General Coach Candidate News

[kottke]

17 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

Been gone for a few hours miss anything?

Did you see anyone "interesting" when you went to get your COVID test?

[AZ Hoosier]

19 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

Been gone for a few hours miss anything?

nope... just the usual bickering and sniping... #Bwahahaha

What breaking news do you have for us?

[Moye > Boozer]

3 minutes ago, NashvilleHoosier said:

Well he's been at Bama for 2 seasons, not 1 :-). 

Potentially ruin his career? There'd be 20 Bama's lining up for his services if he failed here. 

Being at the biggest football school in the country means you have no chance of basketball being near as important. Some might want to play second fiddle. He doesn't seem to have that personality.

He's making sweet money there but could make sweeter money here. 

If he can have success at Alabama, there is no evidence he can't have success here. 

I'll also add, the way Dolson spoke of the second donor covering "transition costs" or whatever his vernacular was lead me to think ---- transition cost = "buyout of the new coach's existing contract" ----- more than it meant ponying up for the next coach's annual salary. Any of you take it the same way? Again, not saying that's how he meant it but more how I took it. $12M might be extreme. Though I hope not!!

[NashvilleHoosier]

1 minute ago, Moye > Boozer said:

I'll also add, the way Dolson spoke of the second donor covering "transition costs" or whatever his vernacular was lead me to think ---- transition cost = "buyout of the new coach's existing contract" ----- more than it meant ponying up for the next coach's annual salary. Any of you take it the same way? Again, not saying that's how he meant it but more how I took it. $12M might be extreme. Though I hope not!!

My take is that I thought $12M was extreme until I heard what we were gonna pay Stevens. Oats makes $3.225/year right now. We could offer $4.5-$5M/year and pay the buyout and in 6 years or so we'd have spent less than we would have on Stevens. If the total package for Stevens was doable, the total package for Oats is. 

[Coach Robby]

10 minutes ago, NashvilleHoosier said:

Well he's been at Bama for 2 seasons, not 1 :-). 

Potentially ruin his career? There'd be 20 Bama's lining up for his services if he failed here. 

Being at the biggest football school in the country means you have no chance of basketball being near as important. Some might want to play second fiddle. He doesn't seem to have that personality.

He's making sweet money there but could make sweeter money here. 

If he can have success at Alabama, there is no evidence he can't have success here. 

well said, I forgot it has been 2 years!

[AZ Hoosier]

6 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

And since this Old Fart is nearly 73, Woody's just a young whippersnapper to me.   

Everybody is different and you all know people in their 50's who simply don't have any gas left in their tank.  Likewise, you know people in their 70's and maybe even in there 80's who are just as active today as they were 20 or 30 years ago.  The age issue is a valid issue, but you can't automatically assume that they can't be effective just because they're "x" years old.

Exactly... saw a piece on William Shatner the other day... the dude is 90 years old and is still riding horses every day... he looked like a guy in his early 60s, seriously.

[Chris007]

22 minutes ago, Treesh said:

Just me trying to save Indiana fans from wanting Woodson. 

Just another Wednesday really. 

EDIT: Race is in transfer portal 

Your always fighting the good fight

[darB s'tI]

Logic: If it's Woodson, there's really no reason to wait this long to announce. We're "losing" people by the hour to the transfer portal. If you have your guy, you make the announcement and retain/recruit. Otherwise, we don't have our guy. Facts.

[Chris007]

5 minutes ago, Moye > Boozer said:

I'll also add, the way Dolson spoke of the second donor covering "transition costs" or whatever his vernacular was lead me to think ---- transition cost = "buyout of the new coach's existing contract" ----- more than it meant ponying up for the next coach's annual salary. Any of you take it the same way? Again, not saying that's how he meant it but more how I took it. $12M might be extreme. Though I hope not!!

To me that was IU is only paying 3.5 million for the next coach and if we have to pay more than that the booster will cover it. 

