2013 F Austin Nichols (Memphis Briarcrest)

[MemphisCanes]

He did say 1st rd picks. Barton was a 2nd rounder. Williams was in the 1st, so Pastner has him, though he wasn't recruited. He transferred in to be close to his mother.

It's not really an indictment on Pastner that NBA GM's undervalued Will Barton.

 

[cncchris33]

How did I know you would come to his defense? Explain to me exactly how Pastner's resume is better using the parameters I set forth. And I am not a huge Martin fan.

 

[cncchris33]

It's not really an indictment on Pastner that NBA GM's undervalued Will Barton.

It's still a fact. Don't try to change it. He put forth specific guidelines in his post, and you brought up two players who don't really fit them.

 

[MemphisCanes]

It's still a fact. Don't try to change it. He put forth specific guidelines in his post, and you brought up two players who don't really fit them.

Really? Elliot Williams is a first round pick. No. 22.

 

[GoobieVol]

Barton and Elliot Williams are both playing for the Blazers right now.

Neither puttin up impressive numbers, but this was a pretty nasty one for Barton though.

Check out Rookie Will Barton's Vicious Dunk on Oklahoma City Thunder | Bleacher Report

Back to Vol talk. We now return you to your regular scheduled programming.

 

[MemphisCanes]

How did I know you would come to his defense? Explain to me exactly how Pastner's resume is better using the parameters I set forth. And I am not a huge Martin fan.

I dunno, who's the better recruiter? Who's got the better win%? Who has more everything? Pastner pretty much across the board.

This is a stupid argument. Pastner is no Coach K, but his resume is noticeably better than Martin's.

 

[MemphisCanes]

Neither puttin up impressive numbers, but this was a pretty nasty one for Barton though.

Check out Rookie Will Barton's Vicious Dunk on Oklahoma City Thunder | Bleacher Report

Back to Vol talk. We now return you to your regular scheduled programming.

Barton has put up very impressive numbers late in the season, but yuo're right, we don't need to belabor this issue.

 

[cncchris33]

Really? Elliot Williams is a first round pick. No. 22.

Did I not say that already? He wasn't really recruited to Memphis. He chose to move closer to home as a transfer. I still conceded that Pastner would count him as a player he put into the 1st round, which I have no problem with.

The original poster said Pastner has still never RECRUITED a player that was a FIRST ROUND pick. Williams kind of fits that. Barton does not.

 

[MemphisCanes]

Did I not say that already? He wasn't really recruited to Memphis. He chose to move closer to home as a transfer. I still conceded that Pastner would count him as a player he put into the 1st round, which I have no problem with.

The original poster said Pastner has still never RECRUITED a player that was a FIRST ROUND pick. Williams kind of fits that. Barton does not.

Lol, ok man.

 

[cncchris33]

I dunno, who's the better recruiter? Who's got the better win%? Who has more everything? Pastner pretty much across the board.

This is a stupid argument. Pastner is no Coach K, but his resume is noticeably better than Martin's.

Better recruiter? Pastner. I did say that their level of talent to work with was relative to the argument, so it's a moot point.

Better winning %? You know that's not really a fair comparison discussing the CUSA and SEC.

Better everything? Well, that frankly looks like a "filler" statement when you ran out of things to discuss lauding Pastner's wide-ranging ability.

The only thing Pastner can claim is better talent and appearances in the tourney, all three of which can be attributed to winning Memphis' crappy conference.

 

[cncchris33]

Lol, ok man.

Good retort there MC.

 

[MemphisCanes]

Good retort there MC.

I'm not going to argue with you. If you want to put the narrowest of parameters on something to try to support your point, have at it. I hope it makes you feel better about what's going on here.

 

[MemphisCanes]

Better recruiter? Pastner. I did say that their level of talent to work with was relative to the argument, so it's a moot point.

Better winning %? You know that's not really a fair comparison discussing the CUSA and SEC.

Better everything? Well, that frankly looks like a "filler" statement when you ran out of things to discuss lauding Pastner's wide-ranging ability.

The only thing Pastner can claim is better talent and appearances in the tourney, all three of which can be attributed to winning Memphis' crappy conference.

So, to clarify, Pastner has a better resume than Martin, but it doesn't count. Gotcha.

 

[cncchris33]

I'm not going to argue with you. If you want to put the narrowest of parameters on something to try to support your point, have at it. I hope it makes you feel better about what's going on here.

I didn't set the parameters (VKAman did). I just love that you choose to ignore them to make an irrelevant point.

 

[cncchris33]

So, to clarify, Pastner has a better resume than Martin, but it doesn't count. Gotcha.

I said, other than NCAA appearances, Martin has a better resume/done a better job/is more impressive than Pastner when you take into account talent level.

If you want to discount the talent discrepancy between Pastner's classes at Memphis and Martin's classes at Missouri State and Tennessee, and ignore that I conceded the NCAA appearance factor, then sure...Pastner has a better resume.

 

[MemphisCanes]

I said, other than NCAA appearances, Martin has a better resume/done a better job/is more impressive than Pastner when you take into account talent level.

If you want to discount the talent discrepancy between Pastner's classes at Memphis and Martin's classes at Missouri State and Tennessee, and ignore that I conceded the NCAA appearance factor, then sure...Pastner has a better resume.

