PDA

View Full Version : Top coaches: as voted by their peers



JasonEvans
08-21-2013, 02:38 PM
In an effort to fill the off-season, Andy Katz at ESPN went out and asked about 250 Div 1 college basketball coaches some questions. Among the questions: Who is the best coach at X's & O's (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post?id=849)?


Tom Izzo
JohnBeilein
Rick Pitino
Bill Self
Bob McKillop
Stew Morril
Coach K
Billy Donovan
Rick Byrd (Belmont)
Kevin Stallings



It goes on from there. I guess it is sorta notable that our friend down the road in Chapel Hill does not find his way into the Top 25. Then again, I don't think even Carolina fans think Roy is all that great at the strategery side of things.

Katz also asked about the most feared recruiters (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post/_/id/547/goodman-toughest-coaches-to-recruit-against)...


John Capipari
Bill Self
Sean Miller
Rick Pitino
Billy Donovan
Tom Izzo
Coach K
Steve Lavin
Leonard Hamilton
Scott Drew
Roy Williams
Josh Pastner



Finally, he wanted to know about the best recruiting assistant coaches (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post?id=463). Kurtis Townsend of Kansas checked in at #1. Mike Hopkins of Syracuse is #2. Duke was the only school to put two guys in the top 20 with Capel coming in at #7 and Wojo at #17.

I am not sure if Goodman is going to be doing more of his survey results going forward, I hope he does. I would say that his early results would seem to indicate that Kansas has the best overall coaching staff, though Duke, Louisville, Michigan State, and a few other blue bloods are close.

-Jason "interesting to see what other coaches think about this stuff" Evans

OldPhiKap
08-21-2013, 02:52 PM
In an effort to fill the off-season, Andy Katz at ESPN went out and asked about 250 Div 1 college basketball coaches some questions. Among the questions: Who is the best coach at X's & O's (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post?id=849)?


Tom Izzo
JohnBeilein
Rick Pitino
Bill Self
Bob McKillop
Stew Morril
Coach K
Billy Donovan
Rick Byrd (Belmont)
Kevin Stallings



It goes on from there. I guess it is sorta notable that our friend down the road in Chapel Hill does not find his way into the Top 25. Then again, I don't think even Carolina fans think Roy is all that great at the strategery side of things.

Katz also asked about the most feared recruiters (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post/_/id/547/goodman-toughest-coaches-to-recruit-against)...


John Capipari
Bill Self
Sean Miller
Rick Pitino
Billy Donovan
Tom Izzo
Coach K
Steve Lavin
Leonard Hamilton
Scott Drew
Roy Williams
Josh Pastner



Finally, he wanted to know about the best recruiting assistant coaches (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post?id=463). Kurtis Townsend of Kansas checked in at #1. Mike Hopkins of Syracuse is #2. Duke was the only school to put two guys in the top 20 with Capel coming in at #7 and Wojo at #17.

I am not sure if Goodman is going to be doing more of his survey results going forward, I hope he does. I would say that his early results would seem to indicate that Kansas has the best overall coaching staff, though Duke, Louisville, Michigan State, and a few other blue bloods are close.

-Jason "interesting to see what other coaches think about this stuff" Evans

Nice props for Bob McKillop, who could be a star coach at a major D-1 and has had a great track record.

flyingdutchdevil
08-21-2013, 03:01 PM
Nice props for Bob McKillop, who could be a star coach at a major D-1 and has had a great track record.

Unfortunately, he's 63. Not sure any blue chip program would want to invest in a short term coach.

But I'm sure he's extremely happy where he is. He's done a great job and will continue to make Davidson a force to reckon with in the tourney.

Class of '94
08-21-2013, 03:34 PM
In an effort to fill the off-season, Andy Katz at ESPN went out and asked about 250 Div 1 college basketball coaches some questions. Among the questions: Who is the best coach at X's & O's (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post?id=849)?


Tom Izzo
JohnBeilein
Rick Pitino
Bill Self
Bob McKillop
Stew Morril
Coach K
Billy Donovan
Rick Byrd (Belmont)
Kevin Stallings



It goes on from there. I guess it is sorta notable that our friend down the road in Chapel Hill does not find his way into the Top 25. Then again, I don't think even Carolina fans think Roy is all that great at the strategery side of things.

Katz also asked about the most feared recruiters (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post/_/id/547/goodman-toughest-coaches-to-recruit-against)...


John Capipari
Bill Self
Sean Miller
Rick Pitino
Billy Donovan
Tom Izzo
Coach K
Steve Lavin
Leonard Hamilton
Scott Drew
Roy Williams
Josh Pastner



Finally, he wanted to know about the best recruiting assistant coaches (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jeff-goodman/post?id=463). Kurtis Townsend of Kansas checked in at #1. Mike Hopkins of Syracuse is #2. Duke was the only school to put two guys in the top 20 with Capel coming in at #7 and Wojo at #17.

I am not sure if Goodman is going to be doing more of his survey results going forward, I hope he does. I would say that his early results would seem to indicate that Kansas has the best overall coaching staff, though Duke, Louisville, Michigan State, and a few other blue bloods are close.

-Jason "interesting to see what other coaches think about this stuff" Evans

Interesting that K wasn't considered in higher regards as a recruiter and X's and O's coach considering he is the leader in wins and has 4 NC (the most of any active coach). I'm not saying K should necessarily be No. 1 but I think he should be in the top 3-4 in those related categories considering his accomplishments. Afterall (in terms of X's and O's), he owns Izzo with a 7-1 record against Izzo and he has a winning record against Beilein (and these guys were voted by their peers as the best X's and O's coaches). And if you argue that K had better talent and that is why he has all those wins and a strong winning record against both Izzo and Beilein, then I would contend that this particular argument supports my assertion that K should be ranked higher as a recruiter.

On a side-note, I wonder if the Kansas staff will use this survey as marketing tool for recruits by telling them that Kansas has the best coaching staff in the America as confirmed by their coaching peers (with this survey).

OldPhiKap
08-21-2013, 03:35 PM
Unfortunately, he's 63. Not sure any blue chip program would want to invest in a short term coach.

But I'm sure he's extremely happy where he is. He's done a great job and will continue to make Davidson a force to reckon with in the tourney.

Exactly. Like John Kresse was at the College of Knowledge for so many years.

davekay1971
08-21-2013, 03:35 PM
Unfortunately, he's 63. Not sure any blue chip program would want to invest in a short term coach.

But I'm sure he's extremely happy where he is. He's done a great job and will continue to make Davidson a force to reckon with in the tourney.

After Jim Larranaga's success at Miami, major conference programs might be willing to give a guy like McKillop a shot. Now, you're right that he appears to be very happy at Davidson, and it's unlikely that HE would want to move to a power conference program. But there would be plenty of schools that, if he picked up the phone, would be crazy not to take the call!

Glad to see Coach K in the top 10 on both categories. In a category of Best Psychologist or Best Motivator...I'd think K would be a lock at number 1. It's why our coach is the complete package.

Being all class is just the icing on the cake.

flyingdutchdevil
08-21-2013, 04:06 PM
After Jim Larranaga's success at Miami, major conference programs might be willing to give a guy like McKillop a shot. Now, you're right that he appears to be very happy at Davidson, and it's unlikely that HE would want to move to a power conference program. But there would be plenty of schools that, if he picked up the phone, would be crazy not to take the call!

Glad to see Coach K in the top 10 on both categories. In a category of Best Psychologist or Best Motivator...I'd think K would be a lock at number 1. It's why our coach is the complete package.

Being all class is just the icing on the cake.

Gotta disagree with you. A coach is like a CEO of a Fortune 500 company. While CEOs certainly emerge over the age of 55, companies would rather have a CEO who is young and will last at the company for 10+ years.

A coach like McKillop would be a "bridge" coach, much similar to what P&G is doing right now with AG Lafley is his second stint as CEO. He isn't the long-term solution; just someone to do a good enough job until they can find their "real" replacement (without pissing off the shareholders, or the fans in this case).

Larranaga is a great coach, but Miami isn't blue chip program and I'm sure that Larranaga isn't seen as the long-term solution either. Schools, like companies, absolutely hate having to hire CEO after CEO and coach after coach, respectively (just ask HP).

hurleyfor3
08-21-2013, 04:19 PM
Surprised Roy is that low, and behind K, as a recruiter. (Of course this is what other coaches think, not what Duke fans think.)

azzefkram
08-21-2013, 04:22 PM
K should be ranked higher as a recruiter.

Maybe he's not as "feared" since there are elite recruits that he just can't/won't recruit due to Duke's academic standards. I know there are other outstanding institutions represented on the list but are their academic standards as stringent as Duke's? You can't really fear someone you won't be competing with.

ChillinDuke
08-21-2013, 04:27 PM
Gotta disagree with you. A coach is like a CEO of a Fortune 500 company. While CEOs certainly emerge over the age of 55, companies would rather have a CEO who is young and will last at the company for 10+ years.

