Stop judging coaches by tourney success

#1
B

BruinVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2011
Messages
60,885
Likes
28,913
#1
This is another year where we should be reminded that tourney success is a crap shoot

scott drew little to no tourney success before this year while his teams has been consistently rated in the top 10 the last number of years.

By looking at tourney success Few would be considered a bad underachieving coach I guess

Cronin at UCLA was considered to be a choke artist in the tourney and in fact was 1 pt away from losing in the playin game from continuing to be considered an awful tourney coach.

Tom Izzo once considered the greatest tourney coach of our time losses again in the first game and had some seriously embarrassing losses as high seeds lately

cal and coach K haven’t been to the final4 in a long time


Pearl lucked out in round 1 his final 4 year.

South Carolina proved the final 4 run meant zero to their future success


the point is while March madness is great entertainment its far from the best measuring stick for the success of a coach.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: USAFgolferVol, AllVol68, NighthawkVol and 16 others
#4
#4
To be honest, I was more disappointed with the tournament lost to Purdue a couple of years ago than this year. We had a great chance to make FF a couple of years ago and should have done it. For some reason, Rick Barnes teams start out hot and then start to decline in Feb and March. The signs of struggles seem to start even before the Tourny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maxwell865, Bigun and savannahfan
#5
#5
Drew has two Elite 8's and two Sweet 16's, so he wasn't an entirely unknown figure.

But, sorry, it's a March sport. That's when the championships are determined. Just like an NFL coach is judged on his playoff performance, as is an NBA coach and MLB manager for how they perform in the playoffs. I'm a Milwaukee Bucks fan. How do you think I view the last two seasons? The NCAA tournament is not a crapshoot. If it were, the two teams thought to be the best wouldn't have made it to last night's game.

Now, it does have a factor of being imperfect to where you can get snipped on a one game basis. However, the longer your career is, then the more viable your NCAA record becomes as a method to assess a coach. Izzo losing this year is one thing, but his 25 year record in the tournament speaks for itself. So, a one year assessment of a coach in the tournament may be problematic, but not a ten year one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: daniel 85, TheMagnificantOne, StoneColdStunner and 8 others
#6
#6
Unimane said:
Drew has two Elite 8's and two Sweet 16's, so he wasn't an entirely unknown figure.

But, sorry, it's a March sport. That's when the championships are determined. Just like an NFL coach is judged on his playoff performance, as is an NBA coach and MLB manager for how they perform in the playoffs. I'm a Milwaukee Bucks fan. How do you think I view the last two seasons? The NCAA tournament is not a crapshoot. If it were, the two teams thought to be the best wouldn't have made it to last night's game.

Now, it does have a factor of being imperfect to where you can get snipped on a one game basis. However, the longer your career is, then the more viable your NCAA record becomes as a method to assess a coach. Izzo losing this year is one thing, but his 25 year record in the tournament speaks for itself. So, a one year assessment of a coach in the tournament may be problematic, but not a ten year one.
Click to expand...

It’s been more than one year for Izzo

remember 15 seed MTSU ?
 
#8
#8
I'll meet you half way on this one. I think it's weighted too heavily. People tend to undervalue the 30 game regular season.

However, you build enough great rosters and the tourney results should be there eventually.

I'm willing to criticize Barnes' NCAAT record, but I do value what he's done for the program. I'd prefer a coach that can do both, but it beats Donnie Tyndall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfan__18, beamerman, hUTch2002 and 7 others
#9
#9
BruinVol said:
It’s been more than one year for Izzo

remember 15 seed MTSU ?
Click to expand...

You mean from time to time he's been snipped? Yeah, it happens. Overall, though, I think his record in the tourney is a pretty accurate reflection of his abilities. Are his eight final fours a crapshoot, too? K's 5 titles? More often than not, the good coaches do well in the tournament, as do good teams.
 