[lillurk]

2 minutes ago, IU-DL said:

Logic: If it's Woodson, there's really no reason to wait this long to announce. We're "losing" people by the hour to the transfer portal. If you have your guy, you make the announcement and retain/recruit. Otherwise, we don't have our guy. Facts.

In addition, do you really think they’ll hire Woodson/Fife/Beilein NOW instead of talking to Beard/Muss/Oats?

[Chris007]

12 minutes ago, kottke said:

Did you see anyone "interesting" when you went to get your COVID test?

I thought I saw Dolson or Roberts leaving in their vehicle but nothing other than that. 

[Chris007]

11 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

nope... just the usual bickering and sniping... #Bwahahaha

What breaking news do you have for us?

Spouses are exhausting. Is that breaking news or old news?

[Zachetology]

21 minutes ago, TadQueasy said:

I think we have a misunderstanding of innovative.  

None of that is innovative.  That stuff has been around awhile.  

We need to be smarter as a fanbase.

Numerous stats have existed for numerous years. Innovation comes from emphasis. In baseball, on-base percentage had existed for a long time. The Moneyball movement was an emphasis on getting on base over other traditional statistics. In basketball, the Moneyball movement is going to be an emphasis on efficiency.

People who think they are geniuses quote KenPom and brag about how efficient an offense or defense is. The actions of most coaches, however, show that they don't understand the strings that pull the puppet of efficiency. The strings are shot selection.

This regular season, for the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament, here are some numbers to consider. I will list the total field goal percentages and points per shot for the 68 teams at the rim, from midrange, and from long range.

AT THE RIM: FG% (58.8%), Points Per Shot (FG% x value of shot; in this case 58.8% x 2; 1.18)

MIDRANGE: FG% (38.8%), PPS (0.78)

LONG RANGE: FG% (35.3%), PPS (1.06)

The meaning of this: every time a team takes a midrange shot, that team is giving away a minimum of .28 points. If a team takes 100 midrange shots over a three games, that team has given away a minimum of 28 points. Does that sound valuable to you? 

Alabama was the only team this year to attempt less than 10% of its shots from midrange and no one else was close. Nate Oats is Billy Beane. He may not win the World Series, but the next dozen teams that do will do it from stealing his philosophy. I believe it is worth it to make an aggressive financial play to be a leader in college basketball rather than live in the past, in more ways than one. 

[AKHoosier]

53 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

That is just nonsense logic. In 2018-19, the last regular NCAA season 17 of the top 25 had .800 or better winning percentages, NBA teams...0. Comparing theNCAA to NBA numbers on any level is just stupid.

Brad Stevens career winning percentage in the NBA?  .564    Why did we want that bum leading IU to 17-13 every year? Dodged a bullet there.

Just look at the numbers before and after he was with both teams.  He was the high water mark for both of those teams with the core rosters he had.

And you have it backwards, if he had gone to Penn St or UVA, he wouldn't be interested in this recent sinkhole of a college coaching job, the whole reason an accomplished NBA coach is even interested in the job is his ties and love of the university.

And again, who gives a isht about his recognizability as a former IU player. If you don't think him walking in a recruits home and mentioning how he reminds him of his former players Carmelo Anthony, Blake Griffin or Chris Paul your delusional.

I am not arguing he is the grand prize, but he also isn't the flaming bag of cr@p some of you are making him out to be.

Awesome, glad you're excited about the prospect of hiring him and not having to put yourself through exhaustive mental gymnastics to get on board.

Just ask yourself one question, and you can lie if you want to: If Purdue had a vacancy and was set to hire Mike Woodson, and assuming you want our hated rival to fail, how would you feel about their chances of doing so?

And for the record, I'm not trying to make him into a flaming pile of crap. If we hired him, we would probably be pretty average.

I thought by firing Archie, we're trying to be better than average for once.

[IUCane]

4 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

To me that was IU is only paying 3.5 million for the next coach and if we have to pay more than that the booster will cover it. 

