|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 23, 2016 16:42:46 GMT -5
Those two institutions are also known as a strong stepping stone to a higher-profile opportunity. Any "diamond in the rough" that you find need to be paid or else they will go elsewhere to shine once they find success. Since our last coach not related to the Thompson Family business was pre-1972, we cannot say if GU is a stepping stone or not. At $3M, I would guess "no", unless the coach was approached by a pro team and that was the coach's dream. I don't know why this salary thing is so controversial and intriguing to some people. In sports, you generally get raises when you perform well. If your performance then falls off, you either get fired or you continue to get money. That's the way it works. Georgetown only paid JTIII about $400,000 when he first came to Georgetown. Any new coach after JT3 would easily make less than what he is making. He is making that salary because of his past accomplishments. I realize that several HoyaTalk members discount that success as being too far in the past, etc., but the fact is that he's been a successful coach, and he is getting paid accordingly. While Villanova has had more success in the last couple of years, if you look at JT3 and Jay Wright's careers, they are very similar, and they make a similar amount of money. Keep in mind that Andy Enfield got a $1 million contract at USC essentially because he beat Georgetown and one other team to make it to the Sweet 16. Was that logical on USC's behalf? Probably not but success causes salaries to rise at large rates. Again, it's sports. So this idea that the $3 million somehow means that we could easily go get an accomplished coach is silly. I mean, unless you mean somebody like Oliver Purnell who made between $2 and $3 million a year, with absolutely no success at DePaul. I bet we could easily hire him. Since we would only be paying a new coach a much smaller salary, and the Georgetown coaching position is not a prime one, it would be a stepping stone job and nothing more.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Feb 23, 2016 16:57:01 GMT -5
We have the imminent unveiling of a state-of-the-art practice facility, a strong returning core (absent any early defections), and a staff that has shown the ability to recruit. We also have recent and recurring regular season success. What we need to see from III over the next 3 or so years (there is just zero likelihood that he has less than 3 more years) is continued success on the recruiting trail and, for the love of John Carroll, some evidence that he is adjusting/tweaking/modifying his game plan, both on offense and defense, to address 1) clear-as-day diminishing returns on whatever princeton principles crap he is half-heartedly trotting out on the court each game; and 2) the fundamental deficiencies in the way he is teaching defense. I think what is most soul-crushing to GU fans is you see the same, tired nonsense every damn game and, frankly, it is painful to watch. The product is just so putrid, wins/losses aside. Well written. This is how I feel about the program, it is the definition of stale right now. The offense has gotten unwatchable. The east - west passing is mind numbing and someone made a great point in another thread, most of our players do not even look at the basket when they get the ball, where is the triple threat position, basketball 101? We have all this "talent" and III seems to coach them up to be timid, indecisive in every aspect of the game. No emotion, no explosion, it is like they are robots. It is one thing to be understated it is another not to be able to raise your game in critical moments that require it.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Feb 23, 2016 17:10:55 GMT -5
|
|
mapei
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,088
|
Post by mapei on Feb 23, 2016 17:16:12 GMT -5
I have generally stayed off the board this year because it's so depressing. But I will say this:
1. I think we are having a horrible year, way worse than we and others expected. But I don't (yet) think we have a horrible program. The facts just don't support that. So I'm very willing to give III another year before I give up on him.
2. I do think there might be something to the staleness argument. The program has been the Thompson Family Business for what seems like half a century. If things aren't better next year it could be refreshing to see something new. But I like III and hope it doesn't come to that.
3. I think our biggest problem this year is a lack of quickness at just about every position. On offense, we don't get open. On defense, we're frequently late, thus all the fouls.
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,333
|
Post by hoyajinx on Feb 23, 2016 17:23:12 GMT -5
Is it a Hoyatalk mandate that every conversation about JTIII devolves into a discussion over his salary? I'm as disappointed as anyone with the season, the atrocious defense, and the jab-myself-in-the-eyes-with-a-pencil-so-I-don't-have-to-watch offense, but this obsession has become tiresome.
