, as did Markus. And Wojo, for that matter.

Some Scoopers are convinced that one or two Warriors are "to blame." I believe there is plenty to go around.

Our guys picked a bad stretch to have a bad stretch.

I know that's not very satisfying for those who think Wojo should be fired, who want to villainize Joey, who think Markus is a "cancer," and who think Sam is selfish ... but it's the best I've got

Now this is an analysis I can agree with.
Title: Re: A macro view of P6 coaches
Post by: Cheeks on June 16, 2019, 10:29:33 PM
Please explain the difference.

He will have to explain what he meant....maybe that was his intention, but I didn’t read it that way at all....I read it as exploded, or went south.  Tanking means purposely not trying, or evening desiring to lose.  I would be surprised if that is what he meant, but maybe he did.