|
Post by hchoops on Dec 11, 2018 14:24:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Dec 11, 2018 14:54:20 GMT -5
Geez, it's deja vu all over again . . .
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 11, 2018 15:32:19 GMT -5
It's always nice when actual data confirms what your eyes tell you.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Dec 11, 2018 16:17:07 GMT -5
A little surprised to see Ed Cooley so high
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Dec 11, 2018 16:21:10 GMT -5
It's always nice when actual data confirms what your eyes tell you. What do they tell you? That Emmett Davis is a "better" coach than Billy Donovan?
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 11, 2018 16:21:21 GMT -5
A little surprised to see Ed Cooley so high I'm not. Guy can flat-out coach. PC is awfully lucky to have him.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Dec 11, 2018 18:24:38 GMT -5
Where is Coach Carmody on the graph?
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Dec 11, 2018 18:55:40 GMT -5
Where is Coach Carmody on the graph? Right at 55%, just above 100 games.
|
|
|
Post by DiMarz on Dec 11, 2018 19:43:30 GMT -5
I'd bet the coaches with the higher winning percentages have had the best players...The best players win the games, no coaches have scored to win a game!
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Dec 11, 2018 19:44:43 GMT -5
I'd bet the coaches with the higher winning percentages have had the best players...The best players win the games, no coaches have scored to win a game! Ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by DiMarz on Dec 11, 2018 19:53:12 GMT -5
I'd bet the coaches with the higher winning percentages have had the best players...The best players win the games, no coaches have scored to win a game! Ridiculous. SOV, do you believe in the long run that a great coach with average talent will be able to consistently beat an average coach with great talent? I've seen so many games where great players just make plays to win games..They make shots, make steals and defend when a game is on the line..
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Dec 11, 2018 19:54:53 GMT -5
I'd bet the coaches with the higher winning percentages have had the best players...The best players win the games, no coaches have scored to win a game! While there is certainly some truth to that, remember that the games where a team has a big edge in talent normally won't be included in this study, since they should win by more than 5 points. In any event, the best pct in close games belongs to Andy Toole of Robert Morris. Does that mean he has the best players? Of the top six, four certainly have had great personnel - Bill Self, Mark Few, Jim Boeheim, and Brad Stevens - but the other two, Toole and Pat Flannery (Bucknell) not so much. And look at some of the coaches who have been OK but not great in the close games. That group includes Rick Pitino, Sean Miller, and Coach K. And in the group of coaches who have not done well at all are Mike Brey, Bob Huggins, Tom Crean, and Tommy Amaker. Relative to their competition, all of these coaches have had pretty good talent.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Dec 11, 2018 19:56:43 GMT -5
SOV, do you believe in the long run that a great coach with average talent will be able to consistently beat an average coach with great talent? I've seen so many games where great players just make plays to win games..They make shots, make steals and defend when a game is on the line.. That is not at all what this study is looking at, since it only looks at games decided by a small margin. If a team has great talent relative to its opponent, it seldom will be in a game decided at the end. Thus most of their games won't be included in the numbers, which will mostly just be the games against other teams with great talent.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 11, 2018 21:56:34 GMT -5
I don't think Cooley is a very good X&O guy....he is very good at creating a culture/recruiting.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 11, 2018 22:29:58 GMT -5
It's always nice when actual data confirms what your eyes tell you. What do they tell you? That Emmett Davis is a "better" coach than Billy Donovan? That Milan Brown can't coach his way out of a paper bag. And that Bill Carmody can.
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Dec 11, 2018 22:35:31 GMT -5
What do they tell you? That Emmett Davis is a "better" coach than Billy Donovan? That Milan Brown can't coach his way out of a paper bag. And that Bill Carmody can. “thank you, adnp”
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 11, 2018 22:43:17 GMT -5
I don't think Cooley is a very good X&O guy....he is very good at creating a culture/recruiting. This chart isn't the be-all and end-all, but it's interesting to me that not only does Cooley rate super well here, but Al Skinner does too... and I've long maintained that it was Cooley, Tim O'Shea, and Bill Coen propping Al up at BC for years. That's a lot of good data on Cooley's side.
|
|
|
Post by crosspride on Dec 11, 2018 23:03:15 GMT -5
What do they tell you? That Emmett Davis is a "better" coach than Billy Donovan? That Milan Brown can't coach his way out of a paper bag. And that Bill Carmody can. You must be a big fan of the way Chris Mullins has been coaching so far at St Johns? He’d be #1 on the list if he met the 50 game sample.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Dec 11, 2018 23:45:32 GMT -5
I'll take the coach with the highest overall winning percentage regardless whether it is within 5 points or over 50 points.
|
|
|
Post by crusader1970 on Dec 13, 2018 13:06:03 GMT -5
One of the problems with this chart IMO is a poor coach, who has good talent and should be winning games by 10-15 points but is winning games by 3 or 4 points. He would score very high on this chart but it is not an accurate reflection of his coaching ability.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 13, 2018 13:09:53 GMT -5
One of the problems with this chart IMO is a poor coach, who has good talent and should be winning games by 10-15 points but is winning games by 3 or 4 points. He would score very high on this chart but it is not an accurate reflection of his coaching ability. Sure, there are all kinds of problems with it. Nobody's representing it as the singular, bulletproof ranking of coaching prowess.
But if you're willing to buy the premise that a game that ends within 5 points is a decent filter for identifying "a game that was within range of a coach influencing the outcome through on-floor decision-making", then this is an interesting representation of which coaches wield that influence well, and which ones don't.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Dec 13, 2018 13:13:22 GMT -5
One refinement that would be interesting would be to compare a coach's under-five W-L% with his overall W-L%. That said, we can see multiple guys on the top of the chart who don't compare favorably, overall, with guys on the bottom.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Dec 13, 2018 13:19:37 GMT -5
One of the problems with this chart IMO is a poor coach, who has good talent and should be winning games by 10-15 points but is winning games by 3 or 4 points. He would score very high on this chart but it is not an accurate reflection of his coaching ability. But if you're willing to buy the premise that a game that ends within 5 points is a decent filter for identifying "a game that was within range of a coach and/or players influencing the outcome through on-floor decision-making and/or execution", then this is an interesting representation of which coaches - and/or their players - wield that influence well, and which ones don't. Modified, in bold - it's a more meaningful stat for those who believe coaches, rather than players, are the ones who make the difference in close games. In truth, it's both.
Believe it was Dick Motta who once said, "Players win games. Coaches lose games." There's some truth to that as well.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 13, 2018 13:32:51 GMT -5
Thanks, I don't need you to modify what I said.
I intentionally used "influence" instead of "solely responsible for". I think it goes without saying that players have a significant influence in outcomes. That word denotes a shared responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 5, 2019 17:06:13 GMT -5
A little surprised to see Ed Cooley so high I'm not. Guy can flat-out coach. PC is awfully lucky to have him. A tremendous coaching job by Ed Cooley in a 4-point game with 25 seconds left today: Yikes.
|
|