|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Dec 28, 2018 21:41:20 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. He was clearly a more productive player than Angus in college and has far surpassed his accomplishments as a pro. That makes him a better player.
WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the projected starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow.
If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?
Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close.
So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 28, 2018 21:57:45 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow. If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close. So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR. My gawd... you truly love moving targets and throwing in/ignoring details that don't suit your intended, if not nonsensical, points. So fact #1... Coaching records don't have outliers... it's their record. EVERY YEAR COUNTS. Fact #2...WT is 6 or so games below CR's record in the 1st 4+ years. WT will fall further behind after year 5 as CR's poorly coached team won 21 games that year. WT will