A coach like McKillop would be a "bridge" coach, much similar to what P&G is doing right now with AG Lafley is his second stint as CEO. He isn't the long-term solution; just someone to do a good enough job until they can find their "real" replacement (without pissing off the shareholders, or the fans in this case).

Larranaga is a great coach, but Miami isn't blue chip program and I'm sure that Larranaga isn't seen as the long-term solution either. Schools, like companies, absolutely hate having to hire CEO after CEO and coach after coach, respectively (just ask HP).

I agree with your point, but there are plenty of non-blue chip but high major programs that would be crazy not to consider McKillop if even for only one recruiting cycle.

I think Larranaga's situation at Miami is a good parallel in this particular case.

Doubt he's going anywhere though. Props to Bob for his ranking in this peer survey.

- Chillin

Des Esseintes
08-21-2013, 05:02 PM
Surprised Roy is that low, and behind K, as a recruiter. (Of course this is what other coaches think, not what Duke fans think.)

I think that points to the fact that even coaches are susceptible to a recency effect in their own field. If this poll had been conducted two years ago, with UNC's two championships and Harrison Barnes's commitment closer in the rearview, you'd likely see Roy pretty high up the recruiting ranks.

Same thing with Self, in the other direction. For a long time, Kansas fans complained about a dearth of McDonald's AAs coming to Lawrence. (Self was still winning like crazy with sub-50 recruits, of course.) Now he hauls in Wiggins, the Black post-grad, and a few others, and he's an unstoppable recruiter.

rsvman
08-21-2013, 05:09 PM
Coach K definitely out "X'd and O'd" Izzo in the tournament in March. He changed up the usual game plan completely and Izzo wasn't prepared for it.

I think it is generally true that Izzo is a heck of an X's and O's coach, but sometimes Coach K can really surprise people.

flyingdutchdevil
08-21-2013, 05:12 PM
Coach K definitely out "X'd and O'd" Izzo in the tournament in March. He changed up the usual game plan completely and Izzo wasn't prepared for it.

I think it is generally true that Izzo is a heck of an X's and O's coach, but sometimes Coach K can really surprise people.

So can Pitino :(

Dev11
08-21-2013, 05:41 PM
Gotta disagree with you. A coach is like a CEO of a Fortune 500 company. While CEOs certainly emerge over the age of 55, companies would rather have a CEO who is young and will last at the company for 10+ years.

A coach like McKillop would be a "bridge" coach, much similar to what P&G is doing right now with AG Lafley is his second stint as CEO. He isn't the long-term solution; just someone to do a good enough job until they can find their "real" replacement (without pissing off the shareholders, or the fans in this case).

Larranaga is a great coach, but Miami isn't blue chip program and I'm sure that Larranaga isn't seen as the long-term solution either. Schools, like companies, absolutely hate having to hire CEO after CEO and coach after coach, respectively (just ask HP).

I think I disagree here, in that most programs actually do not think ten years down the road, particularly knowing how often coaches move around. Any school can lose a good coach to a better program, and the best programs lose coaches to the NBA (see Pitino at Kentucky). I think schools aim more for a 5 year range, which tells recruits, hey, this coach will be here to see you graduate.

rsvman
08-21-2013, 06:11 PM
So can Pitino :(

True dat. Sadly.


I wonder where Coach K was on Izzo's ballot? Or on Roy's? It would be interesting to see whether coaches in each league rated the opposing coaches in their conference higher than the coaches in other conferences did. In other words, for example, was Self rated higher by coaches who play against his teams on a week-to-week basis than he was by coaches in other conferences?

I wonder where Majerus and Al McGuire would have ended up on a list like this if they were still alive and coaching? I'd wager that Majerus would be in the top three of the X's and O's list.

OldPhiKap
08-21-2013, 07:10 PM
True dat. Sadly.


I wonder where Coach K was on Izzo's ballot? Or on Roy's? It would be interesting to see whether coaches in each league rated the opposing coaches in their conference higher than the coaches in other conferences did. In other words, for example, was Self rated higher by coaches who play against his teams on a week-to-week basis than he was by coaches in other conferences?

I wonder where Majerus and Al McGuire would have ended up on a list like this if they were still alive and coaching? I'd wager that Majerus would be in the top three of the X's and O's list.

Or Jim Calhoun. Say what you want, he drew up great game plans against a few extremely good Duke teams. (After getting beat by the "special" play, at least).

Olympic Fan
08-21-2013, 07:47 PM
Regarding Bob McKillop ... he's had several chances to leave Davidson for a BCS-type school, but he's always pursued to pursue such opportunities. Now, he's never been offered by an elite school -- a Duke or a Kentucky or a UNC -- but he has been contacted about numerous struggling programs.

I don't think his age is as much an issue as his attitude ... he's not going to, say, Wake Forest, if that job opens up this spring -- even if the school wanted him,

duke79
08-22-2013, 03:23 PM
I'm amazed Coach K was not ranked higher in these polls, given his remarkable long-term record. I wonder if, perhaps, there is a bit of professional jealousy and Duke hatred at work here? Just speculating.

superdave
08-22-2013, 05:18 PM
I'm amazed Coach K was not ranked higher in these polls, given his remarkable long-term record. I wonder if, perhaps, there is a bit of professional jealousy and Duke hatred at work here? Just speculating.

Coach K is generally regarded as a great motivator, with his teams rarely ever performing below expectations. If that were a category, I'd expect him to be #1.

As far as recruiting, there was a period in the 2000s where Duke had some struggles on the recruiting trail....or appeared to...and it translated into some early NCAA exits. People still bring that up on occassion. Between the JJ-Shelden-Shav class in 2002 and the Scheyer-Henderson-Zoubs-LT class in 2006, Duke got two elite recruits - Livingston and Humphries - who never showed up on campus and two more - Deng and McRoberts - who played a combined 3 seasons. This resulted in exits in the Sweet 16 in 2005 and 2006, a first round exit in 2007 and second round exit in 2008.

Get a second year out of Deng, or one season out of Livingston, or maybe a better teammate in McRoberts and Coach K's recruiting record might be remembered a little differently. Of course, if he has a big 2014 class like we're all hoping for, this list will look drastically different next year.

Bob Green
08-22-2013, 06:00 PM
Interesting that K wasn't considered in higher regards as a recruiter and X's and O's coach considering he is the leader in wins and has 4 NC (the most of any active coach).


Coach K is generally regarded as a great motivator, with his teams rarely ever performing below expectations. If that were a category, I'd expect him to be #1.

Alongside motivator, I would expect Coach K to be voted #1 if the category was Team Preparedness.

Edouble
08-23-2013, 01:18 AM
Coach K is generally regarded as a great motivator, with his teams rarely ever performing below expectations. If that were a category, I'd expect him to be #1.

As far as recruiting, there was a period in the 2000s where Duke had some struggles on the recruiting trail....or appeared to...and it translated into some early NCAA exits. People still bring that up on occassion. Between the JJ-Shelden-Shav class in 2002 and the Scheyer-Henderson-Zoubs-LT class in 2006, Duke got two elite recruits - Livingston and Humphries - who never showed up on campus and two more - Deng and McRoberts - who played a combined 3 seasons. This resulted in exits in the Sweet 16 in 2005 and 2006, a first round exit in 2007 and second round exit in 2008.

Get a second year out of Deng, or one season out of Livingston, or maybe a better teammate in McRoberts and Coach K's recruiting record might be remembered a little differently. Of course, if he has a big 2014 class like we're all hoping for, this list will look drastically different next year.

Results on the court notwithstanding, McRoberts was still an elite recruit. I would think that his ill demeanor in the locker room would affect Coach K's reputation as a motivator, not as a recruiter. Deng was responsible in large part for getting us to a Final Four. I would think that some of the recruiting misses during the period that you mention (Patterson, Monroe, Boynton), not the early exits, would have more effect on Coach K's reputation.

johnb
08-23-2013, 11:36 AM
Fear involves a perceived threat and a pulling back from that threat.

When the coaches at Michigan State and Butler and UCLA see the Duke coaches enter the gym of a high school in Ottawa, Kansas, for example, do they pull back from us? No. They're flattered to be sitting alongside Coach K, hoping some of his genius will rub off on them. Of course, they know he can typically only sign 2 or 3 of the perhaps 8 kids/year who qualify to play for Duke (top 30 or 40 recruit also among the top 10 or 15 academically among the top 100), but, beyond the pragmatics, they know they have a rare opportunity. When Justin Gatlin lines up against Usain Bolt, he hopes to win, would never admit fear, and is--though a competitive athlete would never admit it--flattered that he gets to line up with the greatest of all time.

That contrasts with, say, sitting next to the Kentucky coach, whose name I dare not speak, or the Carolina coach, dag nab it. I wouldn't want to sit next to them. I'd fear all sorts of character contagion.