And the Booster has to like said coach as much as BtownBanners does :).   Boosters obviously liked Stevens but we don't know who else??  

[Iubravos]

52 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Musselman was 20-12 last year at Arkansas which was Archie's record last year.  So we are talking about Musselman over one great year at a power 5 conference.

He has 1 great year out of 2. Look at his record at Nevada. Archie has 0 great years out of 4 with better recruiting facilities.  Give me Musselman all day and it's not close. If you don't trust in Mussel, just wait in 5 years when he is a top 3 coach in college year after year with success. He is the real deal. That's who we need to go after 100% all in. 

[IU Prof]

I'm a big Oats fan. He was building a monster at Buffalo, and has hit the ground running at Alabama. The MAC tends to play a more physical style of ball, similar to the B1G, so I believe his style would translate to IU.

My concern is, if you are Oats, why sign a new contract with a big buyout a few weeks ago if you are interested in IU. He had to know the job could come open, and that a $12 million buyout would hamper his negotiating leverage should IU reach out. 

[Hoosierfan2017]

5 minutes ago, AKHoosier said:

Awesome, glad you're excited about the prospect of hiring him and not having to put yourself through exhaustive mental gymnastics to get on board.

Just ask yourself one question, and you can lie if you want to: If Purdue had a vacancy and was set to hire Mike Woodson, and assuming you want our hated rival to fail, how would you feel about their chances of doing so?

And for the record, I'm not trying to make him into a flaming pile of crap. If we hired him, we would probably be pretty average.

I thought by firing Archie, we're trying to be better than average for once.

I would be as giddy as a school girl in that situation. Purdue’s fanbase probably feels exactly like that right now with the rumors swirling. 

[IU Scott]

16 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

Exactly... saw a piece on William Shatner the other day... the dude is 90 years old and is still riding horses every day... he looked like a guy in his early 60s, seriously.

Look at  sister Jean she is 101 and still going strong

[Moye > Boozer]

4 minutes ago, Zachetology said:

We need to be smarter as a fanbase.

Numerous stats have existed for numerous years. Innovation comes from emphasis. In baseball, on-base percentage had existed for a long time. The Moneyball movement was an emphasis on getting on base over other traditional statistics. In basketball, the Moneyball movement is going to be an emphasis on efficiency.

People who think they are geniuses quote KenPom and brag about how efficient an offense or defense is. The actions of most coaches, however, show that they don't understand the strings that pull the puppet of efficiency. The strings are shot selection.

This regular season, for the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament, here are some numbers to consider. I will list the total field goal percentages and points per shot for the 68 teams at the rim, from midrange, and from long range.

AT THE RIM: FG% (58.8%), Points Per Shot (FG% x value of shot; in this case 58.8% x 2; 1.18)

MIDRANGE: FG% (38.8%), PPS (0.78)

LONG RANGE: FG% (35.3%), PPS (1.06)

The meaning of this: every time a team takes a midrange shot, that team is giving away a minimum of .28 points. If a team takes 100 midrange shots over a three games, that team has given away a minimum of 28 points. Does that sound valuable to you? 

Alabama was the only team this year to attempt less than 10% of its shots from midrange and no one else was close. Nate Oats is Billy Beane. He may not win the World Series, but the next dozen teams that do will do it from stealing his philosophy. I believe it is worth it to make an aggressive financial play to be a leader in college basketball rather than live in the past, in more ways than one. 

Just piling on my near ravenous Nate Oats fandom ------ I actually would prefer him so much more than Muss because I don't want the guy that jumps on the table and says "look at me" after victory ---- I want the guy that tells the other team "get the **** outta here".

Again, I know I've mentioned that dang article 15x now, but having read that article BEFORE IU fired Archie, then listening to Dolson's presser, I thought "holy smokes, Dolson must've read that article" because Nate Oats is the exact coach he is talking about (at least the exact TYPE of coach).