PDA

View Full Version : Any intel on Stanford?



hurleyfor3
01-16-2013, 03:23 PM
Johnny Dawkins visits Boulder next week and I may try to catch the game.

What's his team like, and how's the sentiment around the program this year? Can I expect the same intensity on defense as the team exhibited last year?

They're 10-7, #60 Pomeroy and #64 Sagarin. Not terribly high, but the Pac-10 seems as wide open as usual these days, at least beyond Arizona.

Jim3k
01-16-2013, 05:53 PM
Pretty mediocre. 10-7, season; 1-3 conference.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal

Missing one player, junior Anthony Brown, a 6-6 guard, out for the season due to leg injury. Alums are starting to growl at JD.

stanfan
01-16-2013, 07:30 PM
Pretty mediocre. 10-7, season; 1-3 conference.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal

Missing one player, junior Anthony Brown, a 6-6 guard, out for the season due to leg injury. Alums are starting to growl at JD.

Growl is an understatement. Most Stanford fans, including myself, believe he's a good person. He's just not a quality head coach. Recruiting prowess is suspect. But mainly there is a lack of fire on the team starting at the top. His substitution pattern, the lack of player development and defensive scheming have all been exposed. And since we don't attract top talent like Duke, you need to play even harder (and I know your guys play hard...not intending to put your team down at all!).

Fan support has quickly waned for the program over JD's 5 years. The team went from making the tournament for 13 of 14 years to no appearances in 4 years under JD. And this year could, and should, be his last.

Lunchab1es
01-16-2013, 08:33 PM
Growl is an understatement. Most Stanford fans, including myself, believe he's a good person. He's just not a quality head coach. Recruiting prowess is suspect. But mainly there is a lack of fire on the team starting at the top. His substitution pattern, the lack of player development and defensive scheming have all been exposed. And since we don't attract top talent like Duke, you need to play even harder (and I know your guys play hard...not intending to put your team down at all!).

Fan support has quickly waned for the program over JD's 5 years. The team went from making the tournament for 13 of 14 years to no appearances in 4 years under JD. And this year could, and should, be his last.

It saddens me that he hasn't lived up to expectations at Standford- on a personal level, a fan level, and from a "hey-wouldn't-it-be-cool-if-he-became-an-amazing-successor-to-Coach-K" sort of way .

Hopefully he turns it around in time, and if not, finds great success elsewhere... I'm sure there will be plenty of openings at season's end.

hurleyfor3
01-16-2013, 08:38 PM
Disappointing news, but helpful.

Would it be fair to say his future at Stanford depends on making the NCAA tournament this year?

SoCalDukeFan
01-17-2013, 12:25 AM
is that this is JD's last year at Stanford.

SoCal

gep
01-17-2013, 02:43 AM
Wow... does he then come back to Duke... ala Coach Capel? [I was REALLY pulling for JD to make it big at Stanford... and it being his "last" stop as a head coach]

stanfan
01-17-2013, 09:46 PM
Disappointing news, but helpful.

Would it be fair to say his future at Stanford depends on making the NCAA tournament this year?

Fans say yes, but there's a new AD Bernard Muir and people don't know how he'll react. JD is signed through 2015/6 which may give him another lifeline.

CameronBornAndBred
01-18-2013, 10:43 AM
It saddens me that he hasn't lived up to expectations at Standford- on a personal level, a fan level, and from a "hey-wouldn't-it-be-cool-if-he-became-an-amazing-successor-to-Coach-K" sort of way .

Hopefully he turns it around in time, and if not, finds great success elsewhere... I'm sure there will be plenty of openings at season's end.
JD's experience is exactly why I don't want any assistant coach moving down the bench to K's seat without first proving themselves as a head coach. I will always love JD as a player and as an assistant as Duke, but unfortunately he has removed himself as a replacement option in my mind. I still wish him the best and hope he can turn the year into a positive direction for Stanford; I have a feeling this season is his last there.

arnie
01-18-2013, 11:53 AM
Pretty mediocre. 10-7, season; 1-3 conference.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/_/id/24/stanford-cardinal

Missing one player, junior Anthony Brown, a 6-6 guard, out for the season due to leg injury. Alums are starting to growl at JD.

They can't be mediocre. The local press counted State's win over them as "signature" and comparable to our IOC wins.

Cameron
01-21-2013, 10:16 PM
JD's experience is exactly why I don't want any assistant coach moving down the bench to K's seat without first proving themselves as a head coach. I will always love JD as a player and as an assistant as Duke, but unfortunately he has removed himself as a replacement option in my mind. I still wish him the best and hope he can turn the year into a positive direction for Stanford; I have a feeling this season is his last there.

Agreed. At this point, barring a miraculous career turnaround, there is no way that Johnny Dawkins will ever coach at Duke again, unless it is as an assistant. And I hardly believe Johnny would ever return in that fashion after the disappointing run in Palo Alto.

Another poster hit it on the head. There is a lack of fire within that program, starting with the man sitting in the first seat on the bench. I don't doubt Johnny's desire to win for one second -- his career as a player at Duke should tell you all there is to know about the passion that man has for the game of basketball -- but he just doesn't seem to have that "it factor" about him, that I-know-I-am-good-and-this-is-how-we're-going-to-beat-you persona that I think all the really good head coaches do. Even Brad Stevens, who is as mild-mannered as they come, exudes an air of great confidence and fervency amidst all that stoicism. The fire within is plainly evident. And that certainly rubs off on the players and the Butler program as a whole.

The atmosphere at Stanford, which has only won 31 of its 76 Pac 12 games under Dawkins, is dead. I'm beginning to think that Johnny Dawkins just doesn't have any emotions. It's hard to get your team ready to play when you are that tranquil. It really is.

DukieInBrasil
01-21-2013, 10:50 PM
Stanford is playing Cal right now on FoxSPS (Saturday's game actually).
Funny, they had Harvard vs. Memphis on directly prior to the Stanford vs. Cal. Former Duke players and assistants and now head coaches at other schools in back-to-back time slots.
Tommy's Harvard squad gave Memphis all they could handle, in Memphis (a couple of days ago apparently, but they were showing it now). Dawkins' team beat the Golden Bears by 10 at home.

Jim3k
01-22-2013, 12:27 AM
While I understand, and to some extent sympathize with, the Stanford alums and fans, I think some perspective is in order. On Saturday they beat arch-rival Cal 69-59 at home. Since Mike Montgomery arrived at Cal at the same time Dawkins arrived at Stanford, 2008, it may be worthwhile to compare their records. It is true that Monty has fared somewhat better than Johnny. Overall Monty has been 88-47 and 10-7 so far this year. Dawkins is 75-59 and 11-7 so far this year. Monty has done better in the post-season with three NCAA appearances and one NIT. Dawkins has not made the NCAA tournament, but outright won the NIT last year. He has a third tier post-season tournament as well.

Not all that much to write home about. But this season, disappointing to Stanford fans, actually has been an improvement. Sagarin today (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkt.htm)currently ranks Stanford 56th while Cal is 72nd. (I don't have access to KenPom, so don't know what he has to say.)

No one is calling for Monty's head--of course he has an impressive 30 year career behind him. Still, it is worth observing that Dawkins's four-plus years are not all that different from Monty's four-plus years at Cal.

The main point is that both these schools are muddling along in the middle of the pack. If no one wants Monty ousted, why does anyone want Dawkins gone? Dawkins is actually moving his team up; they seem to be slowly getting better. My feeling is that this is not a coaching issue so much as it is a slow growth thing with both coaches. Montgomery has had a slightly better time of it over the four years. Dawkins is getting there at about the same rate.

