2017 Coaching Carousel

[GBPillini]

Looks can be deceiving. I haven't seen him coach or his teams play so I have no opinion on that. Underwood's teams at SFA passed the eye test. Someone like Dan Muller at ISU doesn't exactly pass the eye test. He may just have the right group of players w/the right chemistry.

Underwood's Adj D -
2013 SFA Austin (before Underwood took over) - 9
2014 (Underwood's 1st year) - 105
2015 - 98
2016 - 38

Also Underwood took over a team that was 70 per Kenpom and moved went from 70, 69, 51, and 41 his last year. Way different starting position to then Keatts at UNCW.

 

[LurkLongandProsper]

That's really all he has to say. He doesn't need to claim that he provided evidence for blah blah blah, because he really hasn't shown any evidene for anything. All he has to say is that he is against him just because. I don't know why he doesn't just state so.

It's totally reasonable to say you don't want the guy because his only HC experience is HS prep and then 3 years in a small conference. But assuming he would be terrible defensively here because of a top 1/3 defensive efficiency at a lower level - without any data or even anecdotal support at all - does zilch.

Yep, which leads us to another baseless point:

I have already indicated that I am against him. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but that type of a move screams of desperation to go for the next big thing and there's too much risk in going for a relatively unknown coach. Let someone else take him and if he has success, great, and if he doesn't, then we can be happy knowing that we didn't throw our program down the well for another 5 years of mediocrity or worse.

Defense is a better gauge of where a coach is at. If his defenses suck at the lower level, that's a good indicator that his defenses will suck at a higher level school. Defense is not something that requires great talent, it requires energy and plenty of practice at perfecting that craft. There are many average players who are great defenders. You can control your defense and how you play, but you can't always control how often your shots go down. If his teams are poor at defense, then that would have me highly concerned. The college game is a defense-first game. This isn't the NBA.

Dude, stop making claims without evidence. Provide us some data to support your point. Defense-first? UCLA is top 10. OBVIOUSLY defense matters. Nobody is claiming we should give up 2 PPP on layups on D to our opponents and just outscore them on 3's.

Ever heard the saying "good offense beats good defense"?

But seriously, stop making concrete statements about the state of the game, et al if you're not going to back them with data. We know your opinion on keatts and the CAA, but it basically boils down to "CAA success won't translate", which is again, not based in any data you've provided (and I struggle to believe there's even enough coaches for a legitimate sampling on that). Everything after that has been unsupported statements passed as fact.

Looks can be deceiving. I haven't seen him coach or his teams play so I have no opinion on that. Underwood's teams at SFA passed the eye test. Someone like Dan Muller at ISU doesn't exactly pass the eye test. He may just have the right group of players w/the right chemistry.

I just don't even know where to start with you sometimes. Be honest, did you watch Underwood at SFA outside of his run in the NCAAT?

 

[OrangeKrus28]

Underwood's Adj D -
2013 SFA Austin (before Underwood took over) - 9
2014 (Underwood's 1st year) - 105
2015 - 98
2016 - 38

Also Underwood took over a team that was 70 per Kenpom and moved went from 70, 69, 51, and 41 his last year. Way different starting position to then Keatts at UNCW.

Look at what Underwood is doing this year. All I'm saying is the eye test can be very telling. The only UNC Wilmington game I saw was when they played Duke in the tourney. I don't remember much other than it was a closely contested game and the score of that contest: 93-85. Again, a poor defensive team. No need to take chances on an unknown coach.

 

[WesterveltVictoryCigar]

Defensive efficiency:
2009-10: 81/347 (CBI Champ)
2010-11: 162/345 (NCAA F4)
2011-12: 13/345 (NCAA R32)

Interesting that Shaka made it the furthest in the tourney with his WORST defensive team.

That tourney run was fueled by making 3s at an impressive rate and at a high volume. It's the archetypal example of "the 3 point shot has changed the game".

 

[LurkLongandProsper]

Not going to quote ChiefIllini's post as well, but I liked all 3, thanks guys.

Defensive efficiency:
2009-10: 81/347 (CBI Champ)
2010-11: 162/345 (NCAA F4)
2011-12: 13/345 (NCAA R32)

Interesting that Shaka made it the furthest in the tourney with his WORST defensive team.

