Rick Barnes discussion (merged)

[Voltopia]

Right, it’s more about that than being the best team…look at UNC just last year and to start this year, nobody thinks that was the best team, they just got hot at the right time. I’m not saying I dislike the tourney or have a great idea on improving it because I don’t, I think you can say you love the tourney but also admit that more often than not the best team doesn’t win it.

That's because an end-of-season tournament isn't designed to pick a "best team" from a particular season All it does it pick a tournament winner. Which sometimes is the best team from a particular season, and other times isn't.

 

[DuckInAPen]

That's because an end-of-season tournament isn't designed to pick a "best team" from a particular season All it does it pick a tournament winner. Which sometimes is the best team from a particular season, and other times isn't.

And yet there are those here who assert that a ~30 game regular season is meaningless, that the only measure of success is a tournament in which random chance plays an outsized role.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

And yet there are those here who assert that a ~30 game regular season is meaningless, that the only measure of success is a tournament in which random chance plays an outsized role.

And they walk among us.

They don’t understand that TN has historically been very much a bubble team. TN is in the best position it has ever experienced in its history. Continue to easily get into the field, continue to add NBA caliber players to the roster, continue to play excellent, well coached highly disciplined defense and the randomness of NCAAT success will arrive.

 

[Voltopia]

And yet there are those here who assert that a ~30 game regular season is meaningless, that the only measure of success is a tournament in which random chance plays an outsized role.

Granted, but I think they think that way because that's what sports media and the sport's handlers and owners have spent decades drilling into people, and thus, that's all people care about. Practically everything about ESPN's presentation is oriented toward the NCAA tournament. Everything is about seeding, last four in, first four out, regionals, NET rankings, it's all they talk about. How did Seth Greenburg refer to Tennessee last Saturday on their show? "That's why Tennessee is a number 1 seed." Everything in the sport is viewed through the lens of the NCAA tournament. "WIN OR GO HOME." "THE ROAD ENDS HERE." That's what the people around the game have reduced it to, an event which just so happens to be incredibly convenient for marketing and advertising purposes.

And if that's all people hear sports media about, then that's what they'll value. Don't misunderstand me, I dislike it. But I get why people assert things like that. Because everything around college basketball says that the only thing which matters is the almighty NCAA tournament. And if that's all that's ever discussed, it's hard to see how to argue with people who value it above all else.

 

[cardvolfan]

Granted, but I think they think that way because that's what sports media and the sport's handlers and owners have spent decades drilling into people, and thus, that's all people care about. Practically everything about ESPN's presentation is oriented toward the NCAA tournament. Everything is about seeding, last four in, first four out, regionals, NET rankings, it's all they talk about. How did Seth Greenburg refer to Tennessee last Saturday on their show? "That's why Tennessee is a number 1 seed." Everything in the sport is viewed through the lens of the NCAA tournament. "WIN OR GO HOME." "THE ROAD ENDS HERE." That's what the people around the game have reduced it to, an event which just so happens to be incredibly convenient for marketing and advertising purposes.

And if that's all people hear sports media about, then that's what they'll value. Don't misunderstand me, I dislike it. But I get why people assert things like that. Because everything around college basketball says that the only thing which matters is the almighty NCAA tournament. And if that's all that's ever discussed, it's hard to see how to argue with people who value it above all else.

I can’t say I totally disagree, and you make a good case. I think those that do tend to believe this are the separaters between the casual fan and the more dedicated, more knowledgeable fan. You do have to get to your destination first before you can enjoy the ride.

 

[ColinS]

The list of coaches that have one final four appearance is a long list, and it isn't exactly prestigious from top to bottom. The fact that Barnes is in that group isn't exactly flattering. There are 9 other ACTIVE head coaches with more final four appearances and 11 more ACTIVE head coaches with one final four appearance. Barnes is in no way among elite company when it comes to post season success. For all the good things that Barnes brings to the table, tournament success has never been one of them. Using Hugh Durham isn't making any kind of point other than that Barnes' one final four appearance isn't exactly impressive when you look at his expectations and the other coaches who have done it.

Hugh Durham has two Final Fours at two different programs that making a Final Four would have been an absolute pipe dream before he got there.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Hugh Durham has two Final Fours at two different programs that making a Final Four would have been an absolute pipe dream before he got there.