Certainly we at Duke shouldn't be jumping on the Stanford alum bandwagon or smacking Dawkins from afar. We know better than they that patience generally works out. If Butters hadn't been patient with that young coach from Army and had bent before the alumni storm, where would Duke be now? And if Michigan had been patient with Amaker (after putting his program in handcuffs and firing him instead of uncuffing him) they would have been fine with him there as well. Beilein did quite well with Amaker's recruits. (IMO, Michigan's choice of Beilein turned out far better than they could have hoped.) I kinda wonder if Oklahoma should have given Capel a little more time.

duke09hms
01-22-2013, 01:07 AM
While I understand, and to some extent sympathize with, the Stanford alums and fans, I think some perspective is in order. On Saturday they beat arch-rival Cal 69-59 at home. Since Mike Montgomery arrived at Cal at the same time Dawkins arrived at Stanford, 2008, it may be worthwhile to compare their records. It is true that Monty has fared somewhat better than Johnny. Overall Monty has been 88-47 and 10-7 so far this year. Dawkins is 75-59 and 11-7 so far this year. Monty has done better in the post-season with three NCAA appearances and one NIT. Dawkins has not made the NCAA tournament, but outright won the NIT last year. He has a third tier post-season tournament as well.

Not all that much to write home about. But this season, disappointing to Stanford fans, actually has been an improvement. Sagarin today (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkt.htm)currently ranks Stanford 56th while Cal is 72nd. (I don't have access to KenPom, so don't know what he has to say.)

No one is calling for Monty's head--of course he has an impressive 30 year career behind him. Still, it is worth observing that Dawkins's four-plus years are not all that different from Monty's four-plus years at Cal.

The main point is that both these schools are muddling along in the middle of the pack. If no one wants Monty ousted, why does anyone want Dawkins gone? Dawkins is actually moving his team up; they seem to be slowly getting better. My feeling is that this is not a coaching issue so much as it is a slow growth thing with both coaches. Montgomery has had a slightly better time of it over the four years. Dawkins is getting there at about the same rate.

Certainly we at Duke shouldn't be jumping on the Stanford alum bandwagon or smacking Dawkins from afar. We know better than they that patience generally works out. If Butters hadn't been patient with that young coach from Army and had bent before the alumni storm, where would Duke be now? And if Michigan had been patient with Amaker (after putting his program in handcuffs and firing him instead of uncuffing him) they would have been fine with him there as well. Beilein did quite well with Amaker's recruits. (IMO, Michigan's choice of Beilein turned out far better than they could have hoped.) I kinda wonder if Oklahoma should have given Capel a little more time.

Stanford has a much more storied basketball history than Cal.
Stanford was coming off 13 NCAA tournament appearances out of 14 years prior to Dawkins. Dawkins is 0 for 4 and may be going on 5 if they miss out this year, which at 11-7 and 2-3 in the down PAC-12 may happen again.
K made the tournament in his 4th year, in a very tough ACC at that time. The PAC-12 has been pretty down in basketball the last few years.
I don't think saying this year is a make-or-break year is unfair to Johnny D.

Dawkins' experience at Stanford should be cause for hesitation for those pushing Collins or Wojo to take over the reins at Duke w/o head coaching experience. Nothing simulates the experience of being the head man in charge. If we're limiting the head coaching search to Duke family, then it's pretty much either Capel or Brey for now.

Hopefully Brad Stevens will give us a serious listen when the time comes.

Des Esseintes
01-22-2013, 02:00 AM
While I understand, and to some extent sympathize with, the Stanford alums and fans, I think some perspective is in order. On Saturday they beat arch-rival Cal 69-59 at home. Since Mike Montgomery arrived at Cal at the same time Dawkins arrived at Stanford, 2008, it may be worthwhile to compare their records. It is true that Monty has fared somewhat better than Johnny. Overall Monty has been 88-47 and 10-7 so far this year. Dawkins is 75-59 and 11-7 so far this year. Monty has done better in the post-season with three NCAA appearances and one NIT. Dawkins has not made the NCAA tournament, but outright won the NIT last year. He has a third tier post-season tournament as well.

Not all that much to write home about. But this season, disappointing to Stanford fans, actually has been an improvement. Sagarin today (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/bkt.htm)currently ranks Stanford 56th while Cal is 72nd. (I don't have access to KenPom, so don't know what he has to say.)

No one is calling for Monty's head--of course he has an impressive 30 year career behind him. Still, it is worth observing that Dawkins's four-plus years are not all that different from Monty's four-plus years at Cal.

The main point is that both these schools are muddling along in the middle of the pack. If no one wants Monty ousted, why does anyone want Dawkins gone? Dawkins is actually moving his team up; they seem to be slowly getting better. My feeling is that this is not a coaching issue so much as it is a slow growth thing with both coaches. Montgomery has had a slightly better time of it over the four years. Dawkins is getting there at about the same rate.

Certainly we at Duke shouldn't be jumping on the Stanford alum bandwagon or smacking Dawkins from afar. We know better than they that patience generally works out. If Butters hadn't been patient with that young coach from Army and had bent before the alumni storm, where would Duke be now? And if Michigan had been patient with Amaker (after putting his program in handcuffs and firing him instead of uncuffing him) they would have been fine with him there as well. Beilein did quite well with Amaker's recruits. (IMO, Michigan's choice of Beilein turned out far better than they could have hoped.) I kinda wonder if Oklahoma should have given Capel a little more time.

Unfortunately, I think you're burying the lede here. Cal has gone to the tournament 3 of the past 4 years. Stanford has missed it every season under Dawkins. I promise you that if the tournament appearance rate were flipped, so would the job security situation. Montgomery would be the one hearing footsteps, and Dawkins would be hailed a success. Overall W-L would matter very little.

I would also ask you--and I mean this seriously, not in a snide way, because I would love to see JD succeed--if patience is in too short supply, how many seasons of mediocre performance should Dawkins be accorded? Because this year is his fifth, and half a decade is a pretty long time in the wilderness for a historically successful program. Speaking only for myself if I were a Stanford fan, I would want to hear a compelling explanation for why past results do not guarantee future performance.

Jim3k
01-22-2013, 03:46 AM
Unfortunately, I think you're burying the lede here.

Of course. That's the point about trying for some perspective. I'm not trying to bury JD; I'm hoping his recruits will help him create the JD brand. That takes some time. Firing a coach too quickly happens all the time and foundations don't get laid.


I would also ask you--and I mean this seriously, not in a snide way, because I would love to see JD succeed--if patience is in too short supply, how many seasons of mediocre performance should Dawkins be accorded? Because this year is his fifth, and half a decade is a pretty long time in the wilderness for a historically successful program. Speaking only for myself if I were a Stanford fan, I would want to hear a compelling explanation for why past results do not guarantee future performance.

Clearly everyone's mileage varies here and there is no answer that will satisfy everyone. I'm just pointing out that Monty is having only moderate success even though he has established the Monty brand. Dawkins had none to start with; his recruiting foot was in a hole to start with. First, Trent Johnson left the cupboard a bit bare for JD when he ran off to LSU (and opened up Duke's acquisition of Miles Plumlee, a Stanford recruit). No one on the West Coast really knew Dawkins; he had to acquire assistance in gaining connections to the high school coaches throughout the country. He's also under some admissions limitations that Cal doesn't impose. So it's slow going.

As for Stanford being a storied team, Monty's 18 year tenure is a big part of that. So it's a bit unfair to hold his replacement, a first year HC, to Monty's standards. Heck, Monty isn't meeting those standards yet himself, now that he's across the Bay at Cal. People don't doubt Montgomery will succeed, so he's safe. I guess I'm just saying that Dawkins should be allowed most of his contract term. He's got a contract extension that runs through the 2015-16 season (http://www.gostanford.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/070611aaa.html). Bowlsby probably understands this dynamic better than anyone. He seems to be like Butters and has the necessary patience. All things considered, JD should get a couple of more years and we should be supporting that, not joining the lynch mob.

JasonEvans
01-22-2013, 12:40 PM
The issue for Johnny, as I see it, is that the fans don't see any signs of real progress in the program. It largely comes down to recruiting. Look, I know that Stanford has some serious recruiting challenges (similar to those faced by Duke and Notre Dame), but Dawkins is still coming up short in terms of bringing the right kind of talent to the Cardinal.

I looked back a few years and Johnny hasn't brought in any recruits who were among the top ten at their position. He seems to land maybe one or two top 100-150 kind of kids, but he has had real trouble breaking in with top 50 kind of talent and he hasn't gotten anyone who was close to being a Mickie Dee.

