No he did not, not even by a long shot. Groce overachieved in his first year with that "team", but that is far, far from turning the "program" around.
2017 Coaching Carousel
- Status
No he did not, not even by a long shot. Groce overachieved in his first year with that "team", but that is far, far from turning the "program" around.
I don't think I am getting my wires crossed. I am thinking about it from a logical and sensible standpoint(as are most people including many media members in and around this state). It seems like you are discrediting Cuonzo Martin because he hasn't been taking his teams to the Elite 8 every year. You forget the recruiting, you forget that he has improved each team he has been with, you forget his clear ties that will not only hold onto much of this current incoming class but will also recruit at a high level in the state of Illinois and probably Indiana. Or maybe you just choose to ignore all of these positives. Cuonzo will never be able to get Cal above Arizona/UCLA/Oregon because those coaches are superior to him, but he will always be in that 2nd tier group. In the B10, he only has Tom Izzo to deal with. The rest of the coaches are on his level: from Greg Gard to Tom Crean to John Belein to Thad Matta to Matt Painter. In our conference, he will be very competitive and his teams will play defense.
Now, unless you can name me the same amount of positives for Mr. Keatts, then I don't buy it or buy him.
If this hire really is down to Keatts vs Monty vs Martin, I think we are in a great spot even though I'm not big on Cuonzo.
My top choices would be:
1. Spend $4+ mill for a proven coach (Tony Bennett, etc). If the next coach elevates this program to meet our expectations we'll be paying that in short time anyways. Just cut out the guess work and make the investment now. Even at $6 mill I think the ROI is worth it.
2. Keatts - I punched my ticket on the hype train.
2b. Monty - I think he'll bring a lot of excitement, and his player development reputation is very high. I will be very happy with this hire. The fact his weaknesses align with Groces (in game decisions, subsittutions, clock management, etc) concern me. I still see this as an incredible upgrade.
4. Cuonzo - Don't see him raising his ceiling much here. He had to lottery picks at Cal, and underwhelmed. If his last season with Cal was here we'd all be displeased. He is 11-28 vs top 25 with most of those wins coming in 2 seasons. I also fear he will be the most difficult to move on from a la Weber. It seems like all of the coaches in the Keady tree have a long drawn out regression to mediocrity. Swanigan saved Painter's job, and just delayed his IMO inevitable firing 5 years from now. i fear that before we know it we'll be 20 years removed from '05 with only a handful of tourney wins in the mean time.
My top choices would be:
1. Spend $4+ mill for a proven coach (Tony Bennett, etc). If the next coach elevates this program to meet our expectations we'll be paying that in short time anyways. Just cut out the guess work and make the investment now. Even at $6 mill I think the ROI is worth it.
2. Keatts - I punched my ticket on the hype train.
2b. Monty - I think he'll bring a lot of excitement, and his player development reputation is very high. I will be very happy with this hire. The fact his weaknesses align with Groces (in game decisions, subsittutions, clock management, etc) concern me. I still see this as an incredible upgrade.
4. Cuonzo - Don't see him raising his ceiling much here. He had to lottery picks at Cal, and underwhelmed. If his last season with Cal was here we'd all be displeased. He is 11-28 vs top 25 with most of those wins coming in 2 seasons. I also fear he will be the most difficult to move on from a la Weber. It seems like all of the coaches in the Keady tree have a long drawn out regression to mediocrity. Swanigan saved Painter's job, and just delayed his IMO inevitable firing 5 years from now. i fear that before we know it we'll be 20 years removed from '05 with only a handful of tourney wins in the mean time.
No, you aren't.
Leaving the 2017 recruits out of it, just in a vacuum, there is no reason to believe Cuonzo's success would come instantly whereas we would have to wait for whatever Keatts (or any other coach) would be able to do.
Experience or lack thereof is not an interrelated factor with the time horizon for success.
We have no idea whether or not this is true, but I would hope we could all agree on this. There is something for everyone on that short list and they all stand head, shoulders, torso, waist, and knees above Groce's resume.