That’s right. FL State in 1972 as well as GA in 1983 getting matched up with NC State/Valvano. It’s a really random accomplishment outside of UK, KU, UNC, Duke and a handful of others (MSU, Cuse, Nova, etc). Blind squirrels regularly find NCAAT FFs.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Unbelievable that that GA team knocked out St John’s with Mullins AND UNC with Jordan, Daugherty, Doherty, and Perkins. But I see a weak link. Some guy named Buzz that roomed with MJ.

GA didn’t even have the Human Highlight Film - he skipped his SR year in 82/83. It was Vern Fleming’s GA team.

 

[ColinS]

That’s right. FL State in 1972 as well as GA in 1983 getting matched up with NC State/Valvano. It’s a really random accomplishment outside of UK, KU, UNC, Duke and a handful of others (MSU, Cuse, Nova, etc). Blind squirrels regularly find NCAAT FFs.

I thought it was Jacksonville but you may be right. For a long time he was the only guy to take two different schools to the Final Four.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I thought it was Jacksonville but you may be right. For a long time he was the only guy to take two different schools to the Final Four.

In 12 years at FSU, Hugh made 3 NCAATs. The FF in 1972 was actually a finals appearance versus UCLA/Bill Walton. FSU beat KY in the regional finals and UNC in the national semis. At GA he made 5x NCAATs in 17 years. Then after not coaching for 2 years, Hugh was 0-8 at Jacksonville in NCAAT appearances.

 

[DuckInAPen]

Granted, but I think they think that way because that's what sports media and the sport's handlers and owners have spent decades drilling into people, and thus, that's all people care about. Practically everything about ESPN's presentation is oriented toward the NCAA tournament. Everything is about seeding, last four in, first four out, regionals, NET rankings, it's all they talk about. How did Seth Greenburg refer to Tennessee last Saturday on their show? "That's why Tennessee is a number 1 seed." Everything in the sport is viewed through the lens of the NCAA tournament. "WIN OR GO HOME." "THE ROAD ENDS HERE." That's what the people around the game have reduced it to, an event which just so happens to be incredibly convenient for marketing and advertising purposes.

And if that's all people hear sports media about, then that's what they'll value. Don't misunderstand me, I dislike it. But I get why people assert things like that. Because everything around college basketball says that the only thing which matters is the almighty NCAA tournament. And if that's all that's ever discussed, it's hard to see how to argue with people who value it above all else.

What you've written is fair and accurate. I suppose what rubs me the wrong way is when our Vols are successful enough for a particular game to attract the interest of a casual fan who, if we happen to lose that game, procedes to mercilessly disparage our coaches and players and to discount their achievements that made the game big in the first place as meaningless.

 

[jaguinn5]

Hugh Durham has two Final Fours at two different programs that making a Final Four would have been an absolute pipe dream before he got there.

That one in 72 was a 25 team tournament. It's a little different.

 

[jaguinn5]

So of 358 active D1 coaches, only 2.5% have advanced in the tourney farther than Barnes and only 5.6% have advanced as far as or farther than Barnes? That "isn't exactly impressive"?

You and I both know that a majority of those coaches are with teams that won't sniff the tournament. How about you look at the records of active coaches that have coached in the tournament.

Any list of active coaches you look at with multiple tournament appearances will show Barnes towards the top in total appearances and towards the bottom in win percentage and total number of final fours. His absolute ceiling is the Sweet 16 most years, which he's done only 7 total times in 35 years despite being loaded with talent year in and year out. He has never even played for a championship. He is the Mark Richt of college basketball. He is a good coach, but there is no arguing that he is historically not a good tournament coach and always ALWAYS comes up short of expectations. Maybe this will be the year he kicks that habit, but I am past the point of expecting him to win much in March.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

You and I both know that a majority of those coaches are with teams that won't sniff the tournament. How about you look at the records of active coaches that have coached in the tournament.

Any list of active coaches you look at with multiple tournament appearances will show Barnes towards the top in total appearances and towards the bottom in win percentage and total number of final fours. His absolute ceiling is the Sweet 16 most years, which he's done only 7 total times in 35 years despite being loaded with talent year in and year out. He has never even played for a championship. He is the Mark Richt of college basketball. He is a good coach, but there is no arguing that he is historically not a good tournament coach and always ALWAYS comes up short of expectations. Maybe this will be the year he kicks that habit, but I am past the point of expecting him to win much in March.

