How much does coaching matter?

[willie99]

College basketball is on 6 on 6 game. I've been saying that since Jim Calhoun came to town

And I might be understating a great coach's influence

 

[RuffRuff]

If you want to know how much coaching matters, take a look at Louisville. They’ve won more games in half a season under Kelsey than they won in two seasons under Payne.

Here is a thought experiment. Take the 10 best Kentucky players from 2010 to 2020, and put them on one NBA team, and that team would win 70 games every season for the next 5 years. Calipari has likely coached more future NBA Hall of Famers during any 10 year stretch of his time at Kentucky than any other coach in college basketball history has during any 10 year stretch in their time coaching. The amount of supreme talent that he coached is staggering, and a lot of the Kentucky guys that never made it big in the NBA were really, really good too. And he has one title.

There is a reason no radio or cable talk show host or podcaster ever asks the question: "who is the worst college basketball coach to win a title". The answer is too obvious.

All part of what took him down, as it became his only angle. To the point he put more stock into being the godfather of pros than winning.

 

[HooperScooper]

They are thrilled with Pope, to the point they think the portal is now the way to go vs OADs. While simultaneously laughing butts off at what is going on in Fayetville.

Who wouldn't want to play for this guy?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Who wouldn't want to play for this guy?

So we already have a thread that is effectively a love letter to Duke. Should we start one that is a love letter to Kentucky too?

 

[HooperScooper]

So we already have a thread that is effectively a love letter to Duke. Should we start one that is a love letter to Kentucky too?

 

[RuffRuff]

Better than a love letter to PC

 

[JohnFSilver]

There needs to be some level of athletic ability among players. With that being said, how much does coaching matter?

Given the same players that we had last year and the year before do you think there is another staff in the country that would've accomplished the same thing? That being 12 consecutive wins by double digits?

If we are the best, how much of an advantage is that? Is it better to have a cooper flagg with Duke's staff? Or our guys with our staff?

(I'll say it before anyone states the obvious. It's better to have our staff and the best players. But that's not reality)

Have fun

Critical when talent is equal.

 

[FlippinCrazy!]

Who was the last lousy coach to win a tittle. And don't say Ollie. He had that team playing at a very high level.

It’s a good point. Last non big name coach was Gary Williams from Maryland? Idk maybe he was big but just before my time. Besides Ollie of course but that was more a fluke than anything. Coaching obviously means something, even if it’s just confidence from your players

 

[uconnfan68]

I think there are a lot of good coaches out there, but I think the best coaches build a plan around the talent they have, and build their talent around their plan. The best coaches know those two things are symbiotic.

Hurley/Murray's offense is revolutionary, and exploits huge holes in modern, analytics-oriented defenses. Hurley and the staff put together the perfect team to maximize this new offense.

You look at a lot of old time coaches, and they basically played pickup offenses, with the goal of getting their stars as many shots as possible. They would win if they had the best players, and would lose if they didn't. Calipari is an extreme example of someone that was abysmal as a coach despite potentially having as many future NBA Hall of Famers over the last 15 years as the rest of the colleges combined. Boeheim is a better example of a coach that basically didn't have an offense, had a well-executed but unoriginal defense, and was very successful with this style when he had players that liked that.

Those offenses have not aged well though. The better coaches focus on the type of shot rather than who takes it, and scoring is balancing out within teams as offenses become more efficient. Analytics offenses are good at eliminating the 5-10 worst shots a game that teams used to take. As they continue to refine, you are seeing a return of post play because some coaches are better understanding the continuous probability nature of measuring shot efficiency.

It always helps when you dominate inside, and outside.

 

[husky429]

Talent matters more. When talent is close, coaching is vital.

Calhoun couldn't coach Mississippi Valley to a natty. But neither could there coach have won it all with our roster last year.

First team that comes to mind as an example is Ville. Tons of talent last 2 years... won nothing because of bad coaching vs similar talent.

