Why do so many posters thing Hurley is poor at player development? | The Boneyard

Why do so many posters thing Hurley is poor at player development?

nelsonmuntz

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
46,944
Reaction Score
40,435
I see hundreds of posts talking about how much better this team will be once experienced players that Hurley has been coaching for two years are gone, and kids from high school that were playing against 5'10 guards and 6'3 centers show up. Do posters think that Hurley is so terrible at player development that he is incapable of coaching players up, and that the team would be better off taking some 18 year old kid that has only had high school coaching?

Is there a negative correlation between exposure to Hurley's coaching and player improvement? If this is true, should we replace the entire roster every year with freshmen?
 
As for UConn its way too early to know. Got to wait for Gaffney's Sr. year to me. He will be a perfect case study. The current roster is not totally his, and some of the veteran players are too familiar with 'losing'.
 
Or we think that Hurley is more likely to succeed coaching up his own recruits than the players who were left to him?

There's only so much Hurley can do with what he has, unless you think he can make Gilbert grow another 4 inches, improve Carlton's 6-inch vertical, or go back and time and imbue Vital with basketball IQ in high school.

He can, however, pick his new players.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Is there a negative correlation between exposure to Hurley's coaching and player improvement? If this is true, should we replace the entire roster every year with freshmen?
Expand ...
The answer is obvious:
Everybody's baiting you.
Or is it the other way around?

(That wasn't haiku
Just three-line story telling
This is a haiku)
 
Last edited:
nelsonmuntz said:
I see hundreds of posts talking about how much better this team will be once experienced players that Hurley has been coaching for two years are gone, and kids from high school that were playing against 5'10 guards and 6'3 centers show up. Do posters think that Hurley is so terrible at player development that he is incapable of coaching players up, and that the team would be better off taking some 18 year old kid that has only had high school coaching?

Is there a negative correlation between exposure to Hurley's coaching and player improvement? If this is true, should we replace the entire roster every year with freshmen?
Expand ...
I think it is more that BYers like to dance with the devil we don't know that the one we do.
 
.-.
Hans Sprungfeld said:
The answer is obvious:
Everybody's baiting you.
Or is it the other way around?

(That wasn't haiku
Just three-line story telling
This is a hiaku)
Expand ...
hey! no its not! 'hi-a-ku' is 3 syllables! and when added to the thread title 'thing,' it brings up my regular thought that 'does anybody reread their post before hitting send?' u get a lifetime mostly free pass for being a thoughtful and un-cranky wordsmith, but, c'mon, be better! be buddy!
(didja like my use of exclamation marks? im working on my mandarin this week!)
 
I think it's because so many of the players show such poor understanding of basic basketball fundamentals. Just yesterday I saw point guards jumping into the air, in the paint, then looking to pass somewhere, power forwards allowing smaller players get under them from the wing to steal rebounds, players turning their back on the ball on defense, going the wrong way around screens, not switching when you're supposed to. That alley-oop thunder slam off an inbound pass in the second half was the poster child for poor fundamentals. Pretty easy to defend...unless you're sleeping. It's as if these kids think they're still playing against high school kids that have 5'10 guards and 6'3 centers. They shouldn't still be doing that. Those "hundreds of posts talking about how much better this team will be once experienced players that Hurley has been coaching for two years are gone" are probably making reference to the fact that they shouldn't be making rookie mistakes any more. Either Hurley isn't teaching them or they aren't listening. Get'em out.
 
Need more player turnover and Hurley guys to judge this. I have already seen Brendan Adams improve quite a bit.
 
ClifSpliffy said:
hey! no its not! 'hi-a-ku' is 3 syllables! and when added to the thread title 'thing,' it brings up my regular thought that 'does anybody reread their post before hitting send?' u get a lifetime mostly free pass for being a thoughtful and un-cranky wordsmith, but, c'mon, be better! be buddy!
(didja like my use of exclamation marks? im working on my mandarin this week!)
Expand ...
Sometimes it takes a village to spellcheck.
Speaking of mandarin, orange you glad I corrected the haiku?
 
Too early to tell.

But it's not too early to tell that Hurley has been awful at substitutions/minutes management. Hopefully he improves with a roster full of his own recruits.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Exactly. Greener grass and all that.
Expand ...
Introduces thread as a question.
Sees the answer he likes, offers hearty kudos.
Was the question offered in good faith?

Jimbo, Dolph, Kearney,
All join Nelson in loving
Socratic Boneyard
 
Dove said:
Every Ollie player peaked last season.

Hurley wants uptempo and the Ollie guys are midtempo.

Patience.
Expand ...
Hopefully this is sarcasm because my tolerance level for stupid posts has been exceeded. This Post WSU meltdown is approaching record proportions.
 