As for the X's and O's, Coach K sees our young men as three dimensional human beings who are being taught to maximize their potential. K can draw up plays, of course, just as Picasso and Michelangelo could undoubtedly draw a stick figure, but K won't win at the X/O game because he sees beyond it, lives beyond it, and expects his players to independently and creatively adapt to the situation as they do to conflicts and difficulties in their lives: with bravery and daring and honor.

Winning a popularity contest related to fear or the chalkboard would be an affront, would belittle K's legacy as a leader and human being. While the other coaches no doubt felt obliged to include him among the top coaches or the entire voting process would be viewed as a charade, his even being part of such an event is like asking, "Which American wore the tallest hat in 1860?" and being upset that Abe Lincoln only finished in the top 10.

Dev11
08-23-2013, 11:54 AM
Fear involves a perceived threat and a pulling back from that threat.

When the coaches at Michigan State and Butler and UCLA see the Duke coaches enter the gym of a high school in Ottawa, Kansas, for example, do they pull back from us? No. They're flattered to be sitting alongside Coach K, hoping some of his genius will rub off on them. Of course, they know he can typically only sign 2 or 3 of the perhaps 8 kids/year who qualify to play for Duke (top 30 or 40 recruit also among the top 10 or 15 academically among the top 100), but, beyond the pragmatics, they know they have a rare opportunity. When Justin Gatlin lines up against Usain Bolt, he hopes to win, would never admit fear, and is--though a competitive athlete would never admit it--flattered that he gets to line up with the greatest of all time.

That contrasts with, say, sitting next to the Kentucky coach, whose name I dare not speak, or the Carolina coach, dag nab it. I wouldn't want to sit next to them. I'd fear all sorts of character contagion.

As for the X's and O's, Coach K sees our young men as three dimensional human beings who are being taught to maximize their potential. K can draw up plays, of course, just as Picasso and Michelangelo could undoubtedly draw a stick figure, but K won't win at the X/O game because he sees beyond it, lives beyond it, and expects his players to independently and creatively adapt to the situation as they do to conflicts and difficulties in their lives: with bravery and daring and honor.

Winning a popularity contest related to fear or the chalkboard would be an affront, would belittle K's legacy as a leader and human being. While the other coaches no doubt felt obliged to include him among the top coaches or the entire voting process would be viewed as a charade, his even being part of such an event is like asking, "Which American wore the tallest hat in 1860?" and being upset that Abe Lincoln only finished in the top 10.

You are drowning yourself in Coach K Kool-Aid, my friend.

COYS
08-23-2013, 01:19 PM
Coach K is generally regarded as a great motivator, with his teams rarely ever performing below expectations. If that were a category, I'd expect him to be #1.

As far as recruiting, there was a period in the 2000s where Duke had some struggles on the recruiting trail....or appeared to...and it translated into some early NCAA exits. People still bring that up on occassion. Between the JJ-Shelden-Shav class in 2002 and the Scheyer-Henderson-Zoubs-LT class in 2006, Duke got two elite recruits - Livingston and Humphries - who never showed up on campus and two more - Deng and McRoberts - who played a combined 3 seasons. This resulted in exits in the Sweet 16 in 2005 and 2006, a first round exit in 2007 and second round exit in 2008.

Get a second year out of Deng, or one season out of Livingston, or maybe a better teammate in McRoberts and Coach K's recruiting record might be remembered a little differently. Of course, if he has a big 2014 class like we're all hoping for, this list will look drastically different next year.

Of course, he still won a title with the 2006 group.

I actually think K suffers more from name fatigue than anything else. This is even true with portions of Duke's fan base. Everyone has heard for years now that he is the best. He is like an NBA prospect who could go number 1 in the draft who elects to come back to college year after year. He can only go down. Miss on a recruit? Well, maybe he wasn't as good as we thought. Fail to make the Final Four? Well, I guess he can't really coach X's and O's as well as some others.

The only thing K can do to raise his profile would be to win the title every year. That is, of course, completely unrealistic.

Lar77
08-23-2013, 02:18 PM
Of course, he still won a title with the 2006 group.

I actually think K suffers more from name fatigue than anything else. This is even true with portions of Duke's fan base. Everyone has heard for years now that he is the best. He is like an NBA prospect who could go number 1 in the draft who elects to come back to college year after year. He can only go down. Miss on a recruit? Well, maybe he wasn't as good as we thought. Fail to make the Final Four? Well, I guess he can't really coach X's and O's as well as some others.

The only thing K can do to raise his profile would be to win the title every year. That is, of course, completely unrealistic.

Unrealistic? On this Board? Never!

Seriously, excellent observation. Coach K has succeeded for so long and under so many different circumstances that there is an expectation that he will coach every team to a title, win every game, and get every recruit and do it while maintaining high standards for his team's academic success and reputation.

When that doesn't happen (regardless of reality), it is viewed as a failure.

Coach K is viewed by most as an all-time great coach in a class with Wooden, Knight, and Smith of those in the past 50 years. The past 5 years have not changed from that legacy (1 National Title, 154 wins against just 30 losses, 3 ACC titles, seeded 1 or 2 in all 5 NCAA tournaments, etc., etc. and so on). I guess each of those 30 losses was due to his shortcomings as an "X and O" coach and since he's only had 6 guys drafted in the first round over that time, he can't recruit.:D

Billy Dat
08-23-2013, 03:45 PM
K has no current peer when you step way back and consider the totality of his career, and, the fact is, coaching is but a piece of it.

Obviously, his coaching accomplishments are the foundation of everything he does, and he's got the best resume of any active coach, and its not even close. Granted, not everyone got a chance to coach the Senior Men's National Team but he earned that appointment.

He also is on the list of top coaches who raise money for charity, write self-help/business books, etc. He's served in executive positions in the NABC and other like organizations. But, most of the names on the X and O and recruiting list would also appear on those lists.

I think where he really has no peer is his combination of intelligence, vision and ability to execute that vision on a grand scale.

-He understands the power of a brand, and the standards that define a brand, and how to grow a power of a brand better than any other college program CEO. It is rare, when any pundit or coach, whether they like us or not, is offering up a general list of teams, that Duke isn't one of the names mentioned. "You can say what you want about playing Robert Morris in November, but is the kid going to show up against Duke in March?" "When your competing with the Kentuckys and Dukes of the world..." That's brand, and K built that brand.
-He raised the money to endow every men's basketball scholarship to ensure the sustainability of the program beyond his lifetime. The endowment may even stretch past the scholarships as this point. He got the K Center built, the team travels beyond first class thanks to the money he's raised, etc.
-He partnered with Jerry Colangelo to define and change the entire culture of USA Basketball, not just run practice, game plan, and make substitutions
-He is the rare coach, at any level of any sport, who is routinely sought out for consult by CEOs, politicians and thinkers of all kinds

All of the above require long term thinking, and one could argue that the modern coach isn't given enough of a chance to think beyond trying to make the next NCAA tournament. Maybe there will never be another K because society and the modern sports environment makes it nearly impossible.

But, in all seriousness, how many other college coaches combine the smarts, toughness, savvy, personality to where you could see them doing something big outside of basketball? And, when I say big, I guess its in the eye of the beholder, but be the CEO of a billion dollar company? Hold a key position in a presidential administration? Be the president of the University, not just its basketball coach? Maybe I am biased, but I think that's the kind of guy K is, and I think most other college basketball coaches, including most of the names on those lists, are just hugely accomplished and successful gym rats.

cf-62
08-23-2013, 03:56 PM
Coach K definitely out "X'd and O'd" Izzo in the tournament in March. He changed up the usual game plan completely and Izzo wasn't prepared for it.

I think it is generally true that Izzo is a heck of an X's and O's coach, but sometimes Coach K can really surprise people.

WHEN Coach K does X's and O's, he is brilliant. He inherited Knight's abilities to completely break down opponents and destroy them with strategies designed to remove the other teams' strengths.

The 80s and early 90s were full of those kinds of games (especially against Carolina).

He took away Chris Washburn. He took away J.R. Reid (most of the time). He shut down David Rivers, and Mark Macon. He is the only coach I can think of that figured out Jon Chaney's zone. And he didn't just survive it. The last two times we played Temple with that 1-3-1, he destroyed it.

THEN we became a "program" with a "system" - and those things outshone the X's and O's. It was bout whether Duke's wing defenders could stop the ball. It was whether the shooters were going to hit their shots.

BTW, I don't think K gets enough credit for drive/kick/3 offense being about X's and O's.

But other than that, he doesn't really break down offenses as much as focus on our system. Guess who else used to preach about preparing yourselves, not "for" the other team - El Deano.

It's not necessarily bad that we've moved beyond the "new plan every game," but it means that K doesn't do a lot of X/O design anymore.

But MAN does it show when he does -- case 1) Michigan State last year, which others have mentioned.

But his greatest X/O achievement was the complete demolishment of #1 UNC after losing Boozer 3 days before. That was followed up by a second whuppin' in the ACC Finals with a whole different look on O AND On D.