Underwood's Adj D -
2013 SFA Austin (before Underwood took over) - 9
2014 (Underwood's 1st year) - 105
2015 - 98
2016 - 38

Also Underwood took over a team that was 70 per Kenpom and moved went from 70, 69, 51, and 41 his last year. Way different starting position to then Keatts at UNCW.

The underwood point is particularly prudent, especially considering he peaked at 41 before being hired (and Keatts is at 56 right now in KenPom).

Regarding the NCAAT, I think it cannot be overstated how random it is (at least in the early rounds), which is why I'm really big (personally) on regular season success in resumes.

 

[OrangeKrus28]

Yep, which leads us to another baseless point:



Dude, stop making claims without evidence. Provide us some data to support your point. Defense-first? UCLA is top 10. OBVIOUSLY defense matters. Nobody is claiming we should give up 2 PPP on layups on D to our opponents and just outscore them on 3's.

Ever heard the saying "good offense beats good defense"?

But seriously, stop making concrete statements about the state of the game, et al if you're not going to back them with data. We know your opinion on keatts and the CAA, but it basically boils down to "CAA success won't translate", which is again, not based in any data you've provided (and I struggle to believe there's even enough coaches for a legitimate sampling on that). Everything after that has been unsupported statements passed as fact.




I just don't even know where to start with you sometimes. Be honest, did you watch Underwood at SFA outside of his run in the NCAAT?

Incorrect. I have not said that CAA success won't translate. It has translated for other coaches like Larranaga/Shaka Smart. This version of the CAA is not very good. But 2 other critical factors to consider:
1. His team's defense---I have said this at nauseum and I have provided stats to back it up.
2. He hasn't coached at a higher level. If he coached and had success in the WCC/MVC/Mountain West/C-USA/AAC or an equivalent conference, then I'd be more likely to think he would be a good candidate. At the end of the day, he should not be making a big leap b/c the chances of him having success are lower than someone who has coached in a higher level mid major conference. If you prefer to take major risks, fine, I can respect that, but Josh Whitman won't be taking major risks with unknowns. #WeWillWin....stands for we will win sooner...not later.

 

[Illiniwek06]

That tourney run was fueled by making 3s at an impressive rate and at a high volume. It's the archetypal example of "the 3 point shot has changed the game".

Indeed, elite defense is not a requirement for success, as has been asserted.

 

[illynifan34]

Look at what Underwood is doing this year. All I'm saying is the eye test can be very telling. The only UNC Wilmington game I saw was when they played Duke in the tourney. I don't remember much other than it was a closely contested game and the score of that contest: 93-85. Again, a poor defensive team. No need to take chances on an unknown coach.

Just awful defense by that Duke coach, good thing he's not available!

 

[OrangeKrus28]

Just awful defense by that Duke coach, good thing he's not available!

That Duke coach has been coaching for 35+ years now. No need to compare him to a young guy who has been coaching for count it...3 seasons...and not even 3 seasons yet.

 

[illynifan34]

That Duke coach has been coaching for 35+ years now. No need to compare him to a young guy who has been coaching for count it...3 seasons...and not even 3 seasons yet.

So if you are a seasoned coach it's ok to give up 80, but if you're young it's not?

 

[LurkLongandProsper]

Look at what Underwood is doing this year. All I'm saying is the eye test can be very telling. The only UNC Wilmington game I saw was when they played Duke in the tourney. I don't remember much other than it was a closely contested game and the score of that contest: 93-85. Again, a poor defensive team. No need to take chances on an unknown coach.

I hate when CAA teams lose by 8 to elite 8 Duke teams, really underwhelming. That's really all you take from that? You dismiss him because he has "superior talent compared to the CAA" (from a previous post of yours, still waiting on your evidence for that one), but losing by 8 to a really good Duke team is a write off because they gave up 93 to Duke? :hand:

Incorrect. I have not said that CAA success won't translate. It has translated for other coaches like Larranaga/Shaka Smart. This version of the CAA is not very good. But 2 other critical factors to consider:
1. His team's defense---I have said this at nauseum and I have provided stats to back it up.
2. He hasn't coached at a higher level. If he coached and had success in the WCC/MVC/Mountain West/C-USA/AAC or an equivalent conference, then I'd be more likely to think he would be a good candidate. At the end of the day, he should not be making a big leap b/c the chances of him having success are lower than someone who has coached in a higher level mid major conference.