#11
#11
calban said:
All the more reason to Embrace the NIT. Post season basketball is not relevant.
Super Bowls mean nothing. World Series is trash.
Hand out the Participation trophies..
Good one Bruin.
Click to expand...

Unsurprisingly, you're either too dense to understand the OP's point, or intentionally misrepresenting what the OP is saying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfan__18, Cheese Vol, whodeycin85 and 2 others
#12
#12
I judge coaches by both regular season and tourney success. Coach Barnes has done some great things at UT and Texas during the regular season. I give him credit for that and overall raising the level of our program. I can't ignore his lack of tourney success in the way I judge him. To get upset one year or two happens to everybody. But Barnes has had a long career and his lack of tourney success can't be attributed to a couple of bad losses to teams that got hot. he has underperformed in the post season and there is not way to sugercoat that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheMagnificantOne, Flovol and cncchris33
#13
#13
BruinVol said:
Entire body of work with the 4 month regular season being weighed more heavily than the tourney
Click to expand...
I couldn't help but notice watching Gonzaga the past few weeks that we play a similar scheme, except 1: they had a dominant force down low w/ Timmy and 2: Zaga ran play sets to perfection. It doesn't seem like we run many set plays but run to a philosophy and plays happen organically. Zaga had some beautifully executed plays which worked time and time again. None of our guards were top notch like Zaga point (#1), but with Springer, he was a pretty good substitute. I think we'll be back in good shape with our roster next year, but need to do get our offensive philosophy down better...
 
  • Like
Reactions: spyfish007
#14
#14
volbound1700 said:
To be honest, I was more disappointed with the tournament lost to Purdue a couple of years ago than this year. We had a great chance to make FF a couple of years ago and should have done it. For some reason, Rick Barnes teams start out hot and then start to decline in Feb and March. The signs of struggles seem to start even before the Tourny.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with your point that Rick's teams rarely get hot at the right time; but to the OPs point: a foul call that is ignored 9 of 10 times extended the Purdue game. I'm not saying we were hosed, just that so many games come down to one judgement call, or one guy getting hot after missing 33 straight shots, or one shot missing by two feet and banking in, etc, and that one went against us. (Sometimes, too, it comes down to a ref just not liking the coach, or not liking how the coach rides him the whole game. You've been on my butt for 39 minutes... close call... guess what? The odds of Bob Knight getting a last second call were pretty slim. And, to be honest, I think Pearl's antics increase the likelihood of a late game call going against him.) Many of the games are like last night's: one team outplays the other, but quite a few more come down to plain ol' arbitrariness. Get enough of those, and you're a "bad coach". Get a few of those in one season and you're Jimmy Valvano.
 
#15
#15
njvols said:
I couldn't help but notice watching Gonzaga the past few weeks that we play a similar scheme, except 1: they had a dominant force down low w/ Timmy and 2: Zaga ran play sets to perfection. It doesn't seem like we run many set plays but run to a philosophy and plays happen organically. Zaga had some beautifully executed plays which worked time and time again. None of our guards were top notch like Zaga point (#1), but with Springer, he was a pretty good substitute. I think we'll be back in good shape with our roster next year, but need to do get our offensive philosophy down better...
Click to expand...

I don't disagree about Gonzaga, but that quality may well be what did them in last night. Baylor ran them out of their sets with fantastic hardnosed defense, and they didn't have an answer. (Getting destroyed on the boards didn't help either, of course.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cardvolfan and JohnnyJava
#16
#16
Brick_By_Brick said:
Unsurprisingly, you're either too dense to understand the OP's point, or intentionally misrepresenting what the OP is saying.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should explain what he's saying. let's get your version oh wise one.
 
#17
#17
Unimane said:
You mean from time to time he's been snipped? Yeah, it happens. Overall, though, I think his record in the tourney is a pretty accurate reflection of his abilities. Are his eight final fours a crapshoot, too? K's 5 titles? More often than not, the good coaches do well in the tournament, as do good teams.
Click to expand...