|
|
|
Post by Lethal_Interjection on Feb 23, 2016 17:27:47 GMT -5
Is it a Hoyatalk mandate that every conversation about JTIII devolves into a discussion over his salary? I'm as disappointed as anyone with the season, the atrocious defense, and the jab-myself-in-the-eyes-with-a-pencil-so-I-don't-have-to-watch offense, but this obsession has become tiresome. Top 10 in pay, the fans want Top 10 results. Even though you won't get it all the time, also a better March record as well.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Feb 23, 2016 17:34:47 GMT -5
I have generally stayed off the board this year because it's so depressing. But I will say this: 1. I think we are having a horrible year, way worse than we and others expected. But I don't (yet) think we have a horrible program. The facts just don't support that. So I'm very willing to give III another year before I give up on him. 2. I do think there might be something to the staleness argument. The program has been the Thompson Family Business for what seems like half a century. If things aren't better next year it could be refreshing to see something new. But I like III and hope it doesn't come to that. 3. I think our biggest problem this year is a lack of quickness at just about every position. On offense, we don't get open. On defense, we're frequently late, thus all the fouls. Despite everything I have written, I totally agree with #1. I want III to succeed, and he deserves another year, but if it becomes more of the same with these type of results, I can no longer support him. I am surprised that I have found my breaking point, but next season will be very telling for the future of this program.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 23, 2016 17:36:16 GMT -5
Top 10 in pay, the fans want Top 10 results. Even though you won't get it all the time, also a better March record as well. The problem is that the world doesn't work this way. I want the best coach we can have, regardless of salary. To me, I don't really care if JT3 is "overpaid" - I am not paying for it, and I think it's silly for people to focus on it. The alternative is hiring someone else who most certainly won't be top 10 in salary, and very likely would not be as successful, either. And, I highly doubt that if we had the 30th best paid coach that our fans would be happy with being a Top 30ish team every season.
|
|
|
Post by Lethal_Interjection on Feb 23, 2016 17:52:46 GMT -5
Top 10 in pay, the fans want Top 10 results. Even though you won't get it all the time, also a better March record as well. The problem is that the world doesn't work this way. I want the best coach we can have, regardless of salary. To me, I don't really care if JT3 is "overpaid" - I am not paying for it, and I think it's silly for people to focus on it. The alternative is hiring someone else who most certainly won't be top 10 in salary, and very likely would not be as successful, either. And, I highly doubt that if we had the 30th best paid coach that our fans would be happy with being a Top 30ish team every season. I agree but the delusional fan at times doesn't see it that way, that's why the expectations are needed to be tempered.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 23, 2016 17:55:41 GMT -5
Just so you know, according to RPI wizard, if we lose out the season (a very real possibility) we end up at 122. Even if we somehow win a game in NYC - which will only happen if we draw St. John's and even then who knows - we end the season below 100 in the RPI rankings. That's Esherickian. No denying it. I was using KenPom, not RPI, but your point is taken. In 2004, Georgetown's RPI was about 134. Right now, our RPI is 91. So yes, if we were to lose out the rest of the season, we might be near the same RPI we were at in 2004. Still, RPI can be deceiving because it's so dependent on the other teams you play and the rest of the league. For example, this year's team is 74 on KenPom, 63 on offense, 106 on defense. In contrast, in 2004, the team was 139 overall, our offense was 261 and defense was 30. Sure, the defense might have been better in 2004 than this season, but the offense was MUCH, MUCH, MUCH worse during Esherick's last season than it is this season. JT3 has never been close to having an offense or defense that bad. But, there's no denying. This is a bad season.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Feb 23, 2016 18:25:54 GMT -5
Wright comes closest of everyone on the list (they weren't ranked at any point of the season they finished below .500 (2012?)). I dont believe anyone else on that list that is currently coaching does! Some have had much better postseason success, but none have been in the top 25 at some point every year during III's tenure (or their tenure at their current school if less) and been in the tourney 80% of the time. Why should III get 3M? For the same reason all of the guys on that list do. They had a season or seasons of success that outstripped whatever they had been paid. It is, as it is for everyone in MBB, based entirely on the past. The only measure of accountability anyone has in this sport is to can the coach. That is how it works. Me? I just want results. Given the way pay works in the sport, I don't change the results I want based on the pay. That doesn't make any sense to me. I would like to know for a fact, but don't have the time for the research & comparison. As to the $3M, how