So while I believe he is actually the BEST X/O coach, he just doesn't use it that much. 7 seems about right for that reason.

sagegrouse
08-23-2013, 04:03 PM
But, in all seriousness, how many other college coaches combine the smarts, toughness, savvy, personality to where you could see them doing something big outside of basketball? And, when I say big, I guess its in the eye of the beholder, but be the CEO of a billion dollar company? Hold a key position in a presidential administration? Be the president of the University, not just its basketball coach? Maybe I am biased, but I think that's the kind of guy K is, and I think most other college basketball coaches, including most of the names on those lists, are just hugely accomplished and successful gym rats.

While some will criticize what you say as hagiography (ooohh!), there is a lot of truth to it. When the job was rebuild a sagging USA basketball program, K was the logical choice, and he did a wonderful job of creating a system, talking the best players into playing, and then winning world and olympic championships.

K would be an outstanding CEO of a large corporation (way beyond $1B), where operational excellence and the motivation of the employee teams were of paramount importance. K is very, very smart (which I am reluctant to say about anybody). Presidential Administration? He could easily be Secretary of the Army. University President? Not so much, unless the U. is having the kind of crisis that brought in Gov. Sanford to Duke. Academic institutions typically want academics or former academics as leaders. State universities sometimes turn to nonacademics as system presidents, as California just did with janet Napolitano. But why would he take the pay cut?

sagegrouse

duke79
08-23-2013, 04:16 PM
K has no current peer when you step way back and consider the totality of his career, and, the fact is, coaching is but a piece of it.

Obviously, his coaching accomplishments are the foundation of everything he does, and he's got the best resume of any active coach, and its not even close. Granted, not everyone got a chance to coach the Senior Men's National Team but he earned that appointment.

He also is on the list of top coaches who raise money for charity, write self-help/business books, etc. He's served in executive positions in the NABC and other like organizations. But, most of the names on the X and O and recruiting list would also appear on those lists.

I think where he really has no peer is his combination of intelligence, vision and ability to execute that vision on a grand scale.

-He understands the power of a brand, and the standards that define a brand, and how to grow a power of a brand better than any other college program CEO. It is rare, when any pundit or coach, whether they like us or not, is offering up a general list of teams, that Duke isn't one of the names mentioned. "You can say what you want about playing Robert Morris in November, but is the kid going to show up against Duke in March?" "When your competing with the Kentuckys and Dukes of the world..." That's brand, and K built that brand.
-He raised the money to endow every men's basketball scholarship to ensure the sustainability of the program beyond his lifetime. The endowment may even stretch past the scholarships as this point. He got the K Center built, the team travels beyond first class thanks to the money he's raised, etc.
-He partnered with Jerry Colangelo to define and change the entire culture of USA Basketball, not just run practice, game plan, and make substitutions
-He is the rare coach, at any level of any sport, who is routinely sought out for consult by CEOs, politicians and thinkers of all kinds

All of the above require long term thinking, and one could argue that the modern coach isn't given enough of a chance to think beyond trying to make the next NCAA tournament. Maybe there will never be another K because society and the modern sports environment makes it nearly impossible.

But, in all seriousness, how many other college coaches combine the smarts, toughness, savvy, personality to where you could see them doing something big outside of basketball? And, when I say big, I guess its in the eye of the beholder, but be the CEO of a billion dollar company? Hold a key position in a presidential administration? Be the president of the University, not just its basketball coach? Maybe I am biased, but I think that's the kind of guy K is, and I think most other college basketball coaches, including most of the names on those lists, are just hugely accomplished and successful gym rats.

Well said and, IMHO, very true. I think when you look at the totality of his coaching abilities (X's and O's), recruiting prowess, personal qualities, motivational skills, smarts, etc., he is truly in a league by himself in the college basketball world and probably in all of college sports and perhaps in all of sports, worldwide. He is one the few coaches in any sport and at any level that you could realistically see succeeding in almost any professional endeavor, whether in the business world, politics, academia, etc.

JasonEvans
08-26-2013, 10:38 AM
One thing I would add is that (and this is true of all polls of "the best") there is a major "recency effect" going on here. "What have you done for me lately" becomes a dominant theme. So, Louisville (#3) and Michigan (#2) may have gotten an X and O boost from being in the national championship game just last season. Kansas (#2 in recruiting) signed the mega-hyped #1 player in the class only a few months ago so that likely boosted Kansas' ranking in the recruiting charts.

That is not to say that the rankings are flawed or skewed by these success stories. It is merely to point out that among the very top teams in these categories, one season of success or one where you come up just a little short of your goals a couple times can really tilt things. I bet Louisville, for example, would have been quite significantly lower on these lists in 2011, before they made back-to-back Final Fours. Do we really think that Rick Pitino, who has been a coach in college hoops for a loooong time, is a significantly better X and O coach today than he was in 2011? I doubt it, but I bet this same poll in 2011 would have barely had him in the Top Ten.

-Jason "just stating the obvious... I am good at that" Evans

dukenilnil
08-27-2013, 01:45 PM
WHEN Coach K does X's and O's, he is brilliant. He inherited Knight's abilities to completely break down opponents and destroy them with strategies designed to remove the other teams' strengths.

The 80s and early 90s were full of those kinds of games (especially against Carolina).

He took away Chris Washburn. He took away J.R. Reid (most of the time). He shut down David Rivers, and Mark Macon. He is the only coach I can think of that figured out Jon Chaney's zone. And he didn't just survive it. The last two times we played Temple with that 1-3-1, he destroyed it.

THEN we became a "program" with a "system" - and those things outshone the X's and O's. It was bout whether Duke's wing defenders could stop the ball. It was whether the shooters were going to hit their shots.

BTW, I don't think K gets enough credit for drive/kick/3 offense being about X's and O's.

But other than that, he doesn't really break down offenses as much as focus on our system. Guess who else used to preach about preparing yourselves, not "for" the other team - El Deano.

It's not necessarily bad that we've moved beyond the "new plan every game," but it means that K doesn't do a lot of X/O design anymore.

But MAN does it show when he does -- case 1) Michigan State last year, which others have mentioned.

But his greatest X/O achievement was the complete demolishment of #1 UNC after losing Boozer 3 days before. That was followed up by a second whuppin' in the ACC Finals with a whole different look on O AND On D.

So while I believe he is actually the BEST X/O coach, he just doesn't use it that much. 7 seems about right for that reason.

I second this analysis. I think there is a perception that Izzo gets more out of his players come tourney time than any other coach, thus he is a great X and O guy. I think Izzo is a great coach, but the flip side of the coin to overachieving in the tourney is that Mich. State generally underachieves in the regular season. Often, they are ranked in the top 10 pre-season, only to have some big ups and down and be ranked lower come tourney time where they then play up to their true potential and "overachieve." I don't know whether the inconsistent regular season play and putting it together for tourney time shows great X and O (instilling concepts throughout the season and finally gelling at the end) or maybe some motivation issues in the regular season or something else entirely.

On the other hand, Duke teams recently have one of the strongest regular seasons and get a 1 or 2 seed and then are viewed as under-performing (aka being out coached on X and O) come tourney time. I am not sure that perception is accurate either.
If memory serves, K in the 80s and early 90s was more like Izzo now - a lot of teams with 3, 4, 5, 6 ACC losses and up and down performances to then "overachieving" in the tourney, especially when compared to Dean Smith's teams that generally had more McD AA and highly ranked recruits.

CDu
08-27-2013, 02:09 PM
Interesting that K wasn't considered in higher regards as a recruiter and X's and O's coach considering he is the leader in wins and has 4 NC (the most of any active coach). I'm not saying K should necessarily be No. 1 but I think he should be in the top 3-4 in those related categories considering his accomplishments. Afterall (in terms of X's and O's), he owns Izzo with a 7-1 record against Izzo and he has a winning record against Beilein (and these guys were voted by their peers as the best X's and O's coaches). And if you argue that K had better talent and that is why he has all those wins and a strong winning record against both Izzo and Beilein, then I would contend that this particular argument supports my assertion that K should be ranked higher as a recruiter.

One shouldn't use head-to-head records as simply a reflection of X's and O's skills. Head-to-head record is a combination of X's and O's and recruiting.

As for your last sentence, notice that Coach K is ranked considerably higher than Beilein and Izzo in terms of recruiting. One could surmise that Coach K's edge in recruiting offsets his lack of edge in X's and O's against Izzo and Beilein, which results in the better record.

Note that only Pitino is ranked higher on both lists. Now, I won't quibble with Pitino being ahead of Coach K in X's and O's. Pitino is certainly a good X's and O's guy, and ultimately this is a subjective evaluation anyway. But I do disagree with Pitino being considered the better recruiter.

I'd probably put Coach K a little higher up on the recruiting list. I don't think the X's and O's list is necessarily too far off... at least not far enough to quibble about.

