The Official Coach K for 2012 ACC COY Thread

[nocilla]

Trying this again...
An example of good coaching in a tight game by Roy that no-one ever wants to give him credit for...

http://youtu.be/dkKaCgd5eLw?hd=1

Really there should have been an offensive foul on Bullock for a moving screen and then a technical foul on Henson for taunting. But maybe you are arguing that Roy deserves credit for whatever he did to keep the official's whistles quiet...

[Wheat/"/"/"]

Really there should have been an offensive foul on Bullock for a moving screen and then a technical foul on Henson for taunting. But maybe you are arguing that Roy deserves credit for whatever he did to keep the official's whistles quiet...

Thanks for the help making my point.

[Duvall]

Trying this again...
An example of good coaching in a tight game by Roy that no-one ever wants to give him credit for...

http://youtu.be/dkKaCgd5eLw?hd=1

Would this be the play that was diagrammed on that night's SportsCenter? No one associated with UNC basketball has ever had to worry about not getting enough credit.

[UrinalCake]

In other news, Henson has really long arms

[phaedrus]

Trying this again...
An example of good coaching in a tight game by Roy that no-one ever wants to give him credit for...

http://youtu.be/dkKaCgd5eLw?hd=1

An in-bounds play not much different from what my high school ran, with over seven minutes to go in the game? Yeah, I'll give him that much credit.

[Wheat/"/"/"]

In other news, Henson has really long arms

And Marshall is a really good passer...

[jv001]

And Marshall is a really good passer...

but Marshall is being redshirted this year. GoDuke!

[ChicagoHeel]

The only way I could see Coach K having a shot at COY is if he wins out including the ACCT. That may be enough to do it. I don't think Roy has a shot, because even if UNC does win out it would be as predicted.

I don't think that K or Roy will win it... not sure who will at this point, still a lot of important games to be played....

If Duke wins out, I don't see how anyone other than K gets it. That would mean two, and possibly three, victories over us, a 17-2 record against ACC opponents, an eleven game winning streak to close the season, and both the regular and tournament titles in the ACC. That exceeds expectations, which others have noted is really the key criterion for winning COY. Just one more reason we need to take care of business on Saturday night...

I think Hamilton could get it if FSU either wins out or wins the rest of its regular season games and then beats UNC/ Duke in the ACC tournament before losing a relatively close game in the final.

Expectations for us were too high going into the season. Nothing short of 16-0 would have won it for Roy. NCSU and UVa have shown flashes, but are fading too much down the stretch.

[devilsadvocate85]

If Duke wins out, I don't see how anyone other than K gets it. That would mean two, and possibly three, victories over us, a 17-2 record against ACC opponents, an eleven game winning streak to close the season, and both the regular and tournament titles in the ACC. That exceeds expectations, which others have noted is really the key criterion for winning COY. Just one more reason we need to take care of business on Saturday night...

I think Hamilton could get it if FSU either wins out or wins the rest of its regular season games and then beats UNC/ Duke in the ACC tournament before losing a relatively close game in the final.

Expectations for us were too high going into the season. Nothing short of 16-0 would have won it for Roy. NCSU and UVa have shown flashes, but are fading too much down the stretch.

As I've pointed out in the Austin Rivers for 1st team thread, I would argue that a team having the ACC POY and potentially two other first team all-conference players should be expected to dominate the conference. My question if I were a UNC fan is; why isn't a team with that much talent dominant? Coaching? Effort (especially on the defensive end)? Chemistry?

[ChicagoHeel]

As I've pointed out in the Austin Rivers for 1st team thread, I would argue that a team having the ACC POY and potentially two other first team all-conference players should be expected to dominate the conference. My question if I were a UNC fan is; why isn't a team with that much talent dominant? Coaching? Effort (especially on the defensive end)? Chemistry?