If the fans could see hope on the horizon -- a top 50 recruit coming in next year -- then it would certainly buy JD more time. But, as it is now, it is easy for them to look at how they have done over the past few years and see no sign that things are going to change any time soon.

-Jason "Stanford is traditionally a school that lands at least some elite recruits... Johnny has really not shown himself to be a good recruiter thus far" Evans

Lid
01-22-2013, 12:51 PM
As for Stanford being a storied team, Monty's 18 year tenure is a big part of that.

Just to elaborate on this point, I have a t-shirt commemorating Stanford's return to the tournament in 1989 -- at the time, they hadn't been since 1942 (and they won it that time). So, this "storied" program has only ever been to the post-season in the last 25 years, except for the 1942 blip/championship. Just a note on the culture of recency in sports...

roywhite
01-22-2013, 12:58 PM
The issue for Johnny, as I see it, is that the fans don't see any signs of real progress in the program. It largely comes down to recruiting. Look, I know that Stanford has some serious recruiting challenges (similar to those faced by Duke and Notre Dame), but Dawkins is still coming up short in terms of bringing the right kind of talent to the Cardinal.

I looked back a few years and Johnny hasn't brought in any recruits who were among the top ten at their position. He seems to land maybe one or two top 100-150 kind of kids, but he has had real trouble breaking in with top 50 kind of talent and he hasn't gotten anyone who was close to being a Mickie Dee.

If the fans could see hope on the horizon -- a top 50 recruit coming in next year -- then it would certainly buy JD more time. But, as it is now, it is easy for them to look at how they have done over the past few years and see no sign that things are going to change any time soon.

-Jason "Stanford is traditionally a school that lands at least some elite recruits... Johnny has really not shown himself to be a good recruiter thus far" Evans

Just to add another .02:

Stanford's recruiting and overall success in virtually every other sport underlines any shortcomings in the men's hoops program. Look, for example, at the great recent sucess in football, where the challenge of filling up to 85 scholarships with talented student/athletes is even greater than finding 11 to 13 good student/athletes for basketball.

CameronBornAndBred
01-22-2013, 01:21 PM
Just to add another .02:

Stanford's recruiting and overall success in virtually every other sport underlines any shortcomings in the men's hoops program. Look, for example, at the great recent sucess in football, where the challenge of filling up to 85 scholarships with talented student/athletes is even greater than finding 11 to 13 good student/athletes for basketball.
I was just thinking the same thing. As FDA so often points out, Stanford crushes us in football recruiting, so there is a certain amount of irony to say they have understandable trouble in recruiting in the basketball world. That is probably a reason that they hired JD in the first place, he was a great recruiter here at Duke...the very school that can't keep up with Stanford on the football side.

hurleyfor3
01-25-2013, 02:17 AM
I'm back from the game.

CU jumped out to a 9-0 lead at which point JD called timeout. Stanford got it as close as 8 in the second half but never seriously threatened. Imagine the Duke-Miami game but some 30% less embarrassing. Wednesday night's Miami team would have won by at least 30 (the Buffs won by "only" 21).

They didn't look abjectly terrible, but Stanford did nothing particularly well. They couldn't have gotten more than five or six offensive rebounds all night... statsheet says they somehow got eight. Total rebounds were 45-29, Colorado.

If I were JD I would start freshening up my LinkedIn profile.

sporthenry
01-25-2013, 11:43 AM
I'm back from the game.

CU jumped out to a 9-0 lead at which point JD called timeout. Stanford got it as close as 8 in the second half but never seriously threatened. Imagine the Duke-Miami game but some 30% less embarrassing. Wednesday night's Miami team would have won by at least 30 (the Buffs won by "only" 21).

They didn't look abjectly terrible, but Stanford did nothing particularly well. They couldn't have gotten more than five or six offensive rebounds all night... statsheet says they somehow got eight. Total rebounds were 45-29, Colorado.

If I were JD I would start freshening up my LinkedIn profile.

I would say he is done. 2-4 in a relatively bad Pac 12. No big name recruits coming in next year. He had decent talent but never seemed to put it all together. Even this year, apart from last night, he had lost 3 Pac 12 games by a combined 15 points and lost to NC State by 9 points (while Duke lost by 8 points). Wonder if they'll be a seat opening up on Duke's bench for him.

emack32
01-25-2013, 01:11 PM
If the next coach has to be a former Blue Devil(which I don't think is the case), I would put Amaker and Brey as the two best candidates. I agree with the sentiment that an assisatant coach with no head coaching experience should not be considered. There is nothing like being at the head of a prgram or a team for that matter.

Durham Thunder
01-25-2013, 02:24 PM
If the next coach has to be a former Blue Devil(which I don't think is the case), I would put Amaker and Brey as the two best candidates. I agree with the sentiment that an assisatant coach with no head coaching experience should not be considered. There is nothing like being at the head of a prgram or a team for that matter.

Brey I think is not a great coach- good, not great. With as many decent teams as he's had, he's had some lousy tournament performances. Amaker should certainly start to get some offers from the big boys. Hey, Ben Howland has destroyed UCLA's credibility since 2008- they should give Amaker a call if they boot Howland in the next couple years.

CameronBornAndBred
01-25-2013, 02:25 PM
Brey I think is not a great coach- good, not great. With as many decent teams as he's had, he's had some lousy tournament performances. Amaker should certainly start to get some offers from the big boys. Hey, Ben Howland has destroyed UCLA's credibility since 2008- they should give Amaker a call if they boot Howland in the next couple years.
Maybe Stanford knocks on Tommy's door....

Wander
01-25-2013, 02:45 PM
If the next coach has to be a former Blue Devil(which I don't think is the case), I would put Amaker and Brey as the two best candidates. I agree with the sentiment that an assisatant coach with no head coaching experience should not be considered. There is nothing like being at the head of a prgram or a team for that matter.

Brey's teams are never very good defensively - I don't follow Notre Dame closely enough to say if it's because of the type of players recruited or X's and O's, but it's consistent enough where it's clearly something systematic.

Amaker's had success largely because his teams are just more talented and athletic than others in the Ivy League. Good for him for making that happen at Harvard and he deserves credit for it, I don't think that would translate well to Duke (and he didn't do great at Michigan).

I don't see any reason to keep it in the family. Maybe by the time K retires there will be a worthy Duke guy, but there isn't one now, and no one's even close IMO.

emack32
01-25-2013, 02:54 PM
No one will ever come close to K!

Cameron
01-25-2013, 03:29 PM
Brey's teams are never very good defensively - I don't follow Notre Dame closely enough to say if it's because of the type of players recruited or X's and O's, but it's consistent enough where it's clearly something systematic.

Amaker's had success largely because his teams are just more talented and athletic than others in the Ivy League. Good for him for making that happen at Harvard and he deserves credit for it, I don't think that would translate well to Duke (and he didn't do great at Michigan).

I don't see any reason to keep it in the family. Maybe by the time K retires there will be a worthy Duke guy, but there isn't one now, and no one's even close IMO.

I agree with this. To be completely frank, there is not one current head coach in the K tree that I would want to see succeed him. Not ever.

Doctor Joe
01-25-2013, 04:09 PM
I would not be as quick to discount hiring an assistant coach. While I'm sure there are other examples, Roy Williams did pretty good for himself at Kansas without any head coaching experience. They will need to keep all the options open when that fateful day arrives - - hopefully not for a while.



If the next coach has to be a former Blue Devil(which I don't think is the case), I would put Amaker and Brey as the two best candidates. I agree with the sentiment that an assisatant coach with no head coaching experience should not be considered. There is nothing like being at the head of a prgram or a team for that matter.

DevilWearsPrada
01-30-2013, 09:31 AM
Agreed. At this point, barring a miraculous career turnaround, there is no way that Johnny Dawkins will ever coach at Duke again, unless it is as an assistant. And I hardly believe Johnny would ever return in that fashion after the disappointing run in Palo Alto.