 

[QDOG5]

Some college coaches I think are very good and possibly do more with less talent. Brian Dutcher, TJ Otzelberger, Kelvin Sampson,Greg Gard, Jamie Dixon, Porter Moser. Although I don’t like him I think Rick Pitino is one of the best college basketball coaches of all time no matter his teams talent level. We can start a list of coaches who do less with more. I’m not going the Scheyer route because it’s too early for him. I’d put Hubert Davis in that category. Bruce Pearl, Obviously Calipari is the poster boy for that category.

 

[Travelman6]

That team had 2 great coaches named Napier and Boatright.

Didn't they say so themselves?

 

[freshler40]

While, if winning the National Championship is the standard, only one of 400 Div 1 teams can do that. Not good odds even with the best coaching. Hiding injuries, incorporating a weak bench, scheduling, playing in the "right conference and alike are the in the mix.

Perhaps the standard should be more realistic, a successful season that develops teenagers into men with degrees, purpose and improving society. I, for one loved the recent Hartford Courant article about a walk-on for the Huskies that is now a PHD/Dr. That is winning!

 

[Umami Zen]

IMO. Coaches need talent and talent needs to be coached. If the coach and talent on the roster match up in a particular year. Great results are possible. Being able to recruit talent to your Program is paramount for those results to happen.

 

[ctchamps]

The Ollie title and subsequent downfall still makes no sense to me. He came in and we had this huge exodus of players - Drummond, Roscoe, Lamb, Alex, even Michael Bradley. We basically pulled in Phil Nolan and had to try to win without bigs and go entirely away from the Calhoun model - which had been rolling with Thabeet, Adrien and Sticks across the front line or sometimes Oriakhi and Okwandu playing together with Roscoe at the three.

So Ollie inherited two tiny guards and spent two years (with his staff) reconstructing everything around them and a small lineup and milking everything he could out of Phil Nolan and Tyler Olander. Fortunately he added Brimah, who we needed, but who was raw. Then he got into the NCAA Tournament - and surely if he could be exposed, the gauntlet of Wright, Hoiberg, Izzo and Donovan could have done it. But we were prepared for everything on that tourney run - when we were down 20-10 to Nova and Bazz went to the bench with two fouls, we put a 15-0 run on them. We were prepared for Iowa State and MSU and punched back when MSU went up. We didn’t look prepared when Florida went up 16-4 and were smothering us defensively, particularly getting the ball out of Bazz’s hands, we made adjustments and killed them the rest of the way. Florida went zone in the second half, and we were on it and lobbed them to death to put that game away. We were rolling Kentucky before foul trouble in the first half killed us and turned it into a game, but we played Giffey at center and found a way. Along the way, we exposed bigger guards and didn’t let better front lines expose us.

It was kind of a master class in coaching that year - accomplishing a lot with a little. And then, that was that. He won and it was like he didn’t want to do the job any more. The 2015 team stepped back - and that was fine. DD was an unexpected departure after winning a title and Purvis wasn’t quite ready. But that team two years later with DHam, Shonn Miller, Gibbs, Purvis and Birmah (with Adams off the bench) had a world of potential. And yet they might not have gotten in without the Adams 70 footer and they basically rolled over for Kansas.

One of the best examples of a rise and fall by a coach.

 

[ctchamps]

Great article of a Division-II coach (Jim Crutchfield) who has won 86.4 percent of his games over more than 10 years. He turned two programs with no winning history into juggernauts. In the last four season his team, Nova Southeastern, is 112-4. The Sharks went undefeated and won the national championship in 2023. With five new starters in 2024, they went 32-3 and lost on a buzzer beater in the title game.

NBA greats think this D-II coach is a basketball genius.

 

[RuffRuff]

One of the best examples of a rise and fall by a coach.

Hard to call it a rise versus a one year outlier. If he had done anything of significance outside of the one year, you could call it that. Good coaches usually get better with time, not worse.

It doesn't feel much different than Hubert Davis taking over for Roy, to a lesser degree.

 

[ctchamps]

Hard to call it a rise versus a one year outlier. If he had done anything of significance outside of the one year, you could call it that. Good coaches usually get better with time, not worse.

