If you want to talk wins and losses, Keatts has a lot of one and not a lot of the other.
Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.
If you want to talk wins and losses, Keatts has a lot of one and not a lot of the other.
No, it's not obvious, and that is just speculation.
Yeah, that's entirely fair, and a lot of folks have some concern about his HC experience being strictly in the CAA, which is why most of us have acknowledge him as a low floor candidate. The hype is built on being able to stomach taking that risk, some of us are OK with that, some are not, and that's entirely fine.
We are taking issue with a few of the points you (and others) have made going beyond that are not. The one above from DudeIllini is entirely baseless, and some of the others talking about how schemes and low major coaches translate jumping up from lower tier gigs should be supported with some data. That's all.
It is pretty obvious.
Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.
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!
Like this?
http://www.illinoisloyalty.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=1275360&postcount=2
I think there were one or two more just like it in this game too.
Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.
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.
Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.
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.
:hand:
Archie Miller/Cuonzo Martin are the top candidates at this time. No questions asked.
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.
My point is that I don't just blindly start liking a coach because the rest of the posters get on the bandwagon.
It is pretty obvious.
UI students may not be so hyped if it means an increase in tuition.
Student tuition is not going to be impacted by our basketball coach's salary.
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.
What's the makeup then - a separate pot set aside for athletics and another from donors, or something else?
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.
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).
Check the conference he is in. Now would he have the same record in a higher conference? I know the answer to that question.