Another poster hit it on the head. There is a lack of fire within that program, starting with the man sitting in the first seat on the bench. I don't doubt Johnny's desire to win for one second -- his career as a player at Duke should tell you all there is to know about the passion that man has for the game of basketball -- but he just doesn't seem to have that "it factor" about him, that I-know-I-am-good-and-this-is-how-we're-going-to-beat-you persona that I think all the really good head coaches do. Even Brad Stevens, who is as mild-mannered as they come, exudes an air of great confidence and fervency amidst all that stoicism. The fire within is plainly evident. And that certainly rubs off on the players and the Butler program as a whole.

The atmosphere at Stanford, which has only won 31 of its 76 Pac 12 games under Dawkins, is dead. I'm beginning to think that Johnny Dawkins just doesn't have any emotions. It's hard to get your team ready to play when you are that tranquil. It really is.

I couldnt leave you a comment, so I will here!! WELL Said, and Spot on!! As you said, JD had great Passion while being a basketball player at Duke. Johnny was my Dad's all time favorite player. JD restored Duke Basketball to its prominence!

I love Brad Stevens!!! Having seen him at the 2010 Final Four, put several !!!!!! on it!

TRANQUIL..... thats a good descriptive adjective! However, being tranquil as a Head Coach does not bring The Intensity and Passion that the team needs to feed to have the desire to Win!!

A song comes to mind! I love this song and play it on all Game Days!!!! Rod Stewart's P A S S I O N !!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mdq0_zZOFLg

Its GAME DAY!!!! We all need PASSION!!! Lets Go Duke!!! And the best to Johnny D! You are a Class Act!

IBleedBlue
01-30-2013, 01:30 PM
I think the next coach is actually sitting on the bench right now. How about Nate James as next head coach?
He can haul recruits left and right as we have seen in the past 3-4 years. Getting elite level talent will not be a problem if Nate James becomes head coach. He might even compete with John Calipari in that category.
As per the actual coaching and game management, I believe he will be gain that experience sitting on the bench before coach K retires.

Duke09
01-30-2013, 04:38 PM
if you're Kevin White, I can't think how his first call isn't Brad Stevens and then Shaka Smart. Shaka will likely be somewhere else by the time K retires. Stevens, I'm less sure about

moonpie23
01-30-2013, 05:11 PM
i think it's interesting how many folks in here are ready to hand the reins to Brad when K retires.... i'm not passing judgement, just an observation. man, is it a done deal already?

Duke09
01-30-2013, 05:30 PM
i think it's interesting how many folks in here are ready to hand the reins to Brad when K retires.... i'm not passing judgement, just an observation. man, is it a done deal already?

I think it's natural to ask who is the best coach that would be willing to move to Durham. I think that is a short list and is topped by Stevens. The AD has 3 routes: 1) Best coach who will move ala Stevens and Smart 2) Best guy in family 3) best assistant. I don't think Duke will be hiring an assistant unless its promoting someone from the bench.

sporthenry
01-30-2013, 05:37 PM
i think it's interesting how many folks in here are ready to hand the reins to Brad when K retires.... i'm not passing judgement, just an observation. man, is it a done deal already?

I agree, it is interesting. All I know is that K will have a lot to say about it and there is no guarantee Stevens will even come here. But it appears we get Stevens and UNC gets Shaka Smart and the world is at peace again.

JasonEvans
01-30-2013, 05:56 PM
Stevens is a fabulous coach, no question about it. He gets the most out of his players and that is a huge part of being successful at any school.

That said, I would really like to see him recruit at a slightly higher level before handing him the keys to the Duke bus without any reservations. As near as I can tell, he is yet to sign a top 50 recruit at Butler. Heck, he has really only signed one top 100 recruit. He is an expert at finding diamonds in the rough -- kids who were not highly touted in high school but who blossom into better than expected collegiate players -- but I would love to see him at least occasionally pluck a kid who has a shot at being a Mickie Dee.

I think he has raised the program's profile to the point where he should be able to do that some time in the next few years.

--Jason "seeing as K ain't going anywhere for another 5+ years, there is plenty of time for Stevens to show he can recruit at the next level" Evans

Duvall
01-30-2013, 06:00 PM
i think it's interesting how many folks in here are ready to hand the reins to Brad when K retires.... i'm not passing judgement, just an observation. man, is it a done deal already?

I can't see how that follows. The chances of anyone posting on this thread having an impact on that decision are remote at best.

Billy Dat
01-30-2013, 06:51 PM
Stevens is a fabulous coach, no question about it. He gets the most out of his players and that is a huge part of being successful at any school.

That said, I would really like to see him recruit at a slightly higher level before handing him the keys to the Duke bus without any reservations. As near as I can tell, he is yet to sign a top 50 recruit at Butler. Heck, he has really only signed one top 100 recruit. He is an expert at finding diamonds in the rough -- kids who were not highly touted in high school but who blossom into better than expected collegiate players -- but I would love to see him at least occasionally pluck a kid who has a shot at being a Mickie Dee.

I think he has raised the program's profile to the point where he should be able to do that some time in the next few years.

--Jason "seeing as K ain't going anywhere for another 5+ years, there is plenty of time for Stevens to show he can recruit at the next level" Evans

Co-sign this in a huge way. I am actually shocked at how many people, who presumably enjoy K's fire and passion, are so interesting in handing the program over to a guy who seems to lack a pulse. Plus, "The Butler Way" is a "system" that Stevens hand selects "types" for rather than amassing assets and seeing how best to deploy them. If it's Shaka or Stevens, I am Shaka's up tempo frantic pressing style all day over Butler's careful precision. Also, don't count out Tommy who is being born again at Harvard and is going to get offered a big program job again soon.

sporthenry
01-30-2013, 06:56 PM
Stevens is a fabulous coach, no question about it. He gets the most out of his players and that is a huge part of being successful at any school.

That said, I would really like to see him recruit at a slightly higher level before handing him the keys to the Duke bus without any reservations. As near as I can tell, he is yet to sign a top 50 recruit at Butler. Heck, he has really only signed one top 100 recruit. He is an expert at finding diamonds in the rough -- kids who were not highly touted in high school but who blossom into better than expected collegiate players -- but I would love to see him at least occasionally pluck a kid who has a shot at being a Mickie Dee.

I think he has raised the program's profile to the point where he should be able to do that some time in the next few years.

--Jason "seeing as K ain't going anywhere for another 5+ years, there is plenty of time for Stevens to show he can recruit at the next level" Evans

I would agree that he hasn't shown much in the way of recruiting at a top level. You would think after 2 straight championship games, even with recruiting lagging a bit, that it would start to get better. But I think it also shows how hard it is to get top recruits and perhaps shows the problem with rankings as they tend to overrate BCS recruits. Sometimes I think committing to Duke or UNC often times doubles your chance to make the McD AA game.

But when you look at ESPN's top 100, it isn't like Gonzaga or VCU or other mid majors are dominating it either. Zaga is a top 10 team with 1 top 100 player. I think that being able to recruit top players makes coaches jobs easier and perhaps giving Stevens the Duke name will help but I don't really care how he builds a winning program be it getting Jabari Parker or going after underrated players and players overseas like Stevens and Few has shown to be successful.

g-money
01-30-2013, 07:17 PM
Also, don't count out Tommy who is being born again at Harvard and is going to get offered a big program job again soon.

Along these lines, I wouldn't count out Jeff Capel just yet either, assuming he gets another shot at a HC gig before Coach K retires. The dude has coaching in his blood.

However, I'm not sure how critical this decision actually is. Sorry to be fatalistic, but whoever succeeds Coach K will likely be steamrolled within t<5 years by the unrealistic expectations of the alumni base. (As an alumnus myself, I feel at liberty to predict this.) I'm not sure if I'd be fighting to be first in line.

tommy
01-31-2013, 02:23 AM
Getting back on topic, some good news for Johnny and the Cardinal. Stanford demolished #10 Oregon at home tonight, 76-52. Probably the best win of his tenure. It comes on the heels of a 30 point win over Utah, so maybe things are looking up. Gotta take care of business now against the Beavers this weekend, or it'll really tarnish tonight's big win.

sporthenry
01-31-2013, 02:29 AM
Well don't look now but Stanford just blew out Oregon 76-52. A top 10 win, which just looking at Stanford's schedule the past few years appears to be Dawkins' best win. Hopefully this will be the beginning of a nice little run for Stanford and they pretty much return everyone next year so hopefully we/I wrote Johnny D off a bit too soon.