I seriously doubt that winning nearly 50% of NCAAT games is towards the bottom.

Barnes getting in every year means that his average teams will hurt the winning percentage. Frank Martin probably has a really good NCAAT winning percentage since his average teams were not included in the selections.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Teams that make the Sweet 16 are those that finished 9th best through 16th. Stop pretending like that is the floor. How often has TN finished in the top 9 or 16 of final AP polls?

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I seriously doubt that winning nearly 50% of NCAAT games is towards the bottom.

Of coaches with 5+ appearances he’s towards the bottom of the list in winning % in NCAAT, and that’s coming from a Barnes supporter.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Of coaches with 5+ appearances he’s towards the bottom of the list in winning % in NCAAT, and that’s coming from a Barnes supporter.

I find it hard to believe that averaging Sweet 16 appearances isn’t a statistical anomaly. And like I said, instead of consistently flaming out the argument should be that he’s getting his bubble teams into the field. Going 0-1 in the NCAAT hurts the winning percentage compared to going 0-0. Which is a better result?

 

[VolGee4]

You and I both know that a majority of those coaches are with teams that won't sniff the tournament. How about you look at the records of active coaches that have coached in the tournament.

Any list of active coaches you look at with multiple tournament appearances will show Barnes towards the top in total appearances and towards the bottom in win percentage and total number of final fours. His absolute ceiling is the Sweet 16 most years, which he's done only 7 total times in 35 years despite being loaded with talent year in and year out. He has never even played for a championship. He is the Mark Richt of college basketball. He is a good coach, but there is no arguing that he is historically not a good tournament coach and always ALWAYS comes up short of expectations. Maybe this will be the year he kicks that habit, but I am past the point of expecting him to win much in March.

So, let’s go through a little history:

- Barnes took over a Providence program in 1988 that went 11-17 the year prior, and they fired that coach after one year (sound familiar?). Two years prior, Pitino took them to the FF with 5 players that Barnes never coached. Eric Murdock and Marty Conlin ended up playing some in the NBA after their two years with Barnes. Barnes makes 3 NCAAT’s in 6 years. Loses by 3 as a 12 seed in 1989, by 1 in OT as a 9 seed in 1990, and by 6 as a 8 seed in 1994.

- Barnes goes to Clemson. Greg Buckner had committed to him at Providence, follows him to Clemson, and starts 122 games all 4 years. Buckner was a KY high school player, so he wasn’t good enough for UK. He goes to the NCAAT 3 out of 4 years. In 1996, they beat 4 ranked teams including Duke and UNC. They lose by 7 as a 9 seed.

In 1997, they beat 5 ranked teams, including UK, who eventually went to the title game. They also beat Duke and Maryland twice. They go to the Sweet 16 as a 4 seed and lost to #1 seed Minnesota in double OT. In 1998, they beat 3 ranked teams and did not meet pre-season expectations. Lost as a 6 seed by 3. Buckner and Harold Jamison played in the NBA. Clemson doesn’t get back to a SS for (I think) 21 years.

- In 1999, he inherits a fairly young team at Texas that went 14-17 the year prior. Slow start, but they go 13-3 in the Big 12. Loses by 4 as a 7 seed. In 2000, they lose in the second round by 5 as a 5 seed.

In 2001, it was a good regular season but bad post season. In 2002, he started to recruit well. As a 6 seed, they reach the Sweet 16 and lose to #2 Oregon by 2. In 2003, they reach the FF and lose to eventual national champion, Syracuse, with Carmelo.

In 2004, they reach the SS. In 2005, Barnes is kind of the early Calipari strategy with really young but talented teams. They lose as a 8 seed by 4 points. In 2006, they beat 6 ranked teams, including 2 top 5 teams. They get to the EE and lose to 4 seeded LSU in OT. After this season, they lose 3 players early to the NBA.

In 2007, Durant comes in, but as many don’t research, this team’s 4 of top 5 scorers are freshmen, and the 5th is a sophomore. This team has NO contributors that are juniors or seniors. They beat 3 ranked teams. As a 4 seed, they lose in round 2 to 5 seed USC. Not strangely enough, only Durant leaves, and in 2008, they go to the EE. They beat 5 ranked teams, 2 in top 5, and lose to 1 seed Memphis (who has pro talent too).

