Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.
2017 Coaching Carousel
- Status
Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.
It is pretty obvious.
I've brought up legitimate concerns about how his teams play defense, the conference he is in, and the lack of high major coaching experience that he has. These are all concerns and factors that one has to take into consideration. I have heard very little substance in why he should be hired. All of the reasons are very shallow and surface-level(wins/losses, up-and-comer, etc...). No real merit. Has anyone here even watched UNC Wilmington much to gain any understanding of his teams? I know I've watched Dayton/Cal/Baylor/So. Carolina/Va. Tech plenty to have an opinion on why I like all of those coaches who man those squads.
My point is that I don't just blindly start liking a coach because the rest of the posters get on the bandwagon.
Last edited:
BananaShampoo
Captain 'Paign
- Phoenix, AZ
I don't think so. He's a good player and Cuonzo has lots of connections to St. Louis so I'm sure he got tipped off about him. To think he wouldn't love to have him at Cal is ludicrous. He pulled in Charlie Moore after getting in late so it's very possible he could do the same here. That said, if he does develop a good relationship with Smith and he decides he wants to play for him, that certainly wouldn't hurt his potential conversation with Whitman.
Ok, have to jump back on board the Keatts Train before it leaves the station.
Choo! Choo! 
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Assuming Whitman doesn't have a Lovie-level-shock-hire up his sleeve, I am FULLY aboard the Cuonzo Martin train and would be very excited about Illini basketball again should he be the replacement.
I don't think so. He's a good player and Cuonzo has lots of connections to St. Louis so I'm sure he got tipped off about him. To think he wouldn't love to have him at Cal is ludicrous. He pulled in Charlie Moore after getting in late so it's very possible he could do the same here. That said, if he does develop a good relationship with Smith and he decides he wants to play for him, that certainly wouldn't hurt his potential conversation with Whitman.
Ok, have to jump back on board the Keatts Train before it leaves the station.
Of course he wants him. Really badly I'm sure. Problem is Cuonzo doesn't want to be at Cal and will be back in the Midwest somewhere next year.
That video is a pick and roll...not slipping the screen.
We don't know, certainly not with his current roster, but there's literally nothing that says it's not possible with a P5 roster. He won't have CAA athletes if he is coaching in a higher conference.
He's currently 21-4, every team with 21 wins in P5 has an AdjO on KenPom of 36 or higher (UNCW's is 20), so it's certainly possible he could do it. UCLA is, again, comfortably below 100 defensively as is UNCW, so the defense doesn't preclude him from that.
Add to that that you have yet to prove P5 level athletes wouldn't help his defensive system (pressing/aggressive defending team), so it's entirely possible.
You've already told us you don't watch his teams, so you don't even know his defensive style. You may be concerned with the results, but again, you have yet to prove those will translate at the same level when adding better athletes. You also act as if the 182 AdjD KenPom number for 2017 is the only number, and ignored when we pointed out that his defense last year was 111.
Everyone has already commented on the CAA being a poor conference, but his team still would be at or very near the top of the CUSA, WCC, MWest, etc per KenPom (a point myself and another poster made that you ignored).
He has a lack of high major HEAD coaching experience, his assistant coaching experience is about as good as it gets, seeing as he worked on a staff that won a National Title and had a Final Four the year prior.
If wins and losses are shallow evaluations, then let's just hire Lorenzo Romar.
I already told you I've watched UNCW this year, S&C also has I believe, and perhaps others have. You tried to tell us Underwood was "obviously an exception", despite clearly having not watched SFA prior to the NCAAT last year, and his kenPom numbers at SFA not being drastically different than Keatts'.
My point is that you're picking and choosing what things to pay attention to. You jump on things like DudeIllini's baseless post to support your argument, and ignore whatever opposes your narrative that claims Keatts can't possibly succeed at this level.
illynifan34
That's a winner!!
- OH
You really don't know though. You can speculate. With his current players in the Big Ten I think he would have trouble. He won't have those players though if he coaches at Illinois.
So, then what do his teams do well if you have watched their games? What makes you excited beyond the obvious of them scoring a lot.
Buzz Williams #1
Scott Drew #2
I mean Buzz is in the ACC at one of the toughest basketball jobs in the ACC and has turned it around quickly.
Scott Drew took Baylor from almost the death penalty and goes to the NCAA tournament every year. Illinois needs to go hard after these guys and get back to what Illinois should be year in and year out a top 15 team competing for Big Ten championships and national Championships.
I absolutely would love one of those 2 guys to come to Illinois. Realistically, Archie Miller and Cuzono are more attainable but several pages back, I listed my Tier A/Tier B/Tier C coaching candidates. Drew was on my Tier A, Buzz along with Archie and Cuonzo are in my Tier B.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
Well, that's not what's happening in this instance. Some prescient poster started this thread all the way back in November, meaning many of us have been weighing candidates and watching other teams games for about two and a half months.
Additionally, there was speculation last year that Groce might lose his job, so we also did this about a year ago (Keatts was also mentioned).
It's not that you bring up illegitimate areas of concern - it's that you are terrible at making arguments. Still waiting for your list of coaches who pulled off turnarounds similar to going from 9-23 to a conference title in one year, since you said that was something "any respectable coach" could do.
There are effective ways to be a skeptic about a mid-major coach like Keatts. Many people have done it in the now 200+ pages of this thread. You're just doing it wrong.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
He recruited Moore out of Illinois in case the UI job opened up too, obviously.
Student tuition is not going to be impacted by our basketball coach's salary.
Hope that's the case. What's the makeup then - a separate pot set aside for athletics and another from donors, or something else?