JasonEvans
02-06-2013, 09:41 PM
I hate to jinx it, but Stanford is really rolling. With 5 minutes left in the first half, they lead Arizona by 7... at Arizona.

They've won 3 in a row. Hold on in this game and they will be firmly in the NCAA tourney conversation.

-Jason "perhaps we all wrote JD's obit too early" Evans

Tappan Zee Devil
02-06-2013, 09:56 PM
I hate to jinx it, but Stanford is really rolling. With 5 minutes left in the first half, they lead Arizona by 7... at Arizona.

They've won 3 in a row. Hold on in this game and they will be firmly in the NCAA tourney conversation.

-Jason "perhaps we all wrote JD's obit too early" Evans

Well, you've done it Jason. 27 - 26 at half time

sporthenry
02-06-2013, 10:27 PM
Flicked on the game, Stanford's offense is pretty ugly at least in this 2nd half. Stanford will have a few more games to at least get in the discussion or save Johnny D's job. Have to take care of business and hope to win a few games like this, UCLA, at Oregon or at ASU to perhaps put themselves in the discussion.

JasonEvans
02-06-2013, 10:50 PM
Arizona by 4, 3 minutes left. Sorry for the jinx, JD!!

sporthenry
02-06-2013, 10:54 PM
Stanford was up 5 and let UA go on a 9-0 run. Cut it to 1 then lack of communication on D gave Lyons an open step back 3. Looks like Stanford is done in this game. Too many empty possessions on offense. It looks very disorganized.

Hopefully Stanford can recover from the loss b/c they went toe to toe with a top 10 team on the road but this could be one of those losses which the team can't shake going forward.

This game would have given Stanford its signature win but ASU might be more important to be another bubble team.

tommy
02-06-2013, 11:08 PM
Down they go, 63-58. Big opportunity lost as the Cardinal just couldn't make the plays down the stretch and Zona's vets did.

sporthenry
02-09-2013, 08:43 PM
Carrick Felix and ASU playing Stanford at ASU. Felix has 14/8. Stanford had a 49-34 lead that is now down to 7 at 56-49.

Big game b/c Stanford can't really afford many losses and ASU is right in the bubble position. Lunardi has them in and CBS has them as one of the first 4 out. So if Stanford gets on the bubble, this will be a big game.

sporthenry
02-09-2013, 08:53 PM
Every time I flick on Stanford, they look ugly. Offense is motionless and they are keeping themselves in the game with defense but even that is aided by misses on wide open 3's and lay ups. Still 7 point lead with 3:19 left, have to close this game out.

I wonder what happens if Stanford continues to close out this year strong but fails to make the NCAAT. I know they had momentum by winning the NIT but came out this year very poorly. But with their whole team returning, I wonder/hope Johnny D gets another year but from what I can see, either his recruiting hasn't been great or his X's and O's leave a bit to be desired or he plays stall ball and I just watch at inopportune times.

sporthenry
02-09-2013, 09:08 PM
Stanford escaped with a win but the end of these college basketball games are terrible this year. Missed 2 front end of 1 and 1's. Then get a jump ball up 3 with a timeout in hand that gives it back to ASU with a chance to tie. They miss, another jump ball so they have to inbound the ball with .7 seconds left. So what does the inbounder do? Instead of just throwing it to an open guy, chucks it the length of the court and it hits the scoreboard giving ASU the ball with .7 seconds left under Stanford's basket.

sporthenry
02-13-2013, 03:08 AM
Stevens is a fabulous coach, no question about it. He gets the most out of his players and that is a huge part of being successful at any school.

That said, I would really like to see him recruit at a slightly higher level before handing him the keys to the Duke bus without any reservations. As near as I can tell, he is yet to sign a top 50 recruit at Butler. Heck, he has really only signed one top 100 recruit. He is an expert at finding diamonds in the rough -- kids who were not highly touted in high school but who blossom into better than expected collegiate players -- but I would love to see him at least occasionally pluck a kid who has a shot at being a Mickie Dee.

I think he has raised the program's profile to the point where he should be able to do that some time in the next few years.

--Jason "seeing as K ain't going anywhere for another 5+ years, there is plenty of time for Stevens to show he can recruit at the next level" Evans

Well just checking in on this thread. Stanford is on the bubble. CBS has Stanford on the first 4 out. RPI 57 and Kenpom 39 (ahead of teams like UNC, K-State, La Salle, Notre Dame, UCLA, and Oregon). They have to keep winning. Big games against UCLA, Oregon and Cal exist and probably can only afford to drop 1 of them.

But reason I bumped the quote is I was checking on Steven's recruiting. For the class of 2014, he is recruiting 2 top 60 ESPN recruits including Trevon Bluiett at 48 and Trey Lyles #1 PF and #5 overall. Reason Lyles is a big deal is that Stevens will be going against K (among others) for Lyle's services. So he is starting to go after some bigger fish. But if he becomes so successful recruiting at Butler, have to imagine he could build a program like Duke there and might not want to leave.

JasonEvans
02-13-2013, 10:43 AM
The next few days are HUGE for Stanford. They have a pair of home games with USC and UCLA.

USC is #108 in the RPI. They are 6-5 in the Pac12, but the Trojans are not that good. Stanford already lost a game at USC earlier this year and really cannot afford to drop another to them. Stanford should be a favorite in this game, probably by 5-6 points or so. A loss would be a devastating blow to their tourney hopes.

UCLA (#40 in RPI) is a huge game because it could be another impressive win for Stanford. You never know what UCLA team will show up -- the one that lost to Arizona St (#67 in RPI), USC, and Cal-Poly (167) or the one that won road games at Arizona (8) and Colorado (18).

Stanford is currently #56 in the RPI. I know they are better in the Pomeroy rankings and that they have won 4-of-5, but they really need to continue the momentum. A pair of wins this week would be huge for them and come close to getting them a ticket to the dance. They still have games left against Oregon St and Utah, two of the Pac12 bottom-feeders, which should be wins. That would get them to 10 Pac12 wins which probably gets them to the Dance. But, it has to start this week. If they only go 1-1 in these games, they are going to need to beat better teams -- like Colorado, Oregon, or Cal -- to get to the 10 wins I think they need.

Stanford has only 1 senior, Gabriel Harris, and he is not a key player. They are loaded to the gills with juniors though -- 8 juniors, 5 of their top 6 scorers are juniors. If they can get to the dance this year and gain that experience, they could be primed for a very successful season next year. If Johnny can survive this season, he could be on the verge of really building something at Stanford.

--Jason "I couldn't be rooting harder for a guy than I am rooting for JD!" EVans

JasonEvans
02-14-2013, 10:08 PM
The big USC game tips off in an hour. C'mon Cardinal!

-JE

willywoody
02-15-2013, 01:18 AM
That was a very exciting high school game.

sporthenry
02-15-2013, 01:36 AM
I think I might be bad luck for Stanford's offense. I have yet to see them have a good 5 minute stretch and they have a few guys who can't hit free throws let alone do anything else. Huestis couldn't miss and yet they went away from him. Randle started to come on and as good as Powell is, he almost reminds me a bit of McBob. He is very good but just doesn't seem to have those moves around the hoop to dominate. Often times seems to get stuck and can't play through the contact.

Tough loss and some of this one is on the coaching. Also went 4-12 from the FT stripe in a 1 point loss. And didn't get much of a shot off at the end of the game. Going to be an uphill battle for a tournament bid.

Huestis, Powell, and Randle are good players and the team should be good next year but Dawkins hasn't proved an exceptional X's and O's guy and without a big recruiting class on the horizon, it might be time to bring in an X's and O's guy to lead those guys.

throatybeard
02-20-2013, 11:56 PM
I just saw the Pac12 standings. Not good news for JD. I hope he hangs on.

sporthenry
03-07-2013, 12:47 AM
Well Stanford currently taking it to Cal on Cal's senior night. Impressive since Cal is a tournament team. Up 17 as we speak and hopefully I don't jinx it.