much was he paid for his first GU contract, when was the extension and for how long, and what was the $ bump? Again, research. We would also need to compare the schools and their budgets. Or, was it JT3 pushing for his son to have that Top 8 salary? Ask and ye shall receive: Here is the list of coaches that made the NCAA Tournament either of the past two seasons and who were listed by USA Today as making between $2.5M and $3.5M (an admittedly somewhat random range that I am viewing as III's salary "peers"). There may well be more coaches than this that make in that range, but if they didn't make the tournament either last year or the year before, they almost surely don't meet your criteria. Next to their name is how many NCAA Tournaments they've qualified for at their current job: Scott Drew (6/13, including this year as a make) Travis Ford (5/8, including this year as a miss) Rick Barnes (fired after qualifying 16 out of 17 years at Texas; won't qualify this year at Tenn and probably isn't making $3M there anyway.) Steve Alford (2/3, including this year as a likely miss; 3/6 at previous job) Lon Kruger (4/5, including this year as a make) Jay Wright (11/15, including this year; 11/12 if you take away his first three years) Bo Ryan (14/14, not counting this year one way or the other) Tom Crean (4/8 including this year as a make; 4/5 if you takeaway his first three years) Bobby Huggins (7/9, including this year as a make) Thad Matta (9/11) Sean Miller (5/7) Josh Pastner (4/7) III (8/12) Your criteria was 80%. Let's be generous and list here those over 75%. It's Rick Barnes, Lon Kruger, Bo Ryan, Bobby Huggins, Thad Matta, and III. I'll also include Wright given recency, since he's way over 80% if you take away those three years. So only seven (counting Wright) of the thirteen names have qualified 75% of the time or more. With III among them. For each of those schools, here's the most recent year(s) going back to the start of the coach's tenure or to 2006 (III's first year) they went through an entire season unranked. I didn't go all the way back for every school: Texas (2012 and 2013) Oklahoma (2012 and 2013) Wisconsin (ranked every year...even this year) West Virginia (2012, 2013, 2014) Ohio State (2016...not even receiving votes in most recent poll) Villanova (2012, 2013) Georgetown (2016...though assuredly we'll be no. 1 in the final poll after our improbable run to the championship) So....the only program that fits your bill is Wisconsin and Bo Ryan. That's it. Out of thirteen names. And none of the other coaches that have qualified for the NCAAT at least 75% of the time have gone further back than 2014 in terms of being ranked at some point during a given year! If III is overpaid....then everyone (except for the retired guy) is overpaid among his "pay peers." But the larger point, at least for me, is that "success' is more difficult than we all think it is. If getting paid among the "top 20" (or whatever it is) makes you think you should get equivalent performance, well, here's the performance of those same guys according to your own metrics. Now, I don't deny that some of these folks have had some better (and/or more recent) postseason success, but that wasn't what you asked. And in any event, many of them really haven't. As for III's pay, it was between $400K and $500K for his first three seasons. He parlayed his success in 2006 and 2007 into a contract extension through 2013. Hard to argue with the decision to give him a raise or extension then. He certainly was in a position to demand it. Not many bigger coaching successes circa 2007 than was III.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,641
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Feb 23, 2016 18:46:04 GMT -5
I think that we are all terrified of change. The fear of severing ties to the Thompson legacy. This may ultimately lead us down a long road of mediocrity. Believe me, I fear the unknown as well. There will only be one JT2! Also, a topic for another day is our pathetic endowment which ranks 61st. That serves as an anchor keeping the university down.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,845
|
Post by EtomicB on Feb 23, 2016 20:23:19 GMT -5
Top 10 in pay, the fans want Top 10 results. Even though you won't get it all the time, also a better March record as well. The problem is that the world doesn't work this way. I want the best coach we can have, regardless of salary. To me, I don't really care if JT3 is "overpaid" - I am not paying for it, and I think it's silly for people to focus on it. The alternative is hiring someone else who most certainly won't be top 10 in salary, and very likely would not be as successful, either. And, I highly doubt that if we had the 30th best paid coach that our fans would be happy with being a Top 30ish team every season. I would be happy with a top 30ish team every year, a top 30 Gtown team is going to the tourney the great majority of the time.. As I posted earlier today, my expectations are for the program to be a top 4 team in the BE every year.. If they can do this they'll be around the top 30 teams in the country without doubt when you consider the OOC schedule Gtown plays.. Do you think top 4 in the BE is an unreasonable goal?
|
|
|
Post by hoyamonarch on Feb 24, 2016 9:46:04 GMT -5
I didn't read the entire thread, but Chris Mack made it a point to mention that they are well versed in advanced statistics.
|
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Feb 24, 2016 10:26:20 GMT -5
I would like to know for a fact, but don't have the time for the research & comparison. As to the $3M, how much was he paid for his first GU contract, when was the extension and for how long, and what was the $ bump? Again, research. We would also need to compare the schools and their budgets. Or, was it JT3 pushing for his son to have that Top 8 salary? Ask and ye shall receive: Here is the list of coaches that made the NCAA Tournament either of the past two seasons and who were listed by USA Today as making between $2.5M and $3.5M (an admittedly somewhat random range that I am viewing as III's salary "peers"). There may well be more coaches than this that make in that range, but if they didn't make the tournament either last year or the year before, they almost surely don't meet your criteria. Next to their name is how many NCAA Tournaments they've qualified for at their current job: Scott Drew (6/13, including this year as a make) Travis Ford (5/8, including this year as a miss) Rick Barnes (fired after qualifying 16 out of 17 years at Texas; won't qualify this year at Tenn and probably isn't making $3M there anyway.) Steve Alford (2/3, including this year as a likely miss; 3/6 at previous job) Lon Kruger (4/5, including this year as a make) Jay Wright (11/15, including this year; 11/12 if you take away his first three years) Bo Ryan (14/14, not counting this year one way or the other) Tom Crean (4/8 including this year as a make; 4/5 if you takeaway his first three years) Bobby Huggins (7/9, including this year as a make) Thad Matta (9/11) Sean Miller (5/7) Josh Pastner (4/7) III (8/12) Of the guys on that list who won't make the tournament this year: Travis Ford is getting fired Rick Barnes got fired even after making the tournament last year Steve Alford's buyout drops in 2017 when he will probably get fired Thad Matta's job is relatively safe but there are rumblingsJosh Pastner is probably 50/50 to get fired Four of the five other guys not making the tournament are either fired, out the door, or having their job security very seriously examined. Matta has S16/S16/F4/E8 from 2010-13, and even his future is being discussed. He is paid at the level where making the tournament is to be expected.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 24, 2016 10:55:09 GMT -5
I think that we are all terrified of change. The fear of severing ties to the Thompson legacy. This may ultimately lead us down a long road of mediocrity. Believe me, I fear the unknown as well. There will only be one JT2! Also, a topic for another day is our pathetic endowment which ranks 61st. That serves as an anchor keeping the university down. Based on HoyaTalk logic, since we are 61st in endowment, we really only need to shoot for being the 61st best university in the country, and I think we've already fulfilled that goal.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Feb 24, 2016 11:14:22 GMT -5
Ask and ye shall receive: Here is the list of coaches that made the NCAA Tournament either of the past two seasons and who were listed by USA Today as making between $2.5M and $3.5M (an admittedly somewhat random range that I am viewing as III's salary "peers"). There may well be more coaches than this that make in that range, but if they didn't make the tournament either last year or the year before, they almost surely don't meet your criteria. Next to their name is how many NCAA Tournaments they've qualified for at their current job: Scott Drew (6/13, including this year as a make) Travis Ford (5/8, including this year as a miss) Rick Barnes (fired after qualifying 16 out of 17 years at Texas; won't qualify this year at Tenn and probably isn't making $3M there anyway.) Steve Alford (2/3, including this year as a likely miss; 3/6 at previous job) Lon Kruger (4/5, including this year as a make) Jay Wright (11/15, including this year; 11/12 if you take away his first three years) Bo Ryan (14/14, not counting this year one way or the other) Tom Crean (4/8 including this year as a make; 4/5 if you takeaway his first three years) Bobby Huggins (7/9, including this year as a make) Thad Matta (9/11) Sean Miller (5/7) Josh Pastner (4/7) III (8/12) Of the guys on that list who won't make the tournament this year: Travis Ford is getting fired Rick Barnes got fired even after making the tournament last year Steve Alford's buyout drops in 2017 when he will probably get fired Thad Matta's job is relatively safe but there are rumblingsJosh Pastner is probably 50/50 to get fired Four of the five other guys not making the tournament are either fired, out the door, or having their job security very seriously examined. Matta has S16/S16/F4/E8 from 2010-13, and even his future is being discussed. He is paid at the level where making the tournament is to be expected. Absolutely, the guys you mention are in trouble. I'm really just making two points entirely consistent with that: (1) The pay thing, and people's fixation on it, is irrelevant. It doesn't, at least in my mind, have to do with pay. It's performance-based regardless of pay. Anyone at any school playing in a major conference is going to be looking seriously at making a change when there are 2 years in a row (or three out of four or whatever) of not making the NCAAT. That's a basic requirement. And I share it. Maybe Georgetown historically has given guys a bit more rope than that, and you always get a bit more rope at the very beginning of your tenure, or if you had some extreme success earlier in your tenure, but it's not a crazy amount of additional rope. And that's true regardless of pay. If anything, pay gives you MORE rope because of the buyouts, etc. (2) I think the numbers show that very, very few coaches (again, regardless of pay except at the very highest level (think K, Pitino, Calipari)) are regularly as successful as people think. Virtually no one gets to the Tournament even 75% of the time. Virtually no one can go more than 3 or 4 straight years of being ranked in the top 25 even once during the year. I get that schools make moves in those situations (as you point out), but it's very difficult for a coach to NOT be in that situation. That is, there aren't very many guys that aren't. I'm not raising any of this as a defense of III. I wouldn't fire him now. But if we have a similar year next year, I'm right there, given what will then be a four-year trend. Reasonable people can have different metrics for evaluating all that, subjective or objective, for when they want to make a move. I'm fine with that. (And I'm fine including postseason success as a part of that -- it just wasn't what PR was talking about). I'm also fine looking at how many years a program ranked in the top-25 at the end of the season -- that was one of your points earlier, and a fair one. Again, though, my suspicion is that among highly paid coaches, III hasn't done as badly as we think. So, I just think the pay thing is a red herring, because I think it's about meeting the performance metrics regardless of pay. And I think in setting up your own personal expectations, it's important people have realistic expectations for whomever it is they hire -- none of us wants to miss the NCAAs 75% of the time or to be ranked in the top 25 only one week in a decade. That's easy to agree on. But I think those numbers show that it's simply very difficult to make the NCAAs 80% of the time (over a reasonable period), or to be "nearly always" a top 30 program. Schools DO make moves regardless, but that doesn't mean they're acting wholly rationally -- often they're reacting to their wholly irrational fan-bases. Finally, to be clear, I'm not one of those that thinks we couldn't get and keep a good coach. After all, we did it with III. We got a good mid-major coach, paid him a reasonable amount at the start given his experience, had extreme success for a short period (and very good success for a longer period), while paying him enough to ensure he stays. If we found someone else, we would be able to do the same thing, if that person succeeded. But the nuance of that is that it's hard to end up with the right guy in the first instance. Provy seems to have finally found him, but they were in the wilderness an awfully long time. So you have to weigh the objective level of success (as I've tried to show) that your current coach has had (rather than any unreasonable expectations) against the real risk you're going to do meaningfully worse. And let's be clear: it would be EASY for us to do meaningfully worse. There's a long way down from even this year (III's single worse season by far, one year removed from a 4 seed and an NCAAT win). And we could find someone better. But let's have that discussion and make those arguments in the context of facts -- not some irrelevant argument about pay and an incorrect perception about how good most coaches do and what it's fair for us to expect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2016 12:00:13 GMT -5
Is it a Hoyatalk mandate that every conversation about JTIII devolves into a discussion over his salary? I'm as disappointed as anyone with the season, the atrocious defense, and the jab-myself-in-the-eyes-with-a-pencil-so-I-don't-have-to-watch offense, but this obsession has become tiresome.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,123
|
Post by RBHoya on Feb 24, 2016 18:03:37 GMT -5
Ignoring much of the recent discussion here--which seems like it might be better suited for the "JT III Coaching Discussion" thread--and responding just to the OP about use of Analytics in the program... I have a friend who for years has sworn that former team manager Justin Zormelo was essential to our strong runs in 2007 and throughout the early JTIII years. Always seemed kind of crazy, but with each passing year, slightly less so. I'm sure it's a coincidence that JTIII has looked less and less competent since Zormelo left, while Justin himself has gone on to become the trainer/stats and analysis guru/right-hand man for a cadre of elite NBA players (most notably Kevin Durant). But, I do wonder who if anyone has filled that role for us over the last several years, and if Justin wasn't a bit of a prodigy. Guy is a trained mathematician and basketball stats guru at the highest level, and he brought some of that thinking to Georgetown back before "analytics and advanced stats" were as ubiquitous as they are today. Here's his website, if anyone's interested: www.bestballanalytics.com/
|
|
beenaround
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,473
|
Post by beenaround on Feb 24, 2016 18:39:38 GMT -5
Ignoring much of the recent discussion here--which seems like it might be better suited for the "JT III Coaching Discussion" thread--and responding just to the OP about use of Analytics in the program... I have a friend who for years has sworn that former team manager Justin Zormelo was essential to our strong runs in 2007 and throughout the early JTIII years. Always seemed kind of crazy, but with each passing year, slightly less so. I'm sure it's a coincidence that JTIII has looked less and less competent since Zormelo left, while Justin himself has gone on to become the trainer/stats and analysis guru/right-hand man for a cadre of elite NBA players (most notably Kevin Durant). But, I do wonder who if anyone has filled that role for us over the last several years, and if Justin wasn't a bit of a prodigy. Guy is a trained mathematician and basketball stats guru at the highest level, and he brought some of that thinking to Georgetown back before "analytics and advanced stats" were as ubiquitous as they are today. Here's his website, if anyone's interested: www.bestballanalytics.com/Now this is why I love Hoyatalk, actually learning something about my favorite program. Thanks for the info.
|
|