TexHawk
08-27-2013, 02:51 PM
I second this analysis. I think there is a perception that Izzo gets more out of his players come tourney time than any other coach, thus he is a great X and O guy. I think Izzo is a great coach, but the flip side of the coin to overachieving in the tourney is that Mich. State generally underachieves in the regular season. Often, they are ranked in the top 10 pre-season, only to have some big ups and down and be ranked lower come tourney time where they then play up to their true potential and "overachieve." I don't know whether the inconsistent regular season play and putting it together for tourney time shows great X and O (instilling concepts throughout the season and finally gelling at the end) or maybe some motivation issues in the regular season or something else entirely.

On the other hand, Duke teams recently have one of the strongest regular seasons and get a 1 or 2 seed and then are viewed as under-performing (aka being out coached on X and O) come tourney time. I am not sure that perception is accurate either.
If memory serves, K in the 80s and early 90s was more like Izzo now - a lot of teams with 3, 4, 5, 6 ACC losses and up and down performances to then "overachieving" in the tourney, especially when compared to Dean Smith's teams that generally had more McD AA and highly ranked recruits.

Not to derail, but I do not understand the love and perception of Izzo, at all. It's everywhere. The media loves him. Other coaches love him. As far as I can tell, every non-Michigan fanbase loves him (or at least, few "hate" him). KU fans adore Izzo, probably because he's one of the few coaches with a winning record against Bill Self (I think he's 3-1 since Self got to KU).

--The media loves repeating the "every 4 year player for Izzo has been to a Final Four", like it's an astonishing accomplishment. Bill Self (at KU) fits the same bill, but he has only been to two F4s in 10 years, which is ok but not earth-shattering. In the times of early entry, that's not a fantastic metric to measure a coach.
--Izzo got a ton of love for his back-to-back F4s in '09/'10, but nobody brings up MSU's absolute faceplant in '11 with the same players PLUS Appling/Payne that fell all the way to 19-15 and a 1st round tournament loss.
--Speaking of 1st round tourney losses, he has 5 of them. But since he sprinkled in a F4 in the middle of those in 2005, it *never* gets mentioned. K, Self, Calipari, Roy would be destroyed for the same.
--And don't get me started on X's and O's. I have never watched an MSU game thinking he is a brilliant tactician. His strong suit is getting his players to play harder than yours, for every crucial possession. I think he does an ok job with identifying advantageous matchups, but not out-of-this-world.

Full disclosure: I married into a Spartan family, so I watch way more MSU games than I would like.

The Gordog
08-27-2013, 03:12 PM
One shouldn't use head-to-head records as simply a reflection of X's and O's skills. Head-to-head record is a combination of X's and O's and recruiting.

As for your last sentence, notice that Coach K is ranked considerably higher than Beilein and Izzo in terms of recruiting. One could surmise that Coach K's edge in recruiting offsets his lack of edge in X's and O's against Izzo and Beilein, which results in the better record.

Note that only Pitino is ranked higher on both lists. Now, I won't quibble with Pitino being ahead of Coach K in X's and O's. Pitino is certainly a good X's and O's guy, and ultimately this is a subjective evaluation anyway. But I do disagree with Pitino being considered the better recruiter.

I'd probably put Coach K a little higher up on the recruiting list. I don't think the X's and O's list is necessarily too far off... at least not far enough to quibble about.

Actually, Izzo and Self are as well.

Troublemaker
08-27-2013, 03:48 PM
I wonder where Coach K was on Izzo's ballot?

Likely #1. Press conferences have always been a lovefest between those two guys whenever Duke and MSU play each other. Izzo has consistently said that he models his program after Duke's. Just one example article showing Izzo's respect for Coach K: http://www.mlive.com/spartans/index.ssf/2013/08/tom_izzo_mike_krzyzewski_the_b.html

CDu
08-27-2013, 03:58 PM
Actually, Izzo and Self are as well.

Doh! You're right. Not sure how I missed that. I'd disagree for sure on Izzo in terms of recruiting. Unless the argument is that MSU is a harder place to recruit to than Duke. But that's a tenuous argument to explain the vast disparity in recruiting wins between Izzo and Coach K.

I'd definitely put Coach K ahead of Izzo in recruiting, and I wouldn't even call it very close.

OldPhiKap
08-27-2013, 04:34 PM
Not to derail, but I do not understand the love and perception of Izzo, at all. It's everywhere. The media loves him. Other coaches love him. As far as I can tell, every non-Michigan fanbase loves him (or at least, few "hate" him). KU fans adore Izzo, probably because he's one of the few coaches with a winning record against Bill Self (I think he's 3-1 since Self got to KU).

--The media loves repeating the "every 4 year player for Izzo has been to a Final Four", like it's an astonishing accomplishment. Bill Self (at KU) fits the same bill, but he has only been to two F4s in 10 years, which is ok but not earth-shattering. In the times of early entry, that's not a fantastic metric to measure a coach.
--Izzo got a ton of love for his back-to-back F4s in '09/'10, but nobody brings up MSU's absolute faceplant in '11 with the same players PLUS Appling/Payne that fell all the way to 19-15 and a 1st round tournament loss.
--Speaking of 1st round tourney losses, he has 5 of them. But since he sprinkled in a F4 in the middle of those in 2005, it *never* gets mentioned. K, Self, Calipari, Roy would be destroyed for the same.
--And don't get me started on X's and O's. I have never watched an MSU game thinking he is a brilliant tactician. His strong suit is getting his players to play harder than yours, for every crucial possession. I think he does an ok job with identifying advantageous matchups, but not out-of-this-world.

Full disclosure: I married into a Spartan family, so I watch way more MSU games than I would like.

Food for thought, per Wikipedia:

"Under Izzo, the Michigan State program has been one of the most successful in the country. Izzo has led the Spartans to the 2000 NCAA Division I National Championship, the 2009 NCAA Division I National Championship Game, six Final Fours, and seven Big Ten Championships in his first 17 years at Michigan State. The coach with the most wins in school history, Izzo's teams have been invited to the past 16 consecutive NCAA tournaments, in addition to setting the Big Ten record for the longest home winning streak. These accomplishments led analyst Andy Katz at ESPN to deem Michigan State the top college basketball program for the decade from 1998 to 2007."

Personally, I like Izzo because his teams play tough defense and they are always a tough out. I can see where some don't like him and that doesn't really bug me either. But that kind of performance over a decade puts him in a small club.

Is he better than Bill Self? Who knows. But both are pretty darn elite I think.

TexHawk
08-27-2013, 04:45 PM
Food for thought, per Wikipedia:

"Under Izzo, the Michigan State program has been one of the most successful in the country. Izzo has led the Spartans to the 2000 NCAA Division I National Championship, the 2009 NCAA Division I National Championship Game, six Final Fours, and seven Big Ten Championships in his first 17 years at Michigan State. The coach with the most wins in school history, Izzo's teams have been invited to the past 16 consecutive NCAA tournaments, in addition to setting the Big Ten record for the longest home winning streak. These accomplishments led analyst Andy Katz at ESPN to deem Michigan State the top college basketball program for the decade from 1998 to 2007."

Personally, I like Izzo because his teams play tough defense and they are always a tough out. I can see where some don't like him and that doesn't really bug me either. But that kind of performance over a decade puts him in a small club.

Is he better than Bill Self? Who knows. But both are pretty darn elite I think.

Didn't mean to get into a Bill Self vs. Izzo argument. More of a "I can't believe nobody criticizes him" thing. He is absolutely elite, he deserves to be mentioned with the best. But he's made of teflon.

(Izzo was rumored to be interested in the KU job after Roy left. I would've been fine with that.)

OldPhiKap
08-27-2013, 04:52 PM
Didn't mean to get into a Bill Self vs. Izzo argument. More of a "I can't believe nobody criticizes him" thing. He is absolutely elite, he deserves to be mentioned with the best. But he's made of teflon.

(Izzo was rumored to be interested in the KU job after Roy left. I would've been fine with that.)

I do agree with the above. I think he must work the media pretty well, kinda reminds me of a lite Valvano without the baggage (personality-wise, not innovation-wise).

flyingdutchdevil
08-27-2013, 05:42 PM
I do agree with the above. I think he must work the media pretty well, kinda reminds me of a lite Valvano without the baggage (personality-wise, not innovation-wise).

Self gets the same treatment. And I don't think it has much to do with the coach but rather a a) long, long history of success and b) the type of program.

a) Self has been truly elite since 2001 (his first year at the Illini program). Izzo has been truly elite since 1999. Given, these are, on average, 12-13 years of "elit-itute". Coach K has been elite for double that period (since the mid-1980s).

b) Kansas and Michigan State are massive public schools with huge, local fan bases. Their alumni do not have the geographic footprint that Duke has and aren't in the news as frequently as Duke (Duke's research spend in 2009 was $439 million. Kansas was $73 million and MSU was $164). Duke is... well, one of the top 5 hated schools in the country.