Stanford's story is a sad one. No bad losses (none over 101 RPI wise) and most of their losses have been close. Looked at kenpom and that backed my theory up, they are 326 in luck which means their record should be much better. 4 Pac 12 losses by 6 points including Colorado and Oregon which would be somewhat signature wins.

The team really grew with Huestis, Rnadle, and Powell. If Johnny D gets one more year, I can't see this team not making the tournament but I haven't been completely impressed with his X's and O's (although I admit I don't know enough of their players to know if its personnel or coaching) and without a great recruiting class, it might be time to make a change so the new coach can have a good first season.

ETA: And the standings don't really tell the whole story. Stanford is 9th but the difference between 9th and 10th is 4.5 games. That is the same difference between 1st and 9th.

Henderson
03-07-2013, 12:54 AM
The next few days are HUGE for Stanford. They have a pair of home games with USC and UCLA.

UCLA (#40 in RPI) is a huge game because it could be another impressive win for Stanford. You never know what UCLA team will show up -- the one that lost to Arizona St (#67 in RPI), USC, and Cal-Poly (167) or the one that won road games at Arizona (8) and Colorado (18).


After what UCLA did at Washington State tonight, a Stanford loss to UCLA would cue up the funeral dirge for JD's season this year. UCLA's RPI is going down like an elevator with a severed cable. WSU is a truly horrible team. Even for the Pac-12.

sporthenry
03-07-2013, 01:00 AM
After what UCLA did at Washington State tonight, a Stanford loss to UCLA would cue up the funeral dirge for JD's season this year. UCLA's RPI is going down like an elevator with a severed cable. WSU is a truly horrible team. Even for the Pac-12.

Well they already lost to UCLA, but UCLA's RPI isn't going to suffer that much. In fact, does it change at all b/c of the game? 50% of RPI is derived from opponent's winning % which actually went up with a win versus UCLA and 25% is both your record and your opponents opponents record. So it seems like each individual game is a wash but I could be wrong.

But UCLA isn't in terrible shape and they won't go down like an elevator. No different than KU losing to TCU (and looking at Kenpom it is actually a much better loss).

Troublemaker
03-07-2013, 01:14 AM
Disappointing season for JD. I thought Stanford was going to tear through the Pac-10 this season after they dominated the NIT last season. Thought the program had turned a corner.

-bdbd
03-07-2013, 03:08 AM
Disappointing season for JD. I thought Stanford was going to tear through the Pac-10 this season after they dominated the NIT last season. Thought the program had turned a corner.

Well, the big upset tonight at Berkeley has them sweeping their NCAAT-bound rivals this year. That is huge in Palo Alto. And, as has been said, they have been very competitive, losing a ton of close games to top-100 schools. I don't know if JD's quite dead yet. Stanford's one of the "good schools" that might just see some promise, and have some patience. Anything is possible...

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=330650025

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9026233/players-coaches-ejected-melee-stanford-california-game

Finishing at 18-13 and 9-9 in conf., which could conceivably land them as high as tied for 5th in the PAC12, depending on how the other games go this week for ASU, USC, Wash and Col, would seem to get them into the NIT probably.

STANDINGS CONFERENCE OVERALL
Pac-12 W-L GB PCT W-L PCT STRK
#19 Oregon 12-4 -- .750 23-6 .793 W2
#23 UCLA 12-5 .5 .706 22-8 .733 L1
California 12-6 1 .667 20-10 .667 L1
#18 Arizona 11-6 1.5 .647 23-6 .793 L2
Colorado 9-7 3 .563 19-9 .679 L1
Washington 9-8 3.5 .529 17-13 .567 W3
USC 9-8 3.5 .529 14-16 .467 L1
Arizona State 9-8 3.5 .529 20-10 .667 L3
Stanford 9-9 4 .500 18-13 .581 W2
Oregon State 3-13 9 .188 13-16 .448 L4
Utah 3-13 9 .188 11-17 .393 L4
Washington State 3-14 9.5 .176 12-18 .400 W1

EXPANDED AP 25 USA TODAY HOME ROAD OVERALL
Pac-12 W-L W-L W-L W-L PF PA
#19 Oregon 3-1 3-1 17-2 6-3 72.5 62.9
#23 UCLA 3-2 3-1 15-3 5-2 75.5 69.1
California 3-2 3-2 11-4 6-5 67.5 63.9
#18 Arizona 2-0 2-0 13-2 7-4 73.4 63.6
Colorado 3-2 3-2 11-2 5-7 68.0 63.5
Washington 0-5 0-4 10-6 5-6 67.8 66.4
USC 1-5 1-4 10-6 3-7 66.1 67.3
Arizona State 0-2 0-2 15-4 4-5 70.7 65.5
Stanford 1-4 1-3 11-5 4-6 70.9 66.1
Oregon State 0-4 0-3 9-8 2-6 72.8 70.5
Utah 0-3 0-3 8-7 2-10 63.6 63.0
Washington State 0-6 0-5 9-7 1-9 64.1 63.3

Mudge
03-07-2013, 03:56 AM
Well, the big upset tonight at Berkeley has them sweeping their NCAAT-bound rivals this year. That is huge in Palo Alto. And, as has been said, they have been very competitive, losing a ton of close games to top-100 schools. I don't know if JD's quite dead yet. Stanford's one of the "good schools" that might just see some promise, and have some patience. Anything is possible...

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=330650025

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9026233/players-coaches-ejected-melee-stanford-california-game

Finishing at 18-13 and 9-9 in conf., which could conceivably land them as high as tied for 5th in the PAC12, depending on how the other games go this week for ASU, USC, Wash and Col, would seem to get them into the NIT probably.

STANDINGS CONFERENCE OVERALL
Pac-12 W-L GB PCT W-L PCT STRK
#19 Oregon 12-4 -- .750 23-6 .793 W2
#23 UCLA 12-5 .5 .706 22-8 .733 L1
California 12-6 1 .667 20-10 .667 L1
#18 Arizona 11-6 1.5 .647 23-6 .793 L2
Colorado 9-7 3 .563 19-9 .679 L1
Washington 9-8 3.5 .529 17-13 .567 W3
USC 9-8 3.5 .529 14-16 .467 L1
Arizona State 9-8 3.5 .529 20-10 .667 L3
Stanford 9-9 4 .500 18-13 .581 W2
Oregon State 3-13 9 .188 13-16 .448 L4
Utah 3-13 9 .188 11-17 .393 L4
Washington State 3-14 9.5 .176 12-18 .400 W1

EXPANDED AP 25 USA TODAY HOME ROAD OVERALL
Pac-12 W-L W-L W-L W-L PF PA
#19 Oregon 3-1 3-1 17-2 6-3 72.5 62.9
#23 UCLA 3-2 3-1 15-3 5-2 75.5 69.1
California 3-2 3-2 11-4 6-5 67.5 63.9
#18 Arizona 2-0 2-0 13-2 7-4 73.4 63.6
Colorado 3-2 3-2 11-2 5-7 68.0 63.5
Washington 0-5 0-4 10-6 5-6 67.8 66.4
USC 1-5 1-4 10-6 3-7 66.1 67.3
Arizona State 0-2 0-2 15-4 4-5 70.7 65.5
Stanford 1-4 1-3 11-5 4-6 70.9 66.1
Oregon State 0-4 0-3 9-8 2-6 72.8 70.5
Utah 0-3 0-3 8-7 2-10 63.6 63.0
Washington State 0-6 0-5 9-7 1-9 64.1 63.3

It does seem to be well past time for Duke basketball fans to recognize that Johnny Dawkins is not going to be the successor to Coach K at Duke (nor should he be, based on track record)... nor does any other current or former assistant to Coach K appear sufficiently accomplished that they should be the frontrunner for that job, when it becomes a subject for consideration... the closest thing to a roaring success among Coach K's former assistants is Mike Brey-- and while I think Brey has done very well, I imagine that Duke will be hoping for more success, after Coach K retires, than Brey has experienced at Notre Dame.