I suppose my first response is that, while we have not dominated the way some might have expected, we are 25-4 and a very good team. We've had some good ACC road wins- e.g. Miami, UVa, and NCSU- and not really struggled at home at all in ACC play, with one obvious Satan-induced exception. We've also had two really tough losses that could have gone either way. Davis doesn't get his hand on Henson's shot and/or Zeller doesn't score an "own goal", and we'd probably wouldn't be having a conversation about UNC failing to live up to expectations. I'm not denying your point that we've failed to dominate, just pointing out that there's a fine line between winning a lot and dominating.

I think a lot of pundits (esp. Bilas) and fans expected another 2009 team and feels 2012 doesn't measure up. Everyone remembers the fact that the 2009 rolled through the tournament and therefore defines that team as dominant. Of course, that team also had some stumbles along the way, including an 0-2 ACC start and three ACC losses (four if you included the tournament). So at this point in the 2009 season, we might not have been seen as sufficiently dominant either.

That being said, I think there are some reasons we have not lived up to preseason expectations. The most obvious is injuries. Losing Dex hurts us against teams with quick guards. Rivers is a match-up nightmare for us without Dex because he's fast and draws a lot of fouls. We don't have Dex to slow him down and Marshall has to be extra careful against his opponent because there's no backup in case of foul trouble. Rivers played a phenomenal game against us, and you might have won regardless, but the bottom line is that we are thinner and more vulnerable to teams with good backcourts without Dex.

The other issue we've faced is simple to identify but hard to solve- outside shooting. We expected that the combination of Barnes, Bullock, and Hairston would really open things up outside and provide balance that would make us close to unstoppable, but that has not proven to be the case, at least not on a consistent basis. I don't really know why that is.

Finally, I would chalk a lot of it up to experience. To no great surprise, our starting senior and junior are our most consistent contributors. The other three are sophomores. Our bench consists of freshman. OUtside Henson and Zeller we have highly talented, great players, but they are more up and down. The consistent excellence that is required if a team is going to be genuinely dominant tends to require upperclassmen. UK this year seems more the exception than the rule. Our 2009 team started two seniors and three juniors. This team, while not young, is a lot younger.

In any case, there's a lot of games left to be played. We take care of business Saturday night and beyond and the preseason pundits will start looking a lot smarter.

[Wander]

As I've pointed out in the Austin Rivers for 1st team thread, I would argue that a team having the ACC POY and potentially two other first team all-conference players should be expected to dominate the conference. My question if I were a UNC fan is; why isn't a team with that much talent dominant? Coaching? Effort (especially on the defensive end)? Chemistry?

Careful. Last year Duke has the ACC POY and another 1st teamer, UNC had zero 1st team all-ACC selections, and UNC won the regular season.

[jv001]

I suppose my first response is that, while we have not dominated the way some might have expected, we are 25-4 and a very good team. We've had some good ACC road wins- e.g. Miami, UVa, and NCSU- and not really struggled at home at all in ACC play, with one obvious Satan-induced exception. We've also had two really tough losses that could have gone either way. Davis doesn't get his hand on Henson's shot and/or Zeller doesn't score an "own goal", and we'd probably wouldn't be having a conversation about UNC failing to live up to expectations. I'm not denying your point that we've failed to dominate, just pointing out that there's a fine line between winning a lot and dominating.

I think a lot of pundits (esp. Bilas) and fans expected another 2009 team and feels 2012 doesn't measure up. Everyone remembers the fact that the 2009 rolled through the tournament and therefore defines that team as dominant. Of course, that team also had some stumbles along the way, including an 0-2 ACC start and three ACC losses (four if you included the tournament). So at this point in the 2009 season, we might not have been seen as sufficiently dominant either.

That being said, I think there are some reasons we have not lived up to preseason expectations. The most obvious is injuries. Losing Dex hurts us against teams with quick guards. Rivers is a match-up nightmare for us without Dex because he's fast and draws a lot of fouls. We don't have Dex to slow him down and Marshall has to be extra careful against his opponent because there's no backup in case of foul trouble. Rivers played a phenomenal game against us, and you might have won regardless, but the bottom line is that we are thinner and more vulnerable to teams with good backcourts without Dex.