Ironically, longevity + sustained success = adoration and scrutiny. Add a private institution with muscles to flex, and the scrutiny can often trump the adoration.

JasonEvans
08-27-2013, 11:01 PM
Rather than Izzo vs Self vs K vs whoever, I think it could be instructive to ask, "would the fanbase look around and say they wanted any other coach than the guy in the job right now?"

Clearly, there is no coach in the country that Duke fans would prefer in the job to K.
I would bet that Michigan St and Kansas feel exactly the same way about Izzo and Self. Syracuse, Louisville, and UNC also feel that way. Kentucky fans love Calipari, though some Wildcat fans I have spoken to say they wish he did it in a bit less sleazy way. I am not sure there are all that many others.

I am not saying other coaches are on the hot seat, but I bet if you asked Michigan if they would take Self or K or if you asked Georgetown if they would rather have Izzo, the answer would be yes.

-Jason "not a measure of 'are you happy with your coach' but a measure of 'is there ANY COACH out there you would rather have?'" Evans

-bdbd
08-28-2013, 02:02 AM
Maybe he's not as "feared" since there are elite recruits that he just can't/won't recruit due to Duke's academic standards. I know there are other outstanding institutions represented on the list but are their academic standards as stringent as Duke's? You can't really fear someone you won't be competing with.

While I might have worded it to sound a little less "haughty," I generally agree with the focus on the word "feared." For whatever reason - not just academic superiority - Duke tends to go after a very specific type of recruit. That is a type of recruit that a majority of these polled coaches probably won't generally target anyway. Also, the word "feared," to me, conjurs up thoughts in a coach of "I'm looking really good with recruit X. So, who am I most affraid will swoop in and try to steal him??" That is not, generally, Duke's (and K's) M.O. Whereas a guy like Calimari WOULD scare me as that coach, b/c he wouldn't let a little thing like a commitment to another school prevent him from swooping in late on a kid, offering inducements or whatever it takes to get him in the KY truck, etc. So yea, he might be more "feared" as a recruiter to most of the polled coaches. :p

TexHawk
08-28-2013, 09:32 AM
Rather than Izzo vs Self vs K vs whoever, I think it could be instructive to ask, "would the fanbase look around and say they wanted any other coach than the guy in the job right now?"

Clearly, there is no coach in the country that Duke fans would prefer in the job to K.
I would bet that Michigan St and Kansas feel exactly the same way about Izzo and Self. Syracuse, Louisville, and UNC also feel that way. Kentucky fans love Calipari, though some Wildcat fans I have spoken to say they wish he did it in a bit less sleazy way. I am not sure there are all that many others.



I think you are wrong on all three of these, especially Syracuse, only because of age. Bill Self is 18 years younger than Jim Boeheim, Sean Miller is 6 years younger than Self. I know we say this every year, but I don't see Boeheim-Roy-Pitino on their sidelines in 2018, perhaps sooner for Boeheim. Syracuse would be crazy to turn down one of those guys, they would push Jim out in about .2 seconds. (Unless you are sure guys like Self/Miller would hop to the NBA soon, but we are not going to talk about that.)

And I know he's technically not current a CBB coach, but Brad Stevens is always lurking and he's 32(!) years younger than Boeheim.

superdave
08-28-2013, 09:40 AM
I think you are wrong on all three of these, especially Syracuse, only because of age. Bill Self is 18 years younger than Jim Boeheim, Sean Miller is 6 years younger than Self. I know we say this every year, but I don't see Boeheim-Roy-Pitino on their sidelines in 2018, perhaps sooner for Boeheim. Syracuse would be crazy to turn down one of those guys, they would push Jim out in about .2 seconds. (Unless you are sure guys like Self/Miller would hop to the NBA soon, but we are not going to talk about that.)

And I know he's technically not current a CBB coach, but Brad Stevens is always lurking and he's 32(!) years younger than Boeheim.

UNC fans over age 35 (or so) have never taken to Roy Williams. They appreciate that he wins and is a Dean protoge, but they do not like his mouth, his antics, his general lack of decorum and some of the clowns he brings into the program. I think they would shove Roy out the door by lunch today for Brad Stevens or Tom Izzo.

The younger fans seem to love Roy, but they dont remember Dean and his program, and they've seen two titles. But there is definitely a big disconnect between Roy and the slightly fans who were most fond of Dean.

flyingdutchdevil
08-28-2013, 09:44 AM
I think you are wrong on all three of these, especially Syracuse, only because of age. Bill Self is 18 years younger than Jim Boeheim, Sean Miller is 6 years younger than Self. I know we say this every year, but I don't see Boeheim-Roy-Pitino on their sidelines in 2018, perhaps sooner for Boeheim. Syracuse would be crazy to turn down one of those guys, they would push Jim out in about .2 seconds. (Unless you are sure guys like Self/Miller would hop to the NBA soon, but we are not going to talk about that.)

And I know he's technically not current a CBB coach, but Brad Stevens is always lurking and he's 32(!) years younger than Boeheim.

Do you not see Coach K on the sidelines in 2018 either? I agree about Boeheim, but Roy is still in his prime (63) and Pitino is only (60). Coach K, on the other hand, is 66. I see Coach K coaching into his 70s, and Roy and Pitino as well given that they aren't fired first (not happening with Pitino, 5% chance with Roy).

superdave
08-28-2013, 12:59 PM
Do you not see Coach K on the sidelines in 2018 either? I agree about Boeheim, but Roy is still in his prime (63) and Pitino is only (60). Coach K, on the other hand, is 66. I see Coach K coaching into his 70s, and Roy and Pitino as well given that they aren't fired first (not happening with Pitino, 5% chance with Roy).

I think as soon as the 2016 Olympics end, we should be on retirement watch. Anything we get from Coach K beyond the 2015-2016 season if a gift in my opinion.

That said, I think Coach K will continue to coach Duke as long as he has the will to prepare. That very well may go into his 70s. But we should not get greedy and count on it.

OldPhiKap
08-28-2013, 01:07 PM
Do you not see Coach K on the sidelines in 2018 either? I agree about Boeheim, but Roy is still in his prime (63) and Pitino is only (60). Coach K, on the other hand, is 66. I see Coach K coaching into his 70s, and Roy and Pitino as well given that they aren't fired first (not happening with Pitino, 5% chance with Roy).


I think as soon as the 2016 Olympics end, we should be on retirement watch. Anything we get from Coach K beyond the 2015-2016 season if a gift in my opinion.

That said, I think Coach K will continue to coach Duke as long as he has the will to prepare. That very well may go into his 70s. But we should not get greedy and count on it.

Presumably, K will hit 1,000 wins next season. On the one hand, I can see K wondering what else there is to accomplish after the Olympics. But he is so competitive, I cannot see him sitting around the house challenging Mickey to cribbage or arm wrestling his sons in law.

Roy, by contrast, won't get fired but I could see him moving to the beach and playing more golf.

Pitino is a rolling stone, I wonder if he has another jump to the pro ranks in him or not.

Lar77
08-28-2013, 01:17 PM
Rather than Izzo vs Self vs K vs whoever, I think it could be instructive to ask, "would the fanbase look around and say they wanted any other coach than the guy in the job right now?"

Clearly, there is no coach in the country that Duke fans would prefer in the job to K.
I would bet that Michigan St and Kansas feel exactly the same way about Izzo and Self. Syracuse, Louisville, and UNC also feel that way. Kentucky fans love Calipari, though some Wildcat fans I have spoken to say they wish he did it in a bit less sleazy way. I am not sure there are all that many others.

I am not saying other coaches are on the hot seat, but I bet if you asked Michigan if they would take Self or K or if you asked Georgetown if they would rather have Izzo, the answer would be yes.

-Jason "not a measure of 'are you happy with your coach' but a measure of 'is there ANY COACH out there you would rather have?'" Evans

Good way to look at it. Would we, at Duke, trade K for any other coach - not as chance.

For some of these programs, would they take K on in a nanosecond? Of course, some would, but not all (Can you imagine how Carolina and Kentucky fans would have to re-orient themslves?).

Thinking ahead to the inevitable day someday after the 2016 Olympics, K will try to leave Duke in good hands, but who is the successor?

Wheat/"/"/"
08-28-2013, 01:32 PM
UNC fans over age 35 (or so) have never taken to Roy Williams. They appreciate that he wins and is a Dean protoge, but they do not like his mouth, his antics, his general lack of decorum and some of the clowns he brings into the program. I think they would shove Roy out the door by lunch today for Brad Stevens or Tom Izzo.

The younger fans seem to love Roy, but they dont remember Dean and his program, and they've seen two titles. But there is definitely a big disconnect between Roy and the slightly fans who were most fond of Dean.

As a UNC fan over thirty five, I can't agree with that.

And I do have great respect for his coaching, and can appreciate his proven results.

Sure, he's not Dean, but I also like his "shoot from the lip", tell it like is is style.

It's refreshing...and often entertaining.

TexHawk
08-28-2013, 01:33 PM
Do you not see Coach K on the sidelines in 2018 either? I agree about Boeheim, but Roy is still in his prime (63) and Pitino is only (60). Coach K, on the other hand, is 66. I see Coach K coaching into his 70s, and Roy and Pitino as well given that they aren't fired first (not happening with Pitino, 5% chance with Roy).

63 is prime? When he took the UNC job, many of us at KU weren't jump-off-a-cliff upset because we didn't think he would have lasted longer than 5 more years in Lawrence anyway. He hates the media, he does not enjoy recruiting, and he seems to almost not care as much about his own team if they aren't #1 seed material. I guarantee you that if there was a Roy-like hotshot coaching candidate for replacement out there (from the UNC family), he would have retired by now. He's hanging on to avoid another Doherty disaster.

And for some reason I thought Pitino was a lot older than 60, my bad.

flyingdutchdevil
08-28-2013, 02:24 PM
63 is prime? When he took the UNC job, many of us at KU weren't jump-off-a-cliff upset because we didn't think he would have lasted longer than 5 more years in Lawrence anyway. He hates the media, he does not enjoy recruiting, and he seems to almost not care as much about his own team if they aren't #1 seed material. I guarantee you that if there was a Roy-like hotshot coaching candidate for replacement out there (from the UNC family), he would have retired by now. He's hanging on to avoid another Doherty disaster.

And for some reason I thought Pitino was a lot older than 60, my bad.

Roy is 4 years removed from a National Championship so, yeah, I'd still call him in his prime. Coach K is 66 - does that make him past his prime if Roy is already past his?

Also, those are aggressive statements to make: he does not enjoy recruiting, and he seems to almost not care as much about his own team if they aren't #1 seed material. Roy has bagged 3 top 15 recruits for 2014. How is that hating recruiting? He got the best of Coach K for one of the fiercest recruiting battles in modern basketball (Barnes). Roy likes his teams plenty. Like any coach (including Coach K), Roy will express a certain amount of emotion depending on the class. That's completely normal. I remember that Coach K rarely going out of his way to express admiration for the 2011-2012 team, despite having a top talent in Austin Rivers. At the same time, Coach K frequently referred to how much fun he had coaching the 2009-2010 team, despite not being one of his more talented team.

Just because a coach doesn't get down on his knees and applaud his teams doesn't mean that he's not going to coach the hell out of that team.

For all the crap that we give Roy, I think he's a very good coach and, with the type of personnel that he loves, I fear him (thank god you graduated, Ty)

TexHawk
08-28-2013, 02:42 PM
Roy is 4 years removed from a National Championship so, yeah, I'd still call him in his prime. Coach K is 66 - does that make him past his prime if Roy is already past his?

Also, those are aggressive statements to make: he does not enjoy recruiting, and he seems to almost not care as much about his own team if they aren't #1 seed material. Roy has bagged 3 top 15 recruits for 2014. How is that hating recruiting? He got the best of Coach K for one of the fiercest recruiting battles in modern basketball (Barnes). Roy likes his teams plenty. Like any coach (including Coach K), Roy will express a certain amount of emotion depending on the class. That's completely normal. I remember that Coach K rarely going out of his way to express admiration for the 2011-2012 team, despite having a top talent in Austin Rivers. At the same time, Coach K frequently referred to how much fun he had coaching the 2009-2010 team, despite not being one of his more talented team.

Just because a coach doesn't get down on his knees and applaud his teams doesn't mean that he's not going to coach the hell out of that team.

For all the crap that we give Roy, I think he's a very good coach and, with the type of personnel that he loves, I fear him (thank god you graduated, Ty)

"Prime" is an age thing, at least my definition. Lots of coaches/players win titles and rings past their prime. Michael Jordan won 3 titles after his prime. "Prime" isn't a bad thing. In regards to college coaching, I'd say it's that sweet spot when you've had a lot of success, you still have a lot of energy, you can still easily relate to young players, and are in good health. Bill Self is in his prime. Sean Miller is getting there, if he's not already. Izzo is probably at the tail end of his. Yes, imo Roy, Pitino, Boeheim are all past their primes. That isn't a bad thing, it just means they have to adjust their coaching style a bit, adapt their message to high school kids, etc. Do you think K recruits the same way today that he did in 1990?

And yea, I would probably say that K is past his prime too. He went to four straight Final 4s from 88-92, won two titles, and was 45 years old after the 2nd one. His 40-55 is about the definition of prime. But I'm not convinced at this point that he's not a cyborg.

I won't rehash it here, but a few weeks ago we had a very good discussion of Roy's time in Lawrence. He absolutely did not enjoy recruiting. He took multiple years off from that, he despised the local media, and openly talked about retirement during his poor seasons. Moving to UNC probably invigorated him, but let's be honest, that school does half of the recruiting by itself.

flyingdutchdevil
08-28-2013, 03:19 PM
"Prime" is an age thing, at least my definition. Lots of coaches/players win titles and rings past their prime. Michael Jordan won 3 titles after his prime. "Prime" isn't a bad thing. In regards to college coaching, I'd say it's that sweet spot when you've had a lot of success, you still have a lot of energy, you can still easily relate to young players, and are in good health. Bill Self is in his prime. Sean Miller is getting there, if he's not already. Izzo is probably at the tail end of his. Yes, imo Roy, Pitino, Boeheim are all past their primes. That isn't a bad thing, it just means they have to adjust their coaching style a bit, adapt their message to high school kids, etc. Do you think K recruits the same way today that he did in 1990?

And yea, I would probably say that K is past his prime too. He went to four straight Final 4s from 88-92, won two titles, and was 45 years old after the 2nd one. His 40-55 is about the definition of prime. But I'm not convinced at this point that he's not a cyborg.

I won't rehash it here, but a few weeks ago we had a very good discussion of Roy's time in Lawrence. He absolutely did not enjoy recruiting. He took multiple years off from that, he despised the local media, and openly talked about retirement during his poor seasons. Moving to UNC probably invigorated him, but let's be honest, that school does half of the recruiting by itself.

I gotta disagree with you on age. For the act of physically playing the game, absolutely. You're body breaks down, injuries carry over, etc etc. But I've made this argument before, and I'll make it again: a college bball coach is more of a CEO than anything. And CEOs aren't in their "prime" until their upper management, which is generally in their 50s and 60s. In coaching, it's the same thing. Understanding what works and doesn't work in recruiting, motivation, Xs and Os - that takes time. A lot of time. Coaches are like a fine wine - they get better with age until they turn into vinegar (or sour, for the human perspective).

brevity
08-28-2013, 04:19 PM
But there is definitely a big disconnect between Roy and the slightly fans who were most fond of Dean.

There is definitely a big disconnect between those slightly older Dean Smith fans... and reality.

Roy Williams was a Top 5 (active) head coach who settled into the Top 10 as younger coaches became more established. We often talk about how he's benefited from inheriting high-profile programs -- "born on third base" and all that -- but we rarely mention the downside. Namely, Roy Williams will never be considered the best that either Kansas or North Carolina ever had. The silly comments, odd decorum, and player handling will fade over time, and the scandals probably will too. Then Roy Williams will be remembered mostly as a native who kept Dean Smith's legacy intact, and secondarily as the guy who kept Kansas in fine shape in between the coaches who won titles.


Good way to look at it. Would we, at Duke, trade K for any other coach - not as chance.

See, Coach K is the best that Duke's ever had. He had the success to surpass his predecessors, and the longevity to overcome any recency bias. Even the most historically knowledgeable Duke fans (there are a few on this board) will gently remind us that Duke had excellence before Coach K, but they won't claim that Duke was at its best back then. So, as a fan, trading Coach K for another coach is an impossibility.

But if you ask the question to a (hypothetical and young) athletic director, the answer may be different. Because that person, while acknowledging that Coach K has earned the right to finish his tenure on his own terms, cannot ignore the future of the program. The job requires a strong look at a trade, and the accompanying guilt of having to give it the proper consideration.

Edouble
08-28-2013, 11:44 PM
I am not saying other coaches are on the hot seat, but I bet if you asked Michigan if they would take Self or K or if you asked Georgetown if they would rather have Izzo, the answer would be yes.


I don't know Jason. Michigan was scary, scary good last year. They were set to win the whole thing at halftime on Monday night.

I agree about G'town, though.

Edouble
08-28-2013, 11:51 PM
I gotta disagree with you on age. For the act of physically playing the game, absolutely. You're body breaks down, injuries carry over, etc etc. But I've made this argument before, and I'll make it again: a college bball coach is more of a CEO than anything. And CEOs aren't in their "prime" until their upper management, which is generally in their 50s and 60s. In coaching, it's the same thing. Understanding what works and doesn't work in recruiting, motivation, Xs and Os - that takes time. A lot of time. Coaches are like a fine wine - they get better with age until they turn into vinegar (or sour, for the human perspective).

