If I could just get TMP to get me a proper wins per star ratio metric you would see that Cal gets less with more in a lot of years. But you have to start with the assumption that the more talent you have the more wins you get regardless of the coach.
Our offense is poor
- Thread starter go_iu
- Start date
If I could just get TMP to get me a proper wins per star ratio metric you would see that Cal gets less with more in a lot of years. But you have to start with the assumption that the more talent you have the more wins you get regardless of the coach.
Who cares about wins per star? That’s irrelevant if you’re responsible for the stars too.
John Wooden didn’t win 10 titles with a bunch of 3 stars. Same as Coach K. A coach is responsible for wins, not “wins per star” ratios.
Wins per star would be a way to measure the basketball CEO's value to shareholders. Translation, fans want a coach who can coach. Anyone can shovel money at a kid. That isn't what a coach is supposed to do. They are suppose to put a good product on the floor and teach the game, and yes win. But even more so they need to play the best they can play. A coach needs to get everything he can out of a team to improve and deliver.
Wins per star, yes.
That’s absurd. It would be a good measure for a pro coach who can’t choose or recruit his players. Then it’s valid.
But you’re trying to eliminate 1 variable in a 2 variable equation. It’s completey absurd and misguided.
It’s like criticizing a manager for being successful because they hired and trained the best team of employees. And instead encouraging them to hire bad talent but get them to improve slightly more (albeit still way less productive than the original team). It’s completely asinine logic.
I do agree with that, Hunter injury is a major piece out of the puzzle. Hopefully he plays this year.
Did you somehow forget you said this?
And you avoided - like the plague - this question I posed to you:
Who are these coaches who "out-scheme" teams and win on a large scale? Huh? Can you at least name one?
This might be the only accurate thing you've posted on this entire thread. Problem is, it applies to your posts . . .
There aren’t many coaches who out scheme other teams. That’s why I’m always preaching getting the best talent.Did you somehow forget you said this?
And you avoided - like the plague - this question I posed to you:
Who are these coaches who "out-scheme" teams and win on a large scale? Huh? Can you at least name one?
This might be the only accurate thing you've posted on this entire thread. Problem is, it applies to your posts . . .
But to name a few who do: Brey, Few, Izzo, Beilein, Wright, Marshall. Brad Stevens was one of the best at it previously.
How do said coaches "out scheme" other teams? Fill the room with your intelligence and feel free to use examples.
Calipari is currently 11-3 with 10, yes, 10, top 100 players, 9 of whom are top 40.
Indiana has 1 top 50 guy playing, everyone else has just worked to get better.
And I will add that any coach in the Big Ten could be 11-3 with UK's talent.
Indiana has 1 top 50 guy playing, everyone else has just worked to get better.
And I will add that any coach in the Big Ten could be 11-3 with UK's talent.
Last edited:
But they couldn’t get the talent.
I’d say most football coaches would be pretty good with Alabama or Clemson’s talent. The problem is it’s not easy to get those players. It’s probably 75% of the coach’s job to do so.
But these guys did it without talent? Didn't you say a little while back Wright didn't win his championships with three stars?
You’re struggling here man. Bad.
No one wins without talents. Talent isn’t a binary decision of yes or no. Some teams have more than others. The more talented team wins more often than not but you still play the games. The coaches I listed have been known to win a good amount of games with less talent. LESS talent...not no talent. Try to keep up.
Agree- our offense is to easy to defend. The offense only starts when the ball is caught on the high post. It’s passing out front until then. No looks at the basket. Teams know this that’s why they easily defend it and we get off to slow starts. Reminds me quite a bit of Creans offense. I would rather see picks low