The other issue we've faced is simple to identify but hard to solve- outside shooting. We expected that the combination of Barnes, Bullock, and Hairston would really open things up outside and provide balance that would make us close to unstoppable, but that has not proven to be the case, at least not on a consistent basis. I don't really know why that is.

Finally, I would chalk a lot of it up to experience. To no great surprise, our starting senior and junior are our most consistent contributors. The other three are sophomores. Our bench consists of freshman. OUtside Henson and Zeller we have highly talented, great players, but they are more up and down. The consistent excellence that is required if a team is going to be genuinely dominant tends to require upperclassmen. UK this year seems more the exception than the rule. Our 2009 team started two seniors and three juniors. This team, while not young, is a lot younger.

In any case, there's a lot of games left to be played. We take care of business Saturday night and beyond and the preseason pundits will start looking a lot smarter.

Sort of like what Coach K had to do last year when we lost Kyrie. He did a fantastic job of bringing the team on after that, but still we did not reach the ultimate goal(NCAA Championship). I think your team is a very good team just like I think ours is a very good team. GoDuke!

[jimsumner]

Careful. Last year Duke has the ACC POY and another 1st teamer, UNC had zero 1st team all-ACC selections, and UNC won the regular season.

And Roy Williams was voted Coach of the Year.

[Wander]

And Roy Williams was voted Coach of the Year.

Not arguing against K as Coach of the Year - I actually think if Duke wins out he deserves it. Just don't like the idea of calling out the effort or coaching of UNC based not wining the conference with multiple 1st teamers.

[oldnavy]

An in-bounds play not much different from what my high school ran, with over seven minutes to go in the game? Yeah, I'll give him that much credit.

Yea, I am still trying to determine if he is kidding or serious with this example...

[COYS]

I suppose my first response is that, while we have not dominated the way some might have expected, we are 25-4 and a very good team. We've had some good ACC road wins- e.g. Miami, UVa, and NCSU- and not really struggled at home at all in ACC play, with one obvious Satan-induced exception. We've also had two really tough losses that could have gone either way. Davis doesn't get his hand on Henson's shot and/or Zeller doesn't score an "own goal", and we'd probably wouldn't be having a conversation about UNC failing to live up to expectations. I'm not denying your point that we've failed to dominate, just pointing out that there's a fine line between winning a lot and dominating.

I think a lot of pundits (esp. Bilas) and fans expected another 2009 team and feels 2012 doesn't measure up. Everyone remembers the fact that the 2009 rolled through the tournament and therefore defines that team as dominant. Of course, that team also had some stumbles along the way, including an 0-2 ACC start and three ACC losses (four if you included the tournament). So at this point in the 2009 season, we might not have been seen as sufficiently dominant either.

That being said, I think there are some reasons we have not lived up to preseason expectations. The most obvious is injuries. Losing Dex hurts us against teams with quick guards. Rivers is a match-up nightmare for us without Dex because he's fast and draws a lot of fouls. We don't have Dex to slow him down and Marshall has to be extra careful against his opponent because there's no backup in case of foul trouble. Rivers played a phenomenal game against us, and you might have won regardless, but the bottom line is that we are thinner and more vulnerable to teams with good backcourts without Dex.

The other issue we've faced is simple to identify but hard to solve- outside shooting. We expected that the combination of Barnes, Bullock, and Hairston would really open things up outside and provide balance that would make us close to unstoppable, but that has not proven to be the case, at least not on a consistent basis. I don't really know why that is.