(But don't forget about Capel, McDermott, Jacobson, Musselman and of course JAAAAAAAAANKOOOOOOVIIIIICHHHHH!!!!)
haasi
- New York
On a separate note, this thread currently has the 16th most posts all time on this site, and we've still got so much time left (5+ weeks) in which speculation and discussion is just going to ramp up. This thread now around 4600 posts. Biggest thread all-time was Aug-Nov 2012 recruiting thread (about 18k - Groce's push toward first class). Then recruiting thread Sept-Oct 2013 (chase after Cliff/Snider et al), then coaching search last time around at about 14k posts. I think we can do it. Let's go team.
LOL... the classic "Illinois will become the biggest spender in college basketball" the mafia of college basketball, making offers people can't refuse. No offense, but these posts appear every time we have a coaching opening.
When it comes to top tier coaches, money will have little to do with their decision to take the Illini job or not.
First off, it probably isn't even close to being just Keatts, Monty, and Cuonzo. I'm positive the list is closer to 10 deep than 3.
1. I find it hard to believe we pay a coach 6 mil, even for Bennett. 4 is already pushing it. Theres probably no chance our next HC makes more than 3m a year.
4. I think thats a pretty good description of a possible outcome that I dont think gets enough mention here. Recently discussion about how Bruce has brought KSU to more tourney in his tenure there than Groce has here is proof fans are quick to view certain aspects, rather than the larger picture. Mediocrity was and will always be Weber's calling card. He shows enough light that firing him takes a meltdown like 2011-2012. Given enough talent he can go very far, but regression to his mean is always the outcome. While I still think Cuonzo could take a step forward here, its good to realize what we want. I think Cuonzo can be better than Weber. He's a better recruiter already. It remains to be seen if he can actually do anything with that talent. Its much easier to fire a guy who hasnt taken a team to the tourney in 4 years than it is to fire someone who never missed back to back appearances.
purcy51
- Louisville, KY
Keatts, Martin vs. Self
One thing I think we're all overlooking in regards to Keatts & Martin as compared to Bill Self is that Self inherited a team that was quite talented. I don't see the cupboard stocked nearly as well as it was when Self took over. The Self hire was a completely different animal. Yes, he was/is a good to great coach but what would it have looked like if the roster hadn''t been as good?
The next coach we get is inheriting a program that has been in decline for quite sometime. Keatts may turn out to be a fine coach but I don't think we can expect the same results immediately although I could be wrong. I often am, just don't tell my wife.
I'm not terribly keen on Martin, for the simple fact that he's never stayed in an HC job more than three years. However, if he returned the program to better success and left us in better shape for the next coaching search I'd be OK with that.
Personally, I agree with other posters who have said we need to hire the RIGHT coach. I have no idea who that is, but I'm enjoying the anticipation.
One thing I think we're all overlooking in regards to Keatts & Martin as compared to Bill Self is that Self inherited a team that was quite talented. I don't see the cupboard stocked nearly as well as it was when Self took over. The Self hire was a completely different animal. Yes, he was/is a good to great coach but what would it have looked like if the roster hadn''t been as good?
The next coach we get is inheriting a program that has been in decline for quite sometime. Keatts may turn out to be a fine coach but I don't think we can expect the same results immediately although I could be wrong. I often am, just don't tell my wife.
I'm not terribly keen on Martin, for the simple fact that he's never stayed in an HC job more than three years. However, if he returned the program to better success and left us in better shape for the next coaching search I'd be OK with that.
Personally, I agree with other posters who have said we need to hire the RIGHT coach. I have no idea who that is, but I'm enjoying the anticipation.
I'm guessing that job has to go through the mandatory 2 week posting before a hire can be made.
The RIGHT coach is whatever Whitman defines it as. Maybe it will be the "safe" coach or the "high upside" coach. You have absolutely no idea what his criteria are, and you have no access to a lot of the information he will use to determine the risks and rewards of a specific candidate.
