Porter Moser should be the guy

[Pakuni]

Andy Enfield was the coach at FGCU for two seasons.  The year they made their S16 run, they were the number 2 seed in their own conference tournament and had to win it to qualify.  He doesn't get the USC gig without that S16 run.  Now that worked out for USC eventually, this year is only his second and third NCAA wins, but it took awhile.

How about Shaka?  Do you think he gets the Texas gig without the Final Four run?  He had no regular season titles and two NCAA wins at VCU otherwise.

I think we agree on this. Enfield is one of the guys I mentioned in an earlier post.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Out of curiosity, what facts do you have to support your opinion except for a few anecdotal examples to fit your narrative that, "winning in the tournament is a terrible measure for projecting successful high major coaches?"

I'm not discrediting regular season success, but to say that NCAA tournament success is a terrible measure to judge head coaches seems to be dubious at best.

Short answer. Why would you look at 2% of the available data and ignore the other 98%?

March success is a data point in a sea of data points. It should be considered but fans have the tendency to only look at March success. Brew's rule is a good one, if they wouldn't be your coach on March 1, they shouldn't be your coach on April 1.

[rocky_warrior]

https://twitter.com/LoweDownStats/status/1374060885908553736

Interesting read from our blogger side. I think this summarizes some of my concerns somewhat with Moser.

Not a Proser or a Noser (or a Hoser). Just want to see us put a consistently good basketball product on the court. This is why the AD has their job and I have mine, I guess. I just miss relevance of the basketball program.

Good info (thanks too Rob).   Honestly, my main concern with Moser is tempo.  I don't doubt he can win, and we'd all be happy with that.  But his teams generally play at a tempo slower than WI, and on par with VA.  I couldn't make fun of how boring those two teams are if we hire Moser.   

[Pakuni]

Short answer. Why would you look at 2% of the available data and ignore the other 98%?

But it's not as if these are the only options.
I'm not suggesting postseason should the only or even primary consideration, but it's important. Especially when you're talking small-school and mid-major coaches, it's a rare opportunity for them to match up with a P6 program after the first week or two of the season, and in a neutral setting. And it displays a coach's ability to prepare his team to play in a tournament setting - all or nothing games, increased pressure, little time to prepare for your next opponent, etc. These are things you can't measure from the regular season schedule, especially in the relative obscurity of a small/mid-major conference.
We agree that it's unwise to put too much stock in the postseason, but it should be a big part of the evaluation.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Good info (thanks too Rob).   Honestly, my main concern with Moser is tempo.  I don't doubt he can win, and we'd all be happy with that.  But his teams generally play at a tempo slower than WI, and on par with VA.  I couldn't make fun of how boring those two teams are if we hire Moser.   

If you have inferior talent, you slow down the tempo. See Wisconsin and Virginia

[Hards Alumni]

Good info (thanks too Rob).   Honestly, my main concern with Moser is tempo.  I don't doubt he can win, and we'd all be happy with that.  But his teams generally play at a tempo slower than WI, and on par with VA.  I couldn't make fun of how boring those two teams are if we hire Moser.   

This is also my main concern, Rock.  Boring basketball is boring.

[rocky_warrior]

If you have inferior talent, you slow down the tempo. See Wisconsin and Virginia

But it's also a coaching style.  I can't see Moser changing that, even with better talent.  See: Bennett, Ryan, Gard

[Dr. Blackheart]

But it's also a coaching style.  I can't see Moser changing that, even with better talent.  See: Bennett, Ryan, Gard

[Silkk the Shaka]

This is also my main concern, Rock.  Boring basketball is boring.

You must not have watched any of their games this year. They were way more entertaining to watch possession by possession than anything I've seen during the Wojo era, including the Markus/Rowsey bomb show. The pace may have been "slow" on a KenPom metric basis, but the movement without the ball every possession was constant (unlike 4 guys standing around watching one guy pound the ball and shoot a contested 3 off the dribble with 15 seconds left on the shot clock, which counts as "fast"). Fast breaks were opportunistic off TO's, and were executed with precision that was anything but boring. Not a mid-2000's Bo Ryan type team by any stretch of the imagination.

[GooooMarquette]

Short answer. Why would you look at 2% of the available data and ignore the other 98%?

March success is a data point in a sea of data points. It should be considered but fans have the tendency to only look at March success. Brew's rule is a good one, if they wouldn't be your coach on March 1, they shouldn't be your coach on April 1.

Generally agree, but there is a middle ground between 'he is your guy' and 'he isn't your guy': A coach who is on your short list on March 1 might (reasonably) move up a spot or two in your hierarchy by April 1.

Say he was a very close #3 on March 1, then makes a FF run. I don't think it's unreasonable to take that run into account and move him up to #1 or #2.

[Hards Alumni]

You must not have watched any of their games this year. They were way more entertaining to watch possession by possession than anything I've seen during the Wojo era, including the Markus/Rowsey bomb show. The pace may have been "slow" on a KenPom metric basis, but the movement without the ball every possession was constant (unlike 4 guys standing around watching one guy pound the ball and shoot a contested 3 off the dribble with 15 seconds left on the shot clock, which counts as "fast"). Fast breaks were opportunistic off TO's, and were executed with precision that was anything but boring. Not a mid-2000's Bo Ryan type team by any stretch of the imagination.

Now take your feelings out of your argument.

Adjusted Tempo is 342.  Out of 357.