So, let me see if I'm following you: discounting the talent that they are both responsible for recruiting and disregarding trips to the NCAA tournament (the whole point of playing regular season games), and the different conferences that they coach in, Martin may have a better resume than Pastner.

Brilliant. Got it.

 

[cncchris33]

So, let me see if I'm following you: discounting the talent that they are both responsible for recruiting and disregarding trips to the NCAA tournament (the whole point of playing regular season games), and the different conferences that they coach in, Martin may have a better resume than Pastner.

Brilliant. Got it.

Pastner recruiting to Memphis vs Martin recruiting to Missouri State? Gee...which is likely to be more successful??? Hmmm

Besides, that's not the point. My point is more reflective of each's success relative to the level of talent they have at their disposal. You are trying to make this a "who's a better recruiter" argument.

Martin hasn't made it to an NCAA tournament in five seasons, three of which came at MSU where winning his conf. tourney was likely his only chance of making it. Pastner has been three times, all by virtue of being the big fish in a small pond and bullying lesser talented teams into a conference tourney victory. Had they not won the conference tourney, they would have missed the NCAAs every year but this past season.

Put Tennessee in CUSA and you'd have similar results. Put Memphis in the SEC and they still haven't made the tournament under Pastner, I'm guessing. I hesitate to say that because it is unprovable, but I believe it to be true in a vacuum.

 

[TigerFan386]

Pastner recruiting to Memphis vs Martin recruiting to Missouri State? Gee...which is likely to be more successful??? Hmmm

Besides, that's not the point. My point is more reflective of each's success relative to the level of talent they have at their disposal. You are trying to make this a "who's a better recruiter" argument.

Martin hasn't made it to an NCAA tournament in five seasons, three of which came at MSU where winning his conf. tourney was likely his only chance of making it. Pastner has been three times, all by virtue of being the big fish in a small pond and bullying lesser talented teams into a conference tourney victory. Had they not won the conference tourney, they would have missed the NCAAs every year but this past season.

Put Tennessee in CUSA and you'd have similar results. Put Memphis in the SEC and they still haven't made the tournament under Pastner, I'm guessing. I hesitate to say that because it is unprovable, but I believe it to be true in a vacuum.

Hmm, if only we had some other kind of measuring stick, like, I don't know, head to head match ups....

 

[TigerFan386]

Pastner recruiting to Memphis vs Martin recruiting to Missouri State? Gee...which is likely to be more successful??? Hmmm

Besides, that's not the point. My point is more reflective of each's success relative to the level of talent they have at their disposal. You are trying to make this a "who's a better recruiter" argument.

Martin hasn't made it to an NCAA tournament in five seasons, three of which came at MSU where winning his conf. tourney was likely his only chance of making it. Pastner has been three times, all by virtue of being the big fish in a small pond and bullying lesser talented teams into a conference tourney victory. Had they not won the conference tourney, they would have missed the NCAAs every year but this past season.

Put Tennessee in CUSA and you'd have similar results. Put Memphis in the SEC and they still haven't made the tournament under Pastner, I'm guessing. I hesitate to say that because it is unprovable, but I believe it to be true in a vacuum.

So let me get this straight. In one breath, you said its excusable for Martin to not make the tournament because he would have to win the conference tourny, but its meaningless that Paster made the tournament because he had to and did win the conference tourny? How does that make any kind of sense?

 

[GoobieVol]

So let me get this straight. In one breath, you said its excusable for Martin to not make the tournament because he would have to win the conference tourny, but its meaningless that Paster made the tournament because he had to and did win the conference tourny? How does that make any kind of sense?

I got it.

 

[cncchris33]

So let me get this straight. In one breath, you said its excusable for Martin to not make the tournament because he would have to win the conference tourny, but its meaningless that Paster made the tournament because he had to and did win the conference tourny? How does that make any kind of sense?

Martin's teams were not grossly more talented than every other team in their conference. Face it, Memphis is, and should be heads and tails more talented than any other CUSA team. Big fish, small pond. Not true for Martin at MSU.

You know that and to pretend otherwise and insinuate that I'm trying to create a double standard is disingenuous.

 

[cncchris33]

Hmm, if only we had some other kind of measuring stick, like, I don't know, head to head match ups....

So, three head-to-head matchups defines a career/resume? Genious!!!

Cuonzo Martin > Billy Donovan.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

Enough is enough. Why drag the Nichols' thread through this argument. If someone wants to argue with that Memphis fan, why not create a separate thread?

 

[MemphisCanes]

So, three head-to-head matchups defines a career/resume? Genious!!!

Cuonzo Martin > Billy Donovan.

Possibly, I guess, if you ignore NCAA appearances and performance, which is the stipulation you put on the Pastner/Martin comparison.

That's why ignoring NCAA appearances/performance (probably THE most important aspect of a coach's resume) is ridiculous.

You may as well decide the better coach based on games played on Tuesdays, or some other meaningless criteria.

 

[GoobieVol]

I'm not going to argue with you. If you want to put the narrowest of parameters on something to try to support your point, have at it. I hope it makes you feel better about what's going on here.

LOL at the 3 posts after this one. :good!: