KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,900
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Apr 2, 2015 19:34:27 GMT -5
I agree with you SF. Here's how I'd breakdown JTIII: Pros Above average recruiter Good ambassador for the school Excellent scheduler (recent years especially) Players seem to like him Cons Not a good in game coach Rarely gets "more" out of the players he has Ability to motivate is debatable Not the best at balancing his roster I am pro JTIII but the above list, which I think is generally accurate, is not exactly a ringing endorsement for a top-10 salary.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 2, 2015 19:40:33 GMT -5
For the record, I am in the pro, but frustrated, JTIII camp. Not sure where NCHoya was coming from on that one. Up until last year, I think we had sneaked into the AP top 10 every year for a long stint due to early season success. My point is for 2.8 million, you should be in the tourney just about every year (CHECK), you should be competing for conference titles most years (CHECK), you should consistently pull in top recruits (MEH, not consistent) and you should make the second weekend of the tourney half the time you are there (NO BUENO). I think JTIII is on a path of fixing recruiting and hopefully that will fix the tourney. Emphasis added, because recruiting has the greatest number of extraneous variables that the coach either doesn't control (facilities) or are inimical to Georgetown's way of doing things (paying players under the table, committing widespread academic fraud, becoming a one-and-done factory).
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,479
|
Post by DanMcQ on Apr 2, 2015 19:43:42 GMT -5
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 2, 2015 19:47:27 GMT -5
I would say that his pay is at the very high end of the range for what his perf level is. My issue with his pay would be that he really does not have any job pressure-that is not the same boat most of the other coaches are in.. He basically has a job for life. He should be taking a bit of a haircut for what is effectively a long term guarantee. So professors should make less if they have tenure? Government employees, which are very hard to fire, should be paid less? What an inane argument.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,906
|
Post by Filo on Apr 2, 2015 19:57:22 GMT -5
NCHoya, I understand your frustration, but I think your arguments regarding the top 25 are partially borne out of the tendency of all of us to be harder on our team because we are fans. By nearly any metric - the rankings, KenPom.com, NCAA seeding - we were a top 25 team at the end of the season. We certainly were not dominant or anything like that but I think it would be harder to argue that there are many teams that should have pushed us down the rankings. The fact that we lost to Utah should also not come as a surprise or mean we aren't top 25 - at least 9 of the top 25 have to lose before the Sweet 16. Thus, I am not sure what "legit top 25" team means. It's sort of a pointless label anyway. There's a huge difference and dropoff in talent between the Top 10, for example, and the teams ranked 20-25, yet both are top 25. Is one "legit" top 25, and the other not? The other issue is that I think the lack of NCAA success has clouded a lot of people's minds with regard to how good we actually have been outside of the NCAA tournament. The 2008 team was great, the 2010 team was really good, the 2013 team was very good, and this year's team was pretty good. Out of the 9 NCAA bids JTIII has received, 6 are a top 4 seed. That clearly shows we've had a ton of success in the regular seasons. I just think it's lost after our losses in March. Agreed, I wish I could take back the Top 25 comment, but it is published so it is out there. I guess what I mean is a nationally discussed team. Is that top 25, top 20, I have no idea, but I know this year the Hoyas were not there in my opinion. And this is all about a simple point - III is paid as a top 10 coach; my belief is we are not a top 10 program therefore III is overpaid. That does not make me anti-III at all. I love the guy, he is just overpaid right now and being paid for past accomplishments. I think it is a defendable position (although I am not doing a good job) but one not many people share on this board. I am with you. I tend to over-defend JTIII, especially against some of the incessant weak stuff we sometimes see. But I agree, he is overpaid, as he is not a top 10 coach at this point based on performance. On the other hand, I am willing to overpay if he can continue running the program with the class and clean record that we have seen so far. Hopefully, he can up the performance side of things to match that record.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,734
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 2, 2015 19:58:39 GMT -5
I agree with you SF. Here's how I'd breakdown JTIII: Pros Above average recruiter Good ambassador for the school Excellent scheduler (recent years especially) Players seem to like him Cons Not a good in game coach Rarely gets "more" out of the players he has Ability to motivate is debatable Not the best at balancing his roster I can't really agree with that. First of all, it's really hard to rate, given his success, anything JTIII does as sub-par. He has Top 10 results in everything but the NCAA tournament over the last 11 years -- he's not a bad coach ANYWHERE. How I'd rate in (presented differently, because I don't think he's "bad" at any of this, and only below average in maybe a couple of areas). I'll also probably do some of this with data come the full off-season, so keep in mind this is MASSIVE speculation: *Recruiting: * Ability to get his man: Very Good but not quite great. JTIII obviously recruits from a niche angle, which is smart. I think it's hard to evaluate his selling ability just because his angle is "I'll improve you" not "You're awesome;" it's going to class; it's the deflated basketball; it's family. There's a subsection of kids to whom this appeals. They lock in. There's a subsection to whom this doesn't. We seem to be often in the chase but mostly lose for these guys. I think when I analyze our average recruiting class we will see a team with some minimal drawbacks being a Top 25 recruiter, though. *Ability to assess talent: Average. He and his staff have definitely made some great finds before others and some good calls. But we've also walked away from some players to pursue "better" ones -- but those we've walked away from have often been really good. It's hard not to think of someone like Josh Hart and think the staff probably underestimated him. *Ability to round out a class: Below Average. The staff continually goes for a bigger fish and we end up with poor classes and too many projects. On the other hand, we aren't Kentucky; it's often hard to really get strong classes over and over. What's interesting is that most GU teams have the star players -- what has often held the team back is not even having five strong players, let alone seven or so. *Skill Development: Very good. Hoyas are constantly lauded by NBA GMs as being ready. They understand team offense, defense, improve footwork, form, etc. *Motivation: Probably below average. I don't think this is a matter of yelling or not. I think JTIIIs demeanor can be powerful in its own way and his supportive style connected with Josh Smith better than Howland ever did. That said, I get the impression that JTIII is very much a "I provide the path, you provide the willpower." I think some coaches will simply ride their players and force the effort -- and that works -- and JTIII tries to let players discover their own work ethic. I don't think the latter works as well with 20 year olds. *Character / PR: Amazing. *X's and Os: Strong to very strong. There's some much bitching over time outs and so much bad analysis on what we run and how. JTIII knows his stuff; if anything I suspect at times he has to hold back stuff because it is too much to learn (or makes a mistake by asking too much). Our defense is a perfect example -- people are so mad about switching, but the best defenses do it. It just requires execution that we didn't always get to. He adjusts his offense and defense, etc.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Apr 2, 2015 20:11:13 GMT -5
I agree with you SF. Here's how I'd breakdown JTIII: Pros Above average recruiter Good ambassador for the school Excellent scheduler (recent years especially) Players seem to like him Cons Not a good in game coach Rarely gets "more" out of the players he has Ability to motivate is debatable Not the best at balancing his roster I am pro JTIII but the above list, which I think is generally accurate, is not exactly a ringing endorsement for a top-10 salary. This is true. These traits shouldn't translate into a Top 10 salary. Problem is once his salary is set, you can't get him to take less - that's the bar now. He's not going to give money back, and the school isn't going to offer him less in the future. So the if the University wants him to remain as the coach they will have to continue to pay him at this above-market rate and hope they will get more for their money. The only alternative is fire him and see who else can deliver the same results for less. However: A.) There's a real possibility another coach would do worse B.) We all know this would never happen unless something happened like a scandal or 5+ years of losing records
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Apr 2, 2015 20:15:32 GMT -5
I would say that his pay is at the very high end of the range for what his perf level is. My issue with his pay would be that he really does not have any job pressure-that is not the same boat most of the other coaches are in.. He basically has a job for life. He should be taking a bit of a haircut for what is effectively a long term guarantee. So professors should make less if they have tenure? Government employees, which are very hard to fire, should be paid less? What an inane argument. I'm actually OK with this argument, in principle. Government employees ARE generally paid less, compared to the private sector. For that matter, tenured academics are paid less than their corporate counterparts (this is more evident in the tech sector, where there are more directly comparable positions in both). Pensions and/or exceptional job security are benefits that are not to be discounted. This is more or less how it worked with Pops. At various points, he was underpaid, relative to market value. The tradeoff for this was job-security-for-life - he remains one of the University's highest-paid employees many years after he hung up the white towel. I have to agree with the poster who noted that Georgetown and JTIII are uniquely valuable to each other. JTIII gets exceptional job security, compared to what most coaches get, as well as the benefit of inheriting a heck of a legacy that he can readily point to. Most coaches don't get to point to their predecessors' accomplishments all that much. When the predecessor is your Pops...it's different. Plus coaching in your hometown, in an NBA arena, etc. Georgetown gets the heir-apparent, Princeton-educated black man as its head coach - someone who is a near-ideal representative of what the University's basketball program aspires to be. A coach who is deeply intelligent, has instant credibility and respect in most living rooms nationwide, understands and cares a great deal about the institution and its values, and comports himself just how you'd hope he would. From an academic administrator perspective - and I know enough of them - the answer to "who would you rather have as Georgetown's head coach" is, to the extent that any of them care, "nobody." The other thing to keep in mind here is that Georgetown fires pretty much no one for performance - Esherick was very likely the last coach to be done in by wins and losses(!). In that sort of a dynamic, one understands just how big of a role "affinity" or "cultural fit" plays in this arrangement.
|
|
|
Post by WilsonBlvdHoya on Apr 2, 2015 20:26:45 GMT -5
Link? I am not privy to the Swiss bank account numbers that you guys use. DFW and Dan, They're onto us!!! I'll fire up the HT private jet, pick both of you up in DFW and NE, respectively, and we'll be off to Geneva in no time.........
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Apr 2, 2015 20:29:52 GMT -5
I'd equate this situation like a bad contract in pro sports. Sure Amare Stoudemire isn't worth a Top 10 contract in the league, but still he can help your team (salary cap aside) much more than a guy on the veteran's minimum can.
For better or worse JTIII is our "bad contact", though less punitive without any cap limitations that hamstring pro teams. But I'd rather have him and be slightly overpaying than take a flier on a guy who could be much worse.
Aren't we better off with a Top 30 coach paid like a Top 10 one over a Top 60 coach paid like a Top 30 one?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,734
Member is Online
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 2, 2015 20:51:19 GMT -5
I'd equate this situation like a bad contract in pro sports. Sure Amare Stoudemire isn't worth a Top 10 contract in the league, but still he can help your team (salary cap aside) much more than a guy on the veteran's minimum can. For better or worse JTIII is our "bad contact", though less punitive without any cap limitations that hamstring pro teams. But I'd rather have him and be slightly overpaying than take a flier on a guy who could be much worse. Aren't we better off with a Top 30 coach paid like a Top 10 one over a Top 60 coach paid like a Top 30 one? Let's just say he's a Top 30 coach paid like a Top 10. (It might be more Top 25 paid like a Top 15). That might be overpaid, but it's not the equivalent of a bad contract and not Amare Stoudemire. I know you meant your comment as a positive, but that's like Robby Cano or Chris Bosh or something. A very good player paid a lot. It's not a decent or below average player paid a ton that might be useful from time to time. He's very good paid as a star. Not average paid as a star.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,731
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 2, 2015 21:33:58 GMT -5
DFW and Dan, They're onto us!!! I'll fire up the HT private jet, pick both of you up in DFW and NE, respectively, and we'll be off to Geneva in no time......... As long as it's not the bus to Geneva, I think we'll be fine.
|
|
FrazierFanatic
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,551
Member is Online
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Apr 2, 2015 21:42:48 GMT -5
I am not privy to the Swiss bank account numbers that you guys use. DFW and Dan, They're onto us!!! I'll fire up the HT private jet, pick both of you up in DFW and NE, respectively, and we'll be off to Geneva in no time......... Power to the Posters!
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Apr 2, 2015 21:50:18 GMT -5
I'd equate this situation like a bad contract in pro sports. Sure Amare Stoudemire isn't worth a Top 10 contract in the league, but still he can help your team (salary cap aside) much more than a guy on the veteran's minimum can. For better or worse JTIII is our "bad contact", though less punitive without any cap limitations that hamstring pro teams. But I'd rather have him and be slightly overpaying than take a flier on a guy who could be much worse. Aren't we better off with a Top 30 coach paid like a Top 10 one over a Top 60 coach paid like a Top 30 one? Let's just say he's a Top 30 coach paid like a Top 10. (It might be more Top 25 paid like a Top 15). That might be overpaid, but it's not the equivalent of a bad contract and not Amare Stoudemire. I know you meant your comment as a positive, but that's like Robby Cano or Chris Bosh or something. A very good player paid a lot. It's not a decent or below average player paid a ton that might be useful from time to time. He's very good paid as a star. Not average paid as a star. Fair. I think that was my point. Top 25-30 coach paid like a Top 10 one. At the end of the day it's not the biggest thing in the world to fret about. His extra salary isn't preventing us from a recruit, facility, etc.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,765
|
Post by njhoya78 on Apr 2, 2015 22:03:34 GMT -5
I think that JT3 just dropped a slot on the Most Highly Paid College Coach list. . . .
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Apr 2, 2015 22:39:48 GMT -5
Wait...am I missing something? Didn't we finish the season ranked in the top 25 this year? shhh. . . That wouldn't fit the anti JTIII narrative. *ap 22, coaches 24 Agree with you NCHoya. JTIII is overpayed and the most recent glaring deficiency is the absence of rising junior and senior classes. Careful, however, this doesn't fit the JTIII apologist narrative.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 2, 2015 23:49:36 GMT -5
shhh. . . That wouldn't fit the anti JTIII narrative. *ap 22, coaches 24 Agree with you NCHoya. JTIII is overpayed and the most recent glaring deficiency is the absence of rising junior and senior classes. Careful, however, this doesn't fit the JTIII apologist narrative. Overpayed? I hope you didn't graduate from Georgetown.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Apr 3, 2015 0:51:32 GMT -5
I would say that his pay is at the very high end of the range for what his perf level is. My issue with his pay would be that he really does not have any job pressure-that is not the same boat most of the other coaches are in.. He basically has a job for life. He should be taking a bit of a haircut for what is effectively a long term guarantee. So professors should make less if they have tenure? Government employees, which are very hard to fire, should be paid less? What an inane argument.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Apr 3, 2015 1:07:19 GMT -5
Yes, if I one will always accept a lower per yr guaranteed revenue stream than a non guaranteed one-and yes professors probably have a very different pay scale than they otherwise would because they effectively can't be fired. --that's how compensation agreements + most long term contracts work in a free mkt. Just look at NFL guaranteed/non guaranteed money in a sports context. Yes, your analogy is also off base a professors/govt employees effectively due take less money compared to similar cop orate jobs at least partly because of security.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Apr 3, 2015 6:35:35 GMT -5
Yes, if I one will always accept a lower per yr guaranteed revenue stream than a non guaranteed one-and yes professors probably have a very different pay scale than they otherwise would because they effectively can't be fired. --that's how compensation agreements + most long term contracts work in a free mkt. Just look at NFL guaranteed/non guaranteed money in a sports context. Yes, your analogy is also off base a professors/govt employees effectively due take less money compared to similar cop orate jobs at least partly because of security. Reformation, careful. You wrote "due" when you meant "do". Instead of discussing a difference of opinion and engaging in the necessary dialogue the Hoyatalk patrol (KCHoya) will call you out if, in haste, you misspell or use an inappropriate word. Then you are questioned "snarkily" (this must be the word of the post season) whether you went to Georgetown . There is no way you can 'compete' with someone who averages a post a day for 15 years.
|
|