I think TexHawk makes a better argument:


"Prime" is an age thing, at least my definition. K ... went to four straight Final 4s from 88-92, won two titles, and was 45 years old after the 2nd one. His 40-55 is about the definition of prime. But I'm not convinced at this point that he's not a cyborg.

After reading Coach K's books, years ago when they first came out, I was struck by how much of a physical toll coaching basketball must take on your body. After a game, going immediately to do hours of tape to be ready for the next game, all the travel, the practices. I'm quite sure that an older man's mind may improve, but a younger man's body can handle the job better. The game seemed to really pass by Bobby K, Denny Crum, and even Dean. Certainly Gutheridge. How he didn't win a championship in '98, and how he could recruit such bad players at UNC is beyond me.

TexHawk
08-29-2013, 10:25 AM
I don't know Jason. Michigan was scary, scary good last year. They were set to win the whole thing at halftime on Monday night.

I agree about G'town, though.

--Beilein has been at Michigan for 6 seasons. Two of those they were under .500. Their conference finishes: 9, 7, 7, 4, 1, 4. When they finished 1st in 2012, they promptly lost in the first round of the NCAA tourney. Beilein's conference record at Michigan is 55-53. (Bill Self is 137-27. K is 350-153.) Sure, the Big10 is a tougher conference, but Bill Self put up a .729 win percentage when he coached there.
--Michigan entered last year's tournament as a 4 seed, and needed a historic collapse and a 35 footer at the gun to make overtime in the Sweet 16. If Elijah Johnson hits a free throw or Trey Burke's bomb doesn't go down, Beilein is nowhere near as high on these lists.
--A 1pt lead is "set to win"? They were on the wrong side of 14-1 run just before halftime.
--The Fab 5 also led Duke at halftime in 1992. Were they set to win?

flyingdutchdevil
08-29-2013, 03:37 PM
After reading Coach K's books, years ago when they first came out, I was struck by how much of a physical toll coaching basketball must take on your body. After a game, going immediately to do hours of tape to be ready for the next game, all the travel, the practices. I'm quite sure that an older man's mind may improve, but a younger man's body can handle the job better. The game seemed to really pass by Bobby K, Denny Crum, and even Dean. Certainly Gutheridge. How he didn't win a championship in '98, and how he could recruit such bad players at UNC is beyond me.

And what do you think a business exec does? Executives work 80-90 hours for Fortune 500 companies. They travel significantly more than any coach, including international travel. They are in meetings all day long. It is a crazy hard job.

Coaches who get older just aren't into it anymore. Gary Williams is a prime example. He got fed up with a lot of the crap that comes with college basketball. But, if you're heart is in it, you can easily do it for as long as you want. Coach K always talks about being more motivated now than in the past. The only "prime" for a coach is how badly and how long you want it. Boeheim, Roy, K, Bo Ryan; they're all old but love the game still. And to me, they are all in their "prime".

Steven43
08-30-2013, 09:57 AM
A college bball coach is more of a CEO than anything. And CEOs aren't in their "prime" until their upper management, which is generally in their 50s and 60s. In coaching, it's the same thing. Understanding what works and doesn't work in recruiting, motivation, Xs and Os - that takes time. A lot of time. Coaches are like a fine wine - they get better with age until they turn into vinegar (or sour, for the human perspective).

If Coach K retires after the Olympics you think we should target coaches that are in their 50's and 60's? if so, does that mean you don't think Duke should consider hiring a young (relatively speaking) coach like Brad Stevens, who would be in his late 30's at that time?

Personally speaking, Brad Stevens is my dream replacement for Coach K. I'm afraid, though, that if Coach K retires after the Olympics, Brad won't agree to go to Duke after only three years coaching the Celtics. Especially if his team is doing well.

JasonEvans
08-30-2013, 11:12 AM
Advance warning...

As any thread about rival coaches gets longer, the chance that it devolves into a discussion of Coach K's replacement approaches 100%. Still, lets see if we can keep this conversation from going there. Tired, worn out, and (I hope) not a discussion we will need to have any time soon!!

-Jason "the notion that K will hang it up after the Olympics, at the still spry age of 69, seems laughable to me -- he's here for much longer than that, I bet" Evans

OldPhiKap
08-30-2013, 11:32 AM
Advance warning...

As any thread about rival coaches gets longer, the chance that it devolves into a discussion of Coach K's replacement approaches 100%. Still, lets see if we can keep this conversation from going there. Tired, worn out, and (I hope) not a discussion we will need to have any time soon!!

-Jason "the notion that K will hang it up after the Olympics, at the still spry age of 69, seems laughable to me -- he's here for much longer than that, I bet" Evans

If I go ahead and say that K's replacement will be like Hitler, do we get to total devolution?

As far as the poll is concerned. I have no reason to think it's not an honest assessment. And frankly, carries more weight than Dickie V. I look forward to watching those coaches this year with the poll in mind, to see if I agree with their peers' assessment. (All while realizing that they know more about it than I do).

superdave
08-30-2013, 11:42 AM
This top coaches discussion is pretty fascinating because all of these guys have egos, want to build their own program and legacy, and dont necessarily want to follow in others' footsteps. Well, maybe ego is a bad word to use. They are all hyper-competitive.

If Brad Stevens and Shaka Smart did not take the UCLA job, why would they take UNC/Duke/Kansas/Kentucky/Indiana? I think UCLA and those other 5 are in the same elite program category, basically. Both guys are on seemingly different paths.

It seems to me that it is a lot harder to just go out and draft the coach you want. It took UNC two tries and some arm-twisting to get the right guy after Dean retired. UCLA has never appropriately replaced Wooden, even though they've had significant success. Indiana may finally be on the right track after tossing Knight. Kentucky struck gold with Pitino, but never warmed to Tubby and devoured Gillispie. Kansas has probably done the best job - except for Larry Brown's indiscretions.

Duke wont just go out and pick someone. They will run a national search, which is likely to start with Coach K's protoges. Anything less is un-professional.

Age should be a factor. The Bill Guthridge era at UNC did not transition smoothly to Doherty. Ties to Duke should be a factor. But the ability to carry on the well-run program, sanction-free, and win is paramount. I think duke will wind up getting a younger guy who is hungry and driven, rather than selecting someone off this top coaches list.

This top coaches list is interesting because some guys could be successful at some places, but not others. Duke was patient with K in the early years. Doherty wore out his welcome at UNC, as did Gillispie at UK. Howland has been really good at UCLA and Pitt, but things went wrong in LA with the local AAU guys. Would Izzo translate well at Duke? Probably. Are there places he might not work out? I am not sure he would fail anywhere. But if you go through the top coaches list - would Pitino work at Duke or UNC? I dont think he'd be welcome either place, actually. Coaches really have to be a good fit for the fan base and administration, in addition to just winning on the court. It can be as special as lightning in a bottle though.

Super "I'm rambling now" Dave

TexHawk
08-30-2013, 12:03 PM
If Brad Stevens and Shaka Smart did not take the UCLA job, why would they take UNC/Duke/Kansas/Kentucky/Indiana? I think UCLA and those other 5 are in the same elite program category, basically. Both guys are on seemingly different paths.


I don't think the UCLA job belongs on the same level as the other ones you listed.
The bright side of that job: Local talent, beautiful weather, you are a God if you do well, fantastic tradition.
The down side: The facilities aren't fantastic, and Pauley Pavilion is sort of a dump. The recent renovations make it better, but it's nowhere near the same level as Cameron, AFH, Rupp, or Assembly Hall. The fanbase is extreme fair-weather, if that makes sense.

Taking that into account, it's not surprising at all that Smart and Stevens turned them down, as they are both Midwest/East coast guys. And Stevens obviously had other career goals that we didn't know about at the time.

tommy
08-30-2013, 12:21 PM
I don't think the UCLA job belongs on the same level as the other ones you listed.
The bright side of that job: Local talent, beautiful weather, you are a God if you do well, fantastic tradition.
The down side: The facilities aren't fantastic, and Pauley Pavilion is sort of a dump. The recent renovations make it better, but it's nowhere near the same level as Cameron, AFH, Rupp, or Assembly Hall. The fanbase is extreme fair-weather, if that makes sense.

Taking that into account, it's not surprising at all that Smart and Stevens turned them down, as they are both Midwest/East coast guys. And Stevens obviously had other career goals that we didn't know about at the time.

There are some downsides to the UCLA job, but the renovated Pauley Pavillion isnt one of them. You probaby haven't been there, or even seen any photos of it. It's a gleaming modern building with excellent features, facilities, and sightlines. Here are some photos (http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=images+new+pauley+pavillion&qpvt=images+new+pauley+pavillion&FORM=IGRE). I haven't been to those others you mention, other than Cameron, but I venture to say Pauley is a much better, more modern, and more comfortable place -- as well as equally if not more historic -- than some of the buildings you mention.