Finally, I would chalk a lot of it up to experience. To no great surprise, our starting senior and junior are our most consistent contributors. The other three are sophomores. Our bench consists of freshman. OUtside Henson and Zeller we have highly talented, great players, but they are more up and down. The consistent excellence that is required if a team is going to be genuinely dominant tends to require upperclassmen. UK this year seems more the exception than the rule. Our 2009 team started two seniors and three juniors. This team, while not young, is a lot younger.

In any case, there's a lot of games left to be played. We take care of business Saturday night and beyond and the preseason pundits will start looking a lot smarter.

This is a well-rounded answer. To be honest, I'm surprised that Duke fans haven't hit the nail on the head for the biggest reason UNC hasn't appeared so dominant: Duke! UNC has Duke to blame for one of their two losses, which tightened the top of the standings. A UNC team looking to go 15-1 on Saturday in Cameron WOULD have had a dominant season, as, if they were to accomplish that feat, they would have to beat Duke twice meaning Duke would be 12-4. That is probably closer to where most people would have guessed we would be in the pre-season. However, Duke has been the team that has played really well, gutted out a few close games, and handed UNC a second ACC loss, thus keeping UNC from running away from the pack. Assuming UNC wins tonight, most people would see a potential 14-2 ACC record as pretty dominant and good enough to win the regular season. It just so happens that because Duke has played well enough to match UNC in the rankings, a potential 14-2 record no longer fulfills sports fans' criteria for the word "dominant."

[COYS]

To go one step further, this year's team can do no worse than match the 13-3 ACC record of the 2010 team. The 2010 team was far more dominant than people realize. Their adjusted efficiency margin (subtracting the defensive efficiency from the offensive efficiency to get their expected margin of victory against an average NCAA team from that season) was 37.6 points per 100 possessions. This was even more dominant relative to the competition than UNC's 2009 team according to KenPom. Our adjusted differential for this season is just 24.6 points per 100 possessions. The fact that we might end up with a better ACC record than the 2010 team is more of a testament to how well this team has battled than how dominant (or not) UNC has been.

[Duvall]

2010: Replace two starters, both of whom would go on to be 1st round picks in the NBA Draft. Win 13 games in conference, an ACC championship and a national championship. Use summer vacation to lead the U.S. "B-Team" to a FIBA World Championship.
2011: Replace three starters. Lose best player in college basketball at midseason. Win 13 games in conference and an ACC championship.
2012: Replace three starters, including the ACC POY and the #1 pick in the NBA Draft. Win 13 games in conference, with more opportunities to come.

[bird]

2010: Replace two starters, both of whom would go on to be 1st round picks in the NBA Draft. Win 13 games in conference, an ACC championship and a national championship. Use summer vacation to lead the U.S. "B-Team" to a FIBA World Championship.
2011: Replace three starters. Lose best player in college basketball at midseason. Win 13 games in conference and an ACC championship.
2012: Replace three starters, including the ACC POY and the #1 pick in the NBA Draft. Win 13 games in conference, with more opportunities to come.

According to Wiki, over the last ten years K has not won the recognition even once, while Roy has won twice, Gary has won twice, and Seth won twice. Herb, Leonard, and Skip also won once each. Even Leitao one once. Time for a well-deserved make up call, IMO.

[COYS]

According to Wiki, over the last ten years K has not won the recognition even once, while Roy has won twice, Gary has won twice, and Seth won twice. Herb, Leonard, and Skip also won once each. Even Leitao one once. Time for a well-deserved make up call, IMO.

The worst season during that 10 year stretch was a 22-11 "disaster" (not quite Hatian Earthquake bad like UNC's 2010 season, but you catch my drift). Otherwise, pencil in Duke for winning a ridiculous amount of games, a whole bunch of ACC titles, a National Title, another Final Four, a NPOY (or two), a NDPOY, a number 1 draft pick, a whole bunch of All Americans. It's hard to get recognition for making it to the top when you've been there for most of the last 26 years. Seriously, we can't appreciate what K has done too much. It's simply mind-boggling what he's done in the last 10 years. And that doesn't even include the 16 years before that!