I know that loyalty is of huge importance to Coach K, and I also know that he has been willing to support friends/colleagues who were not the most qualified, for positions of importance in Duke's sports administration in the past (how else to explain Coach K's backing of Joe Alleva as AD, for so many years)... but if Duke wants to have any chance of sustaining the level of its basketball success, after Coach K retires, Duke is going to have to hire someone other than a former Coach K assistant. I realize that, no matter who Duke hires (much like UCLA in 1975), it is almost inevitable that the program will not be able to match its current success in the future-- but a nepotism hire will only increase the chances that Duke experiences a big drop-off in success, after Coach K retires.

Henderson
03-07-2013, 10:08 AM
It's curious that JD hasn't had more success, though he's by no means been terrible. California is a target-rich state for recruiting (as is Oregon -- Kyle, Kevin Love, and Terrance Jones come to mind, though Jones and Stanford = no). Bishop Gorman H.S. is practically in his back yard. But his recruiting, though he's had some good gets, hasn't swept the five stars available to him. And Stanford is in a great spot both geographically and academically. I wonder if kids are afraid of the academic rigor of Stanford. But then there's Duke... Or if his easygoing demeanor fails to inspire. Anyway, I keep wishing and hoping he'll really blast off (though not by stealing our top recruits).

Unless he does, I don't see him succeeding Coach K when the latter retires 20 years from now.

Chris Collins and Tommy Amaker are the two most obvious heirs apparent. But how about this name? Shane Battier. He's the sort of guy a smart Duke-style player would follow into hell.

nocilla
03-07-2013, 10:26 AM
Tyler Thornton.

JasonEvans
03-07-2013, 10:36 AM
People, we are at least 5 and probably more like 10 years away from K's retirement. He is only 66 right now and seem to have plenty of drive, desire, and vigor. Speculating about who might or might not succeed him is a bit like projecting the 2016 Super Bowl winner right now. There is just too much unknown info to make even a mildly educated guess.

I agree that if we had to pick a new coach at duke today that JD's performance at Stanford so far would not bode well for his case. I agree that Collins and Wojo do not have the head coaching experience we all seem to want. I agree that Stevens at Butler seems like a great fit and a fabulous coach.

But there are many seasons worth of data and situations still to come. Speculating about this is just silly at this point. Until it becomes clear that K is a season or two away from retirement, this is a pointless exercise because we simply do not have enough info.

-Jason "I hope JD gets another season at Stanford as his team seems primed for a nice run next year, but he needs to start getting it done in recruiting too!" Evans

FourWins
03-13-2013, 09:35 PM
After falling to ASU in OT at the Pac-12 tourney, 89-88, JD is done for the year. Hopefully he gets one more year, during which he can lead them to the tournament. They looked pretty good in their blowout win over Cal at Cal.

Mudge
03-14-2013, 03:45 AM
After falling to ASU in OT at the Pac-12 tourney, 89-88, JD is done for the year. Hopefully he gets one more year, during which he can lead them to the tournament. They looked pretty good in their blowout win over Cal at Cal.

In a sad bit of irony, it is quite possible that Herb Sendek, of all people, has just delivered the coup de grace to Dawkins' tenure at Stanford-- JD's done (slightly) better than Amaker at Michigan-- but in a less difficult league (and without the handicap of coming in under sanctions)... hard to know or say what the Stanford AD is thinking, but one has to think that, just as with Amaker after a similar number of years at a school with a similar history of relatively recent Final Four success (and a championship in the past), they (the school's admin and alums) expected to be further along than this, at this juncture...

And the brawl last week against archrival Cal (with several Stanford coaches getting ejected) can't possibly have helped matters... now, if Stanford decides that they are first and foremost about academics, and JD is imparting the right values (and graduating his players), while winning more than he loses, then maybe they will decide to keep him on-- one likes to believe that we still live in a world where that ideal holds true (at least at the Stanfords of the world, if not the Kentuckys).

duke79
03-14-2013, 10:22 AM
In a sad bit of irony, it is quite possible that Herb Sendek, of all people, has just delivered the coup de grace to Dawkins' tenure at Stanford-- JD's done (slightly) better than Amaker at Michigan-- but in a less difficult league (and without the handicap of coming in under sanctions)... hard to know or say what the Stanford AD is thinking, but one has to think that, just as with Amaker after a similar number of years at a school with a similar history of relatively recent Final Four success (and a championship in the past), they (the school's admin and alums) expected to be further along than this, at this juncture...

And the brawl last week against archrival Cal (with several Stanford coaches getting ejected) can't possibly have helped matters... now, if Stanford decides that they are first and foremost about academics, and JD is imparting the right values (and graduating his players), while winning more than he loses, then maybe they will decide to keep him on-- one likes to believe that we still live in a world where that ideal holds true (at least at the Stanfords of the world, if not the Kentuckys).

Hope you are right about this. Would hate to see JD fired, but, let's face reality, winning trumps just about everything else at most D-1 schools (including Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Michigan, etc) and I'm not sure JD has accomplished what Stanford had hoped for. It can be a harsh world at this level.

Bay Area Duke Fan
03-14-2013, 10:57 AM
Stanford's great success in football the past few years makes it harder to accept mediocrity in basketball. If the AD and powerful alumni want Stanford to become the "Duke of the West Coast" in basketball, I think they'll be seriously considering replacing JD at this point.

luvdahops
03-14-2013, 11:15 AM
Stanford's great success in football the past few years makes it harder to accept mediocrity in basketball. If the AD and powerful alumni want Stanford to become the "Duke of the West Coast" in basketball, I think they'll be seriously considering replacing JD at this point.

Hard to disagree with this logic. I think the best case for Johnny is to get one more year based on the potential of his returning core. They lose only one role-playing starter (Adam Brown) and a reserve guard from their rotation; the rest, including the four leading scorers - Powell, Randle, Heustis and Bright - are all juniors or sophs. Of course, the flip side of the argument being that this is also an attractive situation for a new coach to step into, assuming no defections.

Bay Area Duke Fan
03-16-2013, 02:20 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Stanford-keep-Dawkins-but-want-more-wins-4359342.php

http://blog.sfgate.com/stanfordsports/2013/03/15/stanford-basketball-dawkins-return-stirs-questions/

Jim3k
03-16-2013, 10:29 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Stanford-keep-Dawkins-but-want-more-wins-4359342.php

http://blog.sfgate.com/stanfordsports/2013/03/15/stanford-basketball-dawkins-return-stirs-questions/

Same topic. Different newspaper. Dawkins to return for 6th year. Under the gun. http://www.contracostatimes.com/stanford-cardinal/ci_22802661/stanford-basketball-coach-johnny-dawkins-return-but-onus

throatybeard
03-16-2013, 11:08 PM
Stanford's great success in football the past few years makes it harder to accept mediocrity in basketball. If the AD and powerful alumni want Stanford to become the "Duke of the West Coast" in basketball, I think they'll be seriously considering replacing JD at this point.

Speaking of which, Northwestern just fired Carmody. I don't understand how they do well at FB and manage to be somewhere between awful and OK at BB.

flyingdutchdevil
03-17-2013, 11:42 AM
Speaking of which, Northwestern just fired Carmody. I don't understand how they do well at FB and manage to be somewhere between awful and OK at BB.

How are they okay at basketball? They are the only BCS team to have never made the tournament. Ever.

Side topic - I think Collins leaving for Northwestern is a huge mistake. That program is cursed when it comes to basketball. He may be a legend if he ever gets the team to the tourney (and it will clearly open doors), but you need to have killer recruiting skills, killer in-game skills, and a massive amount of luck for that to happen. It's a tall order, and I'm not sure if any assistant coach can do it.

Troublemaker
03-17-2013, 11:52 AM
Glad to see JD getting another year.

With everyone returning, his team is going to be experienced and relatively loaded (for Stanford / Pac10) next season. I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford went from no-NCAAs to a top 4 seed next season.

I'm not sure about his long-term viability at Stanford (depends on recruiting), but I am sure glad he will have a chance to realize the fruits of his labor next season.

It would have been galling to see another coach go in there and take next season's relatively loaded (for Stanford / Pac10) team into the NCAAs.

This was a "do we let this man attempt to finish his job?" scenario and I respect Stanford for answering "yes."

JasonEvans
03-17-2013, 12:46 PM
Glad to see JD getting another year.