Ui37.gif
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I see hundreds of posts talking about how much better this team will be once experienced players that Hurley has been coaching for two years are gone, and kids from high school that were playing against 5'10 guards and 6'3 centers show up. Do posters think that Hurley is so terrible at player development that he is incapable of coaching players up, and that the team would be better off taking some 18 year old kid that has only had high school coaching?

Is there a negative correlation between exposure to Hurley's coaching and player improvement? If this is true, should we replace the entire roster every year with freshmen?
Expand ...

The notion that a coach can only develop "his" players is insane (but typical of what gets thrown out on this site).
 
.-.
It's the exact opposite of what you're saying. I think he's great at developing players, which is why I'm excited for another class of players he chose
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I see hundreds of posts talking about how much better this team will be once experienced players that Hurley has been coaching for two years are gone, and kids from high school that were playing against 5'10 guards and 6'3 centers show up. Do posters think that Hurley is so terrible at player development that he is incapable of coaching players up, and that the team would be better off taking some 18 year old kid that has only had high school coaching?

Is there a negative correlation between exposure to Hurley's coaching and player improvement? If this is true, should we replace the entire roster every year with freshmen?
Expand ...

You don't think players have improved under Hurley?
 
Caronimo said:
Need more player turnover and Hurley guys to judge this. I have already seen Brendan Adams improve quite a bit.
Expand ...
Agree, Dan Hurley keeps saying this is a rebuild. However, that can't happen w/o making some tough decisions on players and process. Make the call on who has enough stretch and capability to stay and exit those that don't. Bring in your recruits and teach. That is the definition of a rebuild. Hurts to see Butler at 5, Oregon at 8, Dayton at 13, Maryland at 17, Michigan at 19. I pick these w/ the exception of Maryland and Michigan have 0 NC's, we have 4. All of these programs have undergone coaching changes in the similar time-frame we have. What gives?
 
Fan4ever said:
Agree, Dan Hurley keeps saying this is a rebuild. However, that can't happen w/o making some tough decisions on players and process. Make the call on who has enough stretch and capability to stay and exit those that don't. Bring in your recruits and teach. That is the definition of a rebuild. Hurts to see Butler at 5, Oregon at 8, Dayton at 13, Maryland at 17, Michigan at 19. I pick these w/ the exception of Maryland and Michigan have 0 NC's, we have 4. All of these programs have undergone coaching changes in the similar time-frame we have. What gives?
Expand ...
we're building to win another championship. they're building to ah, err, umm ….what was the question again?
 
Another @nelsonmuntz strawman special

Fan4ever said:
Butler at 5
Oregon at 8
Dayton at 13
Maryland at 17
Michigan at 19
Expand ...
Prior coach at Butler was 70-31 (and was hired away by Ohio State)
Oregon coach has been there since 2010 (not a "similar timeframe")
Prior coach at Dayton was 139-63 (and was hired away by Indiana)
Maryland coach has been there since 2011 (not a "similar timeframe")
Prior coach at Michigan was 244-146 (and was hired away by the Cavaliers).
Ollie has a worse winning percentage than all of the guys that left around the same time. Why? Because you picked three schools where the coach was lured away to either a P5 program or the NBA.

The other 2 coaches have roughly 7-8 more years at their schools than Hurley does.

That's not in anyway comparable to what Ollie left behind.

Just throw all of those away. They're awful comparisons.

"Bring in your recruits and teach"? He's got one class, and of the three eligible to play right now, two are the only two players on the team with NBA potential. So there's that.
 
Last edited:
.-.
willie99 said:
The dude hates Hurley, I get it, we all get it

Does he need to start 10 threads per week about it?
Expand ...

Not at all what I am saying. Was I challenging Hurley in the OP?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I see hundreds of posts talking about how much better this team will be once experienced players that Hurley has been coaching for two years are gone, and kids from high school that were playing against 5'10 guards and 6'3 centers show up. Do posters think that Hurley is so terrible at player development that he is incapable of coaching players up, and that the team would be better off taking some 18 year old kid that has only had high school coaching?

Is there a negative correlation between exposure to Hurley's coaching and player improvement? If this is true, should we replace the entire roster every year with freshmen?
Expand ...
Jeez, you can’t even get one like even when you’re the OP in a thread. There are some strange birds on this board and not one person ever agrees with anything you post. Why waste your breath anymore?
 
Kitaman said:
As for UConn its way too early to know. Got to wait for Gaffney's Sr. year to me. He will be a perfect case study. The current roster is not totally his, and some of the veteran players are too familiar with 'losing'.
Expand ...

So Hurley doesn’t coach a guy for 1-2 seasons and now he has full immunity to their poor play?
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,516
Messages
4,579,976
Members
10,489
Latest member
smAAAll


Top Bottom