Bingo :thumb:
Maryland seems to be coping pretty well starting 3 freshmen. Just because they're freshmen doesn't mean they can't step up and compete. There will be growing pains but it might not be as bad as some think. Or it could be worse.
This is AD speak, similar to coach speak. That phrase was actually made famous and was used extensively by Guenther when he was asked about the coaching search when Self left town. We ended up with Weber. It means nothing.
My point when making the original analysis is those jobs were all relatively healthy, and he didn't build anything the predecessor didn't achieve. The data supports that claim. I picked 3 years before because it matches the length of his tenure at each stop so far.
Since when do people value a first weekend exit more than a conference championship? Jeez, people.
He's in a 1 bid league and has been first in the conference every year at UNCW, inheriting a team that went 9-23 the year before he got there. If that's not impressive to you, let's just disband the program, coaches who get those kinds of results in bigger conferences are not coming here and you'll never be content. Cuonzo's only conference championship in nine years also didn't net a tournament, you know. Thus is the difficulty of being in a 1 bid league, conference tournament randomness will bite you.
Yep. Every coach we have mentioned will have some semblance of risk. You find the right guy based on interviews, recommendations, resume, etc and hope it pans out. We're playing an odds game, people.
(1) He hasn't even been to the tournament every year, for those of you who weight that heavily -- twice in 8 years!
(2) 1 conference title in 8 years
(3) He hasn't been a worldbeater of a recruiter outside of 2 or 3 really good classes (namely his crown jewel class at Cal)
(4) This is just false, unless you're giving him credit for improving from year 1 to year 3. None of the programs haven't gotten farther than they did under the previous coach.
Keatts:
If he makes the tournament this year, will have as many NCAAT appearances in 3 years head coaching as Cuonzo had in 8
Already has more conference championships than Cuonzo will have in 9
Well-documented as a recruiter
Assistant coach for a national title and a final four
263-17 at Hargrave with two national titles
CAA coach of the year 2x in 2 years (Cuonzo COTY once at MO St, once total)
You can argue in favor of Cuonzo because you want the safe floor, but discrediting Keatts' resume entirely is just bogus. Cuonzo is FAR from perfect. Textbook high floor, low ceiling IMO.
I don't think it's at all a likely outcome, but it's the one I'd be most excited to see.
Illini_1979
- Oregon
Good choice.
And I'll bet he could sing the National Anthem before games.
[YOUTUBE]eq-G7UdlUBk[/YOUTUBE]
Seriously, enjoying this thread and its occasional drifts off topic. :thumb:
The key to winning over recruits is winning over their grandmas!
haasi
- New York
We should consider Tom Jones!
RSCI #53, 57 and 92. 92 was way, way too low for Justin Jackson, BTW. Probably because he was a prep school guy and doesn't get included in some rankings they use.
We have 1 recruit that will be top 100 and while it's true they may do as well as Maryland's guys, it's not very likely.
Guys, every coach worth their salt turned us down last time, you aren't being realistic. We'll probably end up with Engelbert Humperdinck :tsk:
I'd leave out the Hargrave accomplishments, but I otherwise think this post is perfect. There is risk with Keatts, but there is risk with anyone. I'd personally swing for the fences, and if I strike out, I'd swing again in a couple of years.
haasi
- New York
Amen.
(I also don't think you can totally count out significance of Hargrave - lots of exposure to top notch players, great success, understanding how recruiting works, launched him to top recruiting position at Louisville)
The CAA is a weak league. Are you really that impressed with a championship in a league with such basketball "powerhouses" such as Delaware, Towson, and William & Mary?
What I'm saying is I'd rather we go after someone who has proven experience building a program. Preferably in a league with decent basketball.
You are making a big assumption that a coach with a proven track record won't come to Illinois. I'm not saying that we'll get one(e.g. Bennett), but at least an effort should be made instead of chasing exclusively after the next Shaka Smart, Thad Matta, etc.
And I'm not sold on Martin either.
- Status