:hand:
No reason to think that either of these guys are possibilities or would be interested.
That aside, I wouldn't want Drew. It is only a matter of time before things blow up in his face at Baylor. It's Baylor. The place is not known for being the cleanest athletic department. And I'm not referring to just recently either. Drew himself has had some questions around him and indisputably stood by an assistant coach that tried to recruit by threatening to have a player deported if he didn't commit to Baylor.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
As a disclaimer, I've watched maybe a handful of games at this point, I think 4? I don't want anyone to think I've watched their entire season or anything like that.
Offensively: Offensive rebounding, taking care of the ball, and shooting a lot of 3's. The 3 pt volume isn't a bad thing, considering they're making 36% of them as a team (their effective FG % is suuuuper good as a result of this). My gripe offensively would be that they don't seem to get to the line a whole lot.
They also do a pretty good job of forcing turnovers (speaks to their style) on the defensive, which is supported by the fact that they're 36th in total TOs forced and 56th in opponent TOV%. You can tell they press just looking at their team stats (or watching their games, but either way) due to the TOV% and also their foul rate (they foul a fair bit). One big thing/identity item defensively is that their opponents aren't shooting or making a whole lot of 3's against them, which is a huge deal in the modern era, and something Groce teams have a problem with (not that Groce is my baseline for comparison, just a common gripe folks have had). You can read into that however, but defending the 3point line is a big deal in this era.
They're also playing a pretty short rotation (only 7 guys with 15+ MPG, 8 in double digits (8th at exactly 10). To compare that to our squad, we're playing 10 at 13.5 mpg+ on the year.
I would encourage anyone, even if you're not going to watch Keatts or other candidates, to at least poke around on sports reference. Bunch of really interesting info available there for free. Here's a link to season stats for all of D1 on one page (with links to opponent stats, and advanced/advanced opponent stats as well). Clicking on any team will take you to a detailed page for that squad specifically with individual player breakdowns and such as well, really really nice resource.
Keatts is a good coach. I don't see much of an argument against that.
But, there's no way of knowing how he'll do at the next level. We just don't know. Any prediction that's he's "the next Bill Self" is ridiculous. It'd be more accurate to say "there's a .1% chance that he's the next Bill Self." It's much more likely that he's the next [insert average Power 5 head coach name here].
Last edited:
I think there are people who can evaluate a coach's capabilities without regard to his players abilities or his competition. Their system and discipline can be seen. It is tougher to project their affect on players attitudes and recruiting at the highest level or their reaction to a higher pressure position.
Tevo
- Wilmette, IL
I've been thinking about this "He coaches in a lower conference" thinking. Coaching in the CAA might theoretically mean a variety of things:
- The opposing coaches are not as "good" as in the P5 conferences.
- The players are not as initially talented as those entering P5 schools.
- The players are likely not as big, tall, or athletic as those entering P5 schools.
- The facilities you have -- training, video, technology, transportation -- are not likely as robust as at P5 schools.
But all of those things should be, generally speaking, as true about one program as they are about another. UNCW would not have to face stellar athletes on a night-by-night basis, but then UNCW would not HAVE stellar athletes on their team, either. For every advantage that UNCW might gain by "only" having to play CAA schools, there is an equal disadvantage that UNCW should have by being a CAA school itself.
The coach is the one exception. The coach (and his staff) can in fact be a huge difference maker. he can be a better communicator, a better teacher, a better recruiter, etc. That is probably true of every conference -- most of the schools in a given conference will have a lot of similarities in terms of the facilities, salaries, training techniques, accommodations, etc. It's up to the coaches to teach better and recruit better to really make a difference.
So it seems to me only logical to focus on conference records when you want to evaluate how good a coach is. Putting Izzo in charge of the average CAA roster would not net the same results as with his MSU roster. Odds are, that CAA roster would not be as good a team. If they played a host of other P5 teams, they'd likely lose a bunch. But, I think we'd likely say that the Izzo-coached group might begin to out-perform the other CAA teams, due to Izzo's initial skill as a coach, but then also due to his ability to recruit a higher-caliber player (within the realm of those considering CAA schools in the first place).
So given that, when you look at the Big Ten right now, and see Groce struggling, you see that he is actually winning conference games pretty similarly to how he performed in the "lower-level" MAC. (I'm discounting some losses last season due to the crazy injuries, and thus am over-weighting his first three seasons and this season). He was not a world-beater in the MAC conference games, and he's not doing any better (and only somewhat worse, in the B1G). I'd contend that given the "access" to better quality recruits and better facilities, and yet facing "better" coaches and opposing programs, he's the same coach.
All of that leads me to believe that a guy like Keatts, who has to deal with the same limitations as his conference opponents, and yet who races out to the front of that conference pretty much right out of the blocks and then maintains that position for three seasons, is likely to be successful in whatever conference he is placed. Yes, more of his opposing coaches are likely to be good, so his advantage may decline somewhat, but his skills will remain.
Note: Certainly there can be bad fits and bad luck where previously successful guys just seem to "lose it" for a bit (see Weber at the end of his Illinois career), but across a large sample size of many coaches and many years, these things seem to find their level (see Weber "finding it" again at KSU).
That same reasoning is also why I'm not as excited about Cuonzo: He'll likely be the same guy with the same results at Illinois as at Tennessee and Cal -- solid recruiting, good teams, top half of the conference, off and on tournament appearances with an occasional win. All of that is a LOT better than Illinois has seen recently, but we'll quickly grow impatient for every-year NCAA appearances.
Last edited:
- Status