With everyone returning, his team is going to be experienced and relatively loaded (for Stanford / Pac10) next season. I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford went from no-NCAAs to a top 4 seed next season.

I'm not sure about his long-term viability at Stanford (depends on recruiting), but I am sure glad he will have a chance to realize the fruits of his labor next season.

It would have been galling to see another coach go in there and take next season's relatively loaded (for Stanford / Pac10) team into the NCAAs.

This was a "do we let this man attempt to finish his job?" scenario and I respect Stanford for answering "yes."

I'll say this - if they are not near the top of the Pac whatever and in the NCAA tourney next season, no one can say Johnny got a raw deal.

He really does need to get it done in recruiting too. While Stanford is nicely set up for a good team next season, the cupboard is looking sorta bare in a year or two unless JD scores some nice hits on the recruiting trail.

-Jason "all Collins/Northwestern posts should go in a new thread" Evans

CameronBornAndBred
03-17-2013, 03:41 PM
How are they okay at basketball? They are the only BCS team to have never made the tournament. Ever.

Side topic - I think Collins leaving for Northwestern is a huge mistake. That program is cursed when it comes to basketball. He may be a legend if he ever gets the team to the tourney (and it will clearly open doors), but you need to have killer recruiting skills, killer in-game skills, and a massive amount of luck for that to happen. It's a tall order, and I'm not sure if any assistant coach can do it.
Has there ever been a head coach that wasn't an assistant first? Isn't being an assistant where you learn all those "killer skills"? Why would any head coach go to a school that "is cursed when it comes to basketball"?

MaxAMillion
03-17-2013, 03:48 PM
Glad to see JD getting another year.

With everyone returning, his team is going to be experienced and relatively loaded (for Stanford / Pac10) next season. I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford went from no-NCAAs to a top 4 seed next season.

I'm not sure about his long-term viability at Stanford (depends on recruiting), but I am sure glad he will have a chance to realize the fruits of his labor next season.

It would have been galling to see another coach go in there and take next season's relatively loaded (for Stanford / Pac10) team into the NCAAs.

This was a "do we let this man attempt to finish his job?" scenario and I respect Stanford for answering "yes."

Well if JD can't make the tournament next year, he should be fired the day after the season ends. No more excuses...

Reilly
03-20-2013, 09:33 PM
Has there ever been a head coach that wasn't an assistant first? ...

I believe Michigan's Beilein has only been a head coach ...

Reilly
03-20-2013, 09:35 PM
Same topic. Different newspaper. Dawkins to return for 6th year. Under the gun. http://www.contracostatimes.com/stanford-cardinal/ci_22802661/stanford-basketball-coach-johnny-dawkins-return-but-onus

5 years: 85-65 (57%), 28-42 conf (40%), 3-5 conf tourney, 2 ncaa tourneys (1-2), 1 nit (2-1), 2 losing seasons
5 years: 94-73 (56%), 39-51 conf (43%), 3-5 conf tourney, 0 ncaa tourneys (0-0), 2 nit (6-0), 2 losing seasons

Do both of the above coaches deserve a 6th year?

One is K after five years at Duke, the other JD.

arnie
03-20-2013, 09:49 PM
5 years: 85-65 (57%), 28-42 conf (40%), 3-5 conf tourney, 2 ncaa tourneys (1-2), 1 nit (2-1), 2 losing seasons
5 years: 94-73 (56%), 39-51 conf (43%), 3-5 conf tourney, 0 ncaa tourneys (0-0), 2 nit (6-0), 2 losing seasons

Do both of the above coaches deserve a 6th year?

One is K after five years at Duke, the other JD.

I'll take the coach that is trending up with NCAA trips in last two seasons and No. 1 recruiting class 3 years earlier

Des Esseintes
03-21-2013, 02:07 AM
I'll take the coach that is trending up with NCAA trips in last two seasons and No. 1 recruiting class 3 years earlier

Yeah, I wish folks wouldn't make these breezy comparisons. While it's true K had a suboptimal first five years and went on to be one of the greatest coaches of all time, the overwhelming majority of guys with mediocre results through five seasons continue to be mediocre. And as you point out, there were several important signs of progress in K's case that have been thus far absent from Dawkins's. I'd love for him to turn it around, but it does nobody any favors to bust out the old "What if Tom Butters had been as impatient as you people?" routine whenever a Duke guy struggles.

Reilly
03-21-2013, 10:40 AM
More breeziness, as I'm feeling particularly uncharitable, and not in the mood to do anyone any favors:

Per sports-reference.com, Duke SRS 1981-85 (nat'l rank):

10.17 (35/264 - top 13%)
1.20 (114/273 - top 42%)
2.92 (96/274 - top 35%)
11.86 (23/275 - top 8%)
18.38 (4/282 - top 1%)

Per sports-reference.com, Stanford SRS 2009-13 (nat'l rank):

10.58 (49/330 - top 15%)
5.71 (95/334 - top 28%)
6.40 (86/345 - top 25%)
12.64 (33/344 - top 9%)
12.02 (47/347 - top 14%)

Des Esseintes, if you were Stanford's athletic director, would you fire JD this spring?

I would not, and believe the 6th year, with NCAA tournament expectations, is just about right.

I'm not expecting JD to reel off seven Final fours in the next nine years, but I'm also not expecting K, or Boeheim, or Pitino, or Calipari, or Brad Stevens or Shaka Smart, to do that, either. Nor do I think Stanford will go 37-3 next year, given 37-win seasons come about a handful of times for every couple thousand of college b'ball seasons. I was curious how Johnny's first five years, in aggregate, compared to K's first five years, and was a bit surprised to see they had a sort of lockstep nature to them with similar ups and downs, and very comparable aggregate numbers, with the obvious difference being Duke's wonderful breakout fifth year. Folks put a lot of emphasis on making the ncaa's ... Johnny hasn't, but he hasn't had bad teams, and is not that far removed from teams that make the tourney and lose in the first or second round.

-bdbd
03-21-2013, 01:04 PM
Those stats ignore a great deal of context however. JD, who I love too, has struggled a bit on the recruiting trail. At that point in time for K he was having a clear recruiting impact. He had one early year early where he came in SECOND for 5 different top 20 recruits. Guys like Wennington and Mullins. Then with the HS class of 1982 he pulled in a top-5 recruiting class in the nation, with guys like Dawkins, Alarie, Bilas, Henderson, and followed up a year later with a top-flight PG in Amaker. In other words, given the additional info about tremendous success in recruiting at the highest level, it was very easy for the Duke AD to foresee solid development in the program just over the horizon. You can't just solely look at the raw stats on wins and losses, etc. to date, much of which was dependent upon the talent the previous coach left behind. There's a lot more CONTEXT to review.

Now, in JD's favor, some of the context at Stanford is positive too - such as having a lot of experienced players coming back next year, and having lost a lot of close top-100 games this year - but not as clearly promising overall as what Butters was looking at in the early-80's.

That all said, I think that we are all ROOTING for JD to make it well at Stanford, as he is such a class act. TBD. :confused:

Reilly
03-21-2013, 01:17 PM
I agree the W/L stats and SRS ignore a great deal of context. I was not offering them as much more -- if any more -- than a curiosity, and as showing at least enough, in my mind, to justify JD getting a 6th year.

I read this thread before being away for a few days, and folks were wondering if JD would be brought back ... it occurred to me then to compare JD and K's first 5 years -- as I was curious. By the time I got around to it, it had been announced JD would be brought back.

I know we are all rooting for him. My question: if you were the AD, would you have fired him this spring (put aside your warm feelings for him)? I would not have. I thought he had done enough to come back, esp. with what, four leading scorers or something like that returning?

Folks look at making the NCAA as the be-all and end-all, and I guess at the end of the day, it is the defining metric for the power conference teams. JD's been very close, w/ some good teams, and deserved to come back. I'm not saying he will turn into the next K, and I'm not overselling the numbers, just that he's done enough to warrant coming back, which the AD agreed with.

Bay Area Duke Fan
03-23-2013, 02:08 PM
Stanford whipped by Alabama 66-54 in second round of NIT.