(1) You provided a comparison to Illinois, ignored my commentary on the potential for improvement when he adds P5 level athletes to a pressing defense as compared to low major level athletes, and provided data for ONE SEASON.

(2) I've already documented how bad the WCC is in this thread outside of Gonzaga/St Mary's. Per KenPom, UNCW would be the best team in the Mountain West and is currently only 6 spots behind the CUSA leader. 3rd in KenPom in the WCC after Zaga/St Mary's. 4th in American.

(3) Well, this assumes the other coach is good, and I still am not sure it's true. I don't think Keatts has a lower chance of P5 success than, say, Dan Hurley (Rhode Island , 45 in KenPom in A10), or Kermit Davis, etc. This is vastly oversimplifying the equation. Lower chance than Gregg Marshall or Archie? Sure, I would probably agree with that. But "chance of having success" is a floor argument, not a ceiling argument, and we've already discussed that Keatts is low floor, high ceiling.

 

[LurkLongandProsper]

So if you are a seasoned coach it's ok to give up 80, but if you're young it's not?

He gave up 85 to a CAA team with a roster full of 4 and 5* talent! What a bum!

This is my last facetious post, but I plead, support your arguments with data. If you can present data supporting your argument(s) against Keatts, Orangekrus28, I may even agree and put one limb outside the Keatts train (or multiple).

A one year sample comparing UNCW defense to Illinois' is not a sufficient sample/dataset. AND, Illinois would've quite a few more games with a top 20 efficiency offense this year even with this defense, so...

 

[haasi]

That Duke coach has been coaching for 35+ years now. No need to compare him to a young guy who has been coaching for count it...3 seasons...and not even 3 seasons yet.

Just give us some actual data to work off. Names of successful coaches at small schools with moderate defensive efficiency and how they've failed at bigger schools because their defense got exposed. If you find that data, you may convince some people. I don't think your premise is necessarily wrong, just that you seem completely convinced of it without any support.

 

[FollowTisdale]

Incorrect. I have not said that CAA success won't translate. It has translated for other coaches like Larranaga/Shaka Smart. This version of the CAA is not very good. But 2 other critical factors to consider:
1. His team's defense---I have said this at nauseum and I have provided stats to back it up.
2. He hasn't coached at a higher level. If he coached and had success in the WCC/MVC/Mountain West/C-USA/AAC or an equivalent conference, then I'd be more likely to think he would be a good candidate. At the end of the day, he should not be making a big leap b/c the chances of him having success are lower than someone who has coached in a higher level mid major conference. If you prefer to take major risks, fine, I can respect that, but Josh Whitman won't be taking major risks with unknowns. #WeWillWin....stands for we will win sooner...not later.

OK speedbump28, the thing is though:

1) You've recognized that his adjusted defense (actually you might still be stuck on PPG, but whatever) is ranked 181st. That's top 3rd in the country, not great, but not a game killer, even UCLA is over 100. What you haven't backed up is just assuming that moving to the Big 10 will result in him having even worse of a defense. He'll have better athletes at Illinois, why can't I just assume he'll have a much better defense? Or at least on par with Michigan who's at 135.

2) Here you're right, he hasn't coached at a higher level. He hasn't had the chance too, and he will almost 100% be coaching at a higher level next year. All legendary coaches start somewhere. We have a coach opening this offseason, not 3 years from now where Keatts has proved himself up to your arbitrary level. Oh and by the way, according to Kenpom, his rag tag group of JV dummies would be the highest ranked team in the Mountain West, 2nd in the C-USA, and (i don't want to look up the rest, i assume 3rd in the MVC and WCC and lower in the AAC). And that's with CAA talent, which as you've discussed, wouldn't be fit to clean the Hickory HS's shoes

 

[Illiniwek06]

OK speedbump28, the thing is though:

1) You've recognized that his adjusted defense (actually you might still be stuck on PPG, but whatever) is ranked 181st. That's top 3rd in the country, not great, but not a game killer, even UCLA is over 100. What you haven't backed up is just assuming that moving to the Big 10 will result in him having even worse of a defense. He'll have better athletes at Illinois, why can't I just assume he'll have a much better defense? Or at least on par with Michigan who's at 135.