In 2009, they had more veteran talent but not high level NBA talent. Lose to 2 seed Duke as a 7 seed by 5 points. In 2010, a bit of roster turnover as the starting guards are true freshmen. They lose as a 8 seed by 1 point in OT. In 2011, they beat 6 ranked teams. They lose in the second round to 5 seed Arizona by 1 point. Arizona then beat 1 seed Duke.

In 2012, more turnover at guard, and they don’t have near as much talent. Lost by 6 points as an 11 seed. 2013 was his only year to miss the NCAAT at Texas. In 2014, talent was just not as good. They still beat 5 ranked teams. Lost in 2nd round as a 7 seed to 2 seed Michigan State. In 2015, he did bring in Myles Turner. Beat 3 ranked teams and lost as an 11 seed by 8 points to Butler. He finishes taking Texas to 16 NCAAT’s when they had been to 17 in their history.

People can interpret all of this as they may. But with how competitive the sport has gotten, this is a hell of a resume. Some generally know who he’s coached but don’t know specifics. Just like Calipari not getting to a FF with Wall, Cousins, Bledsoe or losing to St. Peter’s and Coach K not getting to a FF with Zion. Those things happen. But, getting 4 schools to the NCAAT and 3 of them to a SS is really good, especially at the schools he has coached at. I am glad we have him.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I find it hard to believe that averaging Sweet 16 appearances isn’t a statistical anomaly. And like I said, instead of consistently flaming out the argument should be that he’s getting his bubble teams into the field. Going 0-1 in the NCAAT hurts the winning percentage compared to going 0-0. Which is a better result?

50% isn’t averaging S16 though, that’s averaging R32, 1-1.

Fwiw he ranks in like the 400’s in Barttorvik database for wins over expected in the tourney, he’s negative…that goes against what you’re saying, that bubble teams hurt his numbers. Basically they look and say if you’re a 6 seed you should go 1-1, beat the 11 and lose to the 3, not 0-1.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

50% isn’t averaging S16 though, that’s averaging R32, 1-1.

Fwiw he ranks in like the 400’s in Barttorvik database for wins over expected in the tourney, he’s negative…that goes against what you’re saying, that bubble teams hurt his numbers. Basically they look and say if you’re a 6 seed you should go 1-1, beat the 11 and lose to the 3, not 0-1.

Getting to the Sweet 16 is what is outperforming 1-1. I find it hard to believe that there are significant numbers of coaches averaging that.

And seeds are garbage. I don’t put much stock in analyzing those results.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

And yet there are those here who assert that a ~30 game regular season is meaningless, that the only measure of success is a tournament in which random chance plays an outsized role.

Look at Pearl's years. What the casual fan holds up as his best year was 2009-2010 when we made the Elite 8, and as far as results in the NCAAT yeah that's true. But his best team was 2007-2008 and that team was one of the best teams if not the best in UT history.

 

[Vols8086]

Getting to the Sweet 16 is what is outperforming 1-1. I find it hard to believe that there are significant numbers of coaches averaging that.

And seeds are garbage. I don’t put much stock in analyzing those results.

Ok, so you’ve been given actual data and facts, but you only choose to believe what you want or what fits your narrative. Got it.

Barnes can be a great coach and program builder and also struggle in the NCAA tourney. Both can be true.

 

[VolGee4]

Ok, so you’ve been given actual data and facts, but you only choose to believe what you want or what fits your narrative. Got it.

Barnes can be a great coach and program builder and also struggle in the NCAA tourney. Both can be true.

The one thing I will argue is that losing to a higher seed doesn’t necessarily mean much. The difference between a 4 seed and 5 seed doesn’t mean the 4 was automatically better. Barnes lost to a 5 seed Arizona in 2011. Arizona had a lottery pick, and Texas started 2 true freshmen all season with no player over 6’8.” Now, losing as, say, a 6 versus 11 is certainly different.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Ok, so you’ve been given actual data and facts, but you only choose to believe what you want or what fits your narrative. Got it.

Barnes can be a great coach and program builder and also struggle in the NCAA tourney. Both can be true.

Let’s see the list that has Barnes near the bottom of tournament winning percentage. Nobody has given that. And why would it be qualified as coaches with more than 5 appearances? I’ve seen assertions. Let’s actually see the facts and dissect what they mean.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

CRB’s Texas teams finished the season ranked less than half of the time. But he made 16 of 17 NCAATs.