It doesn't feel much different than Hubert Davis taking over for Roy, to a lesser degree.

Two years. Was able to keep Bazz and Boat in spite of JC retiring and the post season ban. The team played well that first season.

Read post 22 in this thread. Those two years demonstrated great coaching. KO lost it after the divorce.

 

[Waquoit]

Two years. Was able to keep Bazz and Boat in spite of JC retiring and the post season ban. The team played well that first season.

Read post 22 in this thread. Those two years demonstrated great coaching. KO lost it after the divorce.

After Bazz left, Ollie had absolutely no game plan on offense besides iso ball. At least a dozen times a game, the guy who brought the ball down court would throw up a heave without once looking to pass. I'm not sure we can blame that on the divorce.

 

[Monte]

I believe that the best college coaches, are the best recruiters. By BEST, I mean those that have won the most titles. High school coaches don't do much recruiting; neither do pro-coaches, as this is the responsibility of the front office.
Good coaches, with poor players, don't win. Bad coaches with good players do win. I always look back at baseball manager Casey Stengel. He won several World Series with the NY Yankees, who at that time, had the best farm system, and the best players. After Stengel left the Yankees, he managed a new team, the NY Mets. They were composed of inferior players, many who were on the downside of their careers. The Mets, under Stengel, set an ALL TIME RECORD for losses!

 

[Jaydumo20]

I believe that the best college coaches, are the best recruiters. By BEST, I mean those that have won the most titles. High school coaches don't do much recruiting; neither do pro-coaches, as this is the responsibility of the front office.
Good coaches, with poor players, don't win. Bad coaches with good players do win. I always look back at baseball manager Casey Stengel. He won several World Series with the NY Yankees, who at that time, had the best farm system, and the best players. After Stengel left the Yankees, he managed a new team, the NY Mets. They were composed of inferior players, many who were on the downside of their careers. The Mets, under Stengel, set an ALL TIME RECORD for losses!

That's a great example

 

[Huskyforlife]

Talent is probably 80% of the equation if we’re being honest.

I sorta think college coaches should be looked at like GMs that run practices and choose the in game rotations. The head coach decides who to offer, unlike professional sports where the coach is at the will of GM for roster decisions.

Hurley couldn’t scheme his best defense of all time until he started Clingan. He couldn’t run his best offenses of all time without Newton. I think his fear of being mediocre drove him to recruit better offensive players(karaban/spencer) while balancing his love of physical defensive oriented players(Clingan/Jackson Jr/Castle). We’re lucky losing keeps him up at night.

For all the hate Cal gets on this board, he sorta proves my point. When he amassed an absurd amount talent, his team was unstoppable on the way to a national championship. This proves talent is the vast majority of the equation, unless you think he had coaching genius for only one season in his entire career?

We also understand this intuitively because of how popular recruiting is to follow. If we really thought Dan would win with any assortment of personnel, we wouldn’t be typing out scouting reports of our favorite UConn targets.

My favorite example is in football with Bill Belichick. Sure he has more post season success than any other coach in history, but what happened the moment Brady left? What did he accomplish before Brady? The reality was he coached defense primarily before getting the New England job, Brady made those offenses special, not Bill. And then Brady went on to win again in Tampa.

Give or take 80%.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Hard to call it a rise versus a one year outlier. If he had done anything of significance outside of the one year, you could call it that. Good coaches usually get better with time, not worse.

It doesn't feel much different than Hubert Davis taking over for Roy, to a lesser degree.

Do you realize how bitter and pathetic you sound complaining about a coach that won a National Championship with one of the objectively weakest championship teams in history, beating 3 future Hall of Fame coaches along the way?

 

[pj]

Talent matters more. When talent is close, coaching is vital.

Calhoun couldn't coach Mississippi Valley to a natty. But neither could there coach have won it all with our roster last year.

First team that comes to mind as an example is Ville. Tons of talent last 2 years... won nothing because of bad coaching vs similar talent.

A good coach can't elevate bad talent, but a bad coach can waste good talent.