2) Here you're right, he hasn't coached at a higher level. He hasn't had the chance too, and he will almost 100% be coaching at a higher level next year. All legendary coaches start somewhere. We have a coach opening this offseason, not 3 years from now where Keatts has proved himself up to your arbitrary level. Oh and by the way, according to Kenpom, his rag tag group of JV dummies would be the highest ranked team in the Mountain West, 2nd in the C-USA, and (i don't want to look up the rest, i assume 3rd in the MVC and WCC and lower in the AAC). And that's with CAA talent, which as you've discussed, wouldn't be fit to clean the Hickory HS's shoes

Slight correction - UNCW defense this year is bottom half (better than 45% of field). Of course, no mention of the fact that they have the 5th best offense this year (better than 99% of field). Last year, they were top third (better than 68% of field).

 

[FollowTisdale]

I may even agree and put one limb outside the Keatts train (or multiple).

That's a good way to lose a limb, KEATTS HYPE TRAIN DOESN'T SLOW DOWN FOR DUMB PASSENGERS STICKING EXTREMITIES OUTSIDE THE CONFINES OF THE TRAIN.

 

[Joestan1967]

Ok, can I say this. And please don't go back and readmy prior posts. But Groce will be back next year, and I am happy aboutit. It may be the lingering effect of being able to get excited andwatch a competitive Illini Basketball game last night, which was awesome. But also, few other things. I believe Groce can recruit. He started slow, came in after rough Weber time with programdown, and wasn't well known. So took few years, but he hasturned corner on that. Second, Whitman wants him there. Knows he is good long term for program. And personally, would loveto see him have true success at UofI. The question is can he coachX and O's. With some big losses, and questionable offensive anddefensive systems, and my lord the substitution patterns, it makes you wonderwhat he thinking. But honestly, its shooting %. JT, TA,LB, and during many earlier losses JCL have simply not been able to score, atall. Big hole to fill. Look what happened last nightwhen TL and MF put in 11 each. Illini looked pretty good. GoGroce!

 

[OrangeKrus28]

I'm glad that many people here see Keatts as the savior, for what reasons, I have no idea. Nobody here has watched UNC Wilmington's games so in my honest opinion, all of your opinions are no better and no worse than my opinion. There is no need to go back and forth because we will be spending hours dissecting a coach who isn't even coming to this school. Mark those words. I am willing to admit I'm wrong if he becomes our coach but that's just not happening. It is just as likely that Tony Bennett becomes our coach as this guy.

 

[Illiniwek06]

I'm glad that many people here see Keatts as the savior, for what reasons, I have no idea. Nobody here has watched UNC Wilmington's games so in my honest opinion, all of your opinions are no better and no worse than my opinion. There is no need to go back and forth because we will be spending hours dissecting a coach who isn't even coming to this school. Mark those words. I am willing to admit I'm wrong if he becomes our coach but that's just not happening. It is just as likely that Tony Bennett becomes our coach as this guy.

I think you misunderstand. People are not claiming that Keatts is the savior. They are taking issue with your conclusion of him being a failure in the B1G based on UNCW not being strong on defense this year. I absolutely agree with you that Keatts is not guaranteed to be a success at Illinois.

 

[zpfled]

I hope Groce makes it work here, but if he doesn't, I think Cuonzo Martin will be able to retain our 2017 recruits.

It's going to be Cuonzo. I believed it back in September and I believe it even more now.

 

[FatGreg]

Basketball is a game where whoever scores the most points wins. I'm not saying this in direct reference to Keatts, but I would MUCH rather have a coach with a brilliant offensive mind and a lackluster defense than a coach with a reliably good defense but an inefficient offense. If you're elite on either end of the court, you're going to win a lot of games. Valuing defense way above offense is silly. If the other team can't score on you, you win; if they can't score WITH you, you win. NBA styles aren't fully transposable, but I'd rather play like the current Warriors team than the 90s Knicks.

 

[mattcoldagelli]

So if you are a seasoned coach it's ok to give up 80, but if you're young it's not?

Yeah, obviously, once you get to either 45 years old or 10 years in the biz then things switch over from "points allowed" to the "eye test." These are just the rules (oh yeah, and also "the Colonial is butt").

Try to keep up, man.

 

[BananaShampoo]

Welp. This has been a very entertaining last few pages. opcorn:

 

[TCTORNADO]

Welp. This has been a very entertaining last few pages. opcorn:

And to think we have another 30 days.

 

[golferjohn1970]

And to think we have another 30 days.

Yeah that is depressing to think about hope it goes fast!!