They're slower than Virginia and Wisconsin.

[rocky_warrior]

Indeed. 

[muwarrior69]

Now take your feelings out of your argument.

Adjusted Tempo is 342.  Out of 357.

They're slower than Virginia and Wisconsin.

...and they all are winning programs. Slow fast who cares as long as it results in winning.

[rocky_warrior]

Slow fast who cares as long as it results in winning.

I would happily accept the winning.  I'd personally prefer "not slow" for my own personal enjoyment.

[Hards Alumni]

...and they all are winning programs. Slow fast who cares as long as it results in winning.

But you can win without being slow.  Which is what I'd prefer to watch.

[muwarrior69]

I would happily accept the winning.  I'd personally prefer "not slow" for my own personal enjoyment.

Al's teams were petty deliberate. In fact his teams were praised in limiting the number of possessions per game. I guess Al's teams would be boring. But then there was no shot clock.

[CTWarrior]

But it's also a coaching style.  I can't see Moser changing that, even with better talent.  See: Bennett, Ryan, Gard

Like everyone else, I love the disciplined, team-oriented style I've seen from Loyola on both offense and defense the few times I've seen them the past few years, including the tournament.  I don't think it will be as easy to get 4/5 star guys who think they are going to play in the NBA to play that way, though.

[brewcity77]

OK, so which small school coach got a high-major gig based on tournament success while also sucking during the regular season?
None, right? Because those small schools don't get the opportunity for tournament success without first having great records in the regular season. So it's a moot point.

In the meantime, there are and have been plenty of small school coaches who've racked up great regular season records but no postseason success, and thus remain small school coaches. John Becker comes to mind. Dave Richman. Heck, even Tod Kowalczyk.

If you don't believe winning in March opens up opportunities for smaller school coaches, not sure what to tell you.

I'm not saying coaches don't get jobs on the basis of NCAA success, I'm saying NCAA success isn't the best barometer to use. It's too volatile to hire someone on the basis of a couple games rather than a career resume. I'd rather look at the balance of a season, or better multiple seasons. That's why I'd like someone like Craig Smith, who has shown the ability to win at multiple places, even if he hasn't won big in March.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Now take your feelings out of your argument.

Adjusted Tempo is 342.  Out of 357.

They're slower than Virginia and Wisconsin.

LOL dude u are miserable

[burger]

LOL dude u are miserable

Won't be miserable if the brings an EFG above 50%......

[JWags85]

I would happily accept the winning.  I'd personally prefer "not slow" for my own personal enjoyment.

I watched the second Drake game, both of their SIU games late in the season, games they won that were exceptionally ugly.  And this is one of his better teams that are clearly better than their conference foes.  We've seen with Wisconsin and UVA over the years, when it's not clicking on all cylinders it can be excruciating.  Even if they are well coached and disciplined, I personally hate watching teams pass up open looks or driving lanes early in a possession cause that's not part of the scheme.

LOL dude u are miserable

He may be miserable, yet you've spent the last 3-4 days breathlessly anointing Moser is the second coming and fawning over everything about him.  You're far from unbiased and impartial.  He's not wrong in anything he's pointed out.

[Lennys Tap]

I thought the Loyola/Illinois game was as entertaining as any I've seen in the tournament.

[Pakuni]

I'm not saying coaches don't get jobs on the basis of NCAA success, I'm saying NCAA success isn't the best barometer to use. It's too volatile to hire someone on the basis of a couple games rather than a career resume. I'd rather look at the balance of a season, or better multiple seasons. That's why I'd like someone like Craig Smith, who has shown the ability to win at multiple places, even if he hasn't won big in March.

I think we agree more than disagree. I just think it's a bit of a false dilemma here. The choice isn't to hire on either tournament  OR regular season success. Both need to be considered.
Just as you may not be enthralled with Moser based on his regular season results, I'm not enthralled with Smith because he has yet to win a postseason game six seasons as a D1 coach (not including 2020, for obvious reasons).

[Big Papi]

Winning makes games more fun to watch.  Wojo had a way more up tempo style of play but that was frustrating to watch a lot of times.  The Texas game was an ugly game to watch the other day.  53-52 and they are an up tempo team.

A slower paced style can still be fun to watch when executed very well.

Last five games of the season, with Loyola playing win or go home games.

W73-49
W65-49
W75-65
w71-60
W71-58

I watched 2 of those games.  Far from boring.

Marquette's last five games with a coach with an "up tempo" style of play

W83-70
L62-80
W77-71
W66-59
L49-68

2 blowout losses and a win scoring 66.  Loyola scored more points than us when you add the scores for those 5 games.  Point is I will gladly take 5-0 over 3-2.

I don't completely disregard style of play and tempo with Moser but I think we win way more than we lose with him and well back to my original point winning makes games more fun to watch, even the grinders.

I'm not quite sold yet on Gates' coaching ability.  Doesn't mean he wouldn't be a great hire.  I just think there is a little bit more risk involved.

[Stretchdeltsig]

Al's teams were petty deliberate. In fact his teams were praised in limiting the number of possessions per game. I guess Al's teams would be boring. But then there was no shot clock.

Agree. I wasn't bored watching Loyola play. It was so impressive how well coached they were and how deliberate. Scoopers are used to watching high turn over Wojo ball. We're much better off playing Moser ball which is more entertaining than Bennett or Hard slow ball with slow players.