I think If we look at a coaches overall record vs tourney level teams in the regular seasons we will see a remarkable Similar record to their tourney records
 
#18
#18
papatomany said:
I don't disagree with your point that Rick's teams rarely get hot at the right time; but to the OPs point: a foul call that is ignored 9 of 10 times extended the Purdue game. I'm not saying we were hosed, just that so many games come down to one judgement call, or one guy getting hot after missing 33 straight shots, or one shot missing by two feet and banking in, etc, and that one went against us. (Sometimes, too, it comes down to a ref just not liking the coach, or not liking how the coach rides him the whole game. You've been on my butt for 39 minutes... close call... guess what? The odds of Bob Knight getting a last second call were pretty slim. And, to be honest, I think Pearl's antics increase the likelihood of a late game call going against him.) Many of the games are like last night's: one team outplays the other, but quite a few more come down to plain ol' arbitrariness. Get enough of those, and you're a "bad coach". Get a few of those in one season and you're Jimmy Valvano.
Click to expand...

I feel like the issue was the play of Admiral Schofield. He was not the same player in March for some reason and that hurt the team. We barely got by lowly Iowa the game before. It really stinks as Grant Williams and Admiral Schofield are two of the best players that we had in a while. We really could have used both of them this year.
 
#19
#19
I will say this, it is pretty pathetic that schools like Loyola, VCU, George Mason, and Butler can make a Final Four but Tennessee has never sniffed a Final Four in its entire history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brockytop
#20
#20
Funny how OP is criticizing teams/coaches for not making a Final 4 in a while when we haven't made one in our entire history. I wish our issue was "we haven't been back to a Final 4 in a few years."
 
  • Like
Reactions: brockytop
#23
#23
BruinVol said:
This is another year where we should be reminded that tourney success is a crap shoot

scott drew little to no tourney success before this year while his teams has been consistently rated in the top 10 the last number of years.

By looking at tourney success Few would be considered a bad underachieving coach I guess

Cronin at UCLA was considered to be a choke artist in the tourney and in fact was 1 pt away from losing in the playin game from continuing to be considered an awful tourney coach.

Tom Izzo once considered the greatest tourney coach of our time losses again in the first game and had some seriously embarrassing losses as high seeds lately

cal and coach K haven’t been to the final4 in a long time


Pearl lucked out in round 1 his final 4 year.

South Carolina proved the final 4 run meant zero to their future success


the point is while March madness is great entertainment its far from the best measuring stick for the success of a coach.
Click to expand...
A million Minnesota Vikings fans justed "yaaah"-ed your post!
 
  • Like
Reactions: brockytop and JohnWardForever
#24
#24
BruinVol said:
This is another year where we should be reminded that tourney success is a crap shoot

scott drew little to no tourney success before this year while his teams has been consistently rated in the top 10 the last number of years.

By looking at tourney success Few would be considered a bad underachieving coach I guess

Cronin at UCLA was considered to be a choke artist in the tourney and in fact was 1 pt away from losing in the playin game from continuing to be considered an awful tourney coach.

Tom Izzo once considered the greatest tourney coach of our time losses again in the first game and had some seriously embarrassing losses as high seeds lately

cal and coach K haven’t been to the final4 in a long time


Pearl lucked out in round 1 his final 4 year.

South Carolina proved the final 4 run meant zero to their future success


the point is while March madness is great entertainment its far from the best measuring stick for the success of a coach.
Click to expand...
I mean Few is 46-30 in NCAA tourney games and in the past 6 years has made the Championship game twice and no worse than the Sweet 16.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brockytop and Kas232323
#25
#25
Unimane said:
The NCAA tournament is not a crapshoot. If it were, the two teams thought to be the best wouldn't have made it to last night's game.
Click to expand...

That doesn't always happen though. A Duke team with THREE top 10 picks and a future HOF coach didn't even make the final four a couple of years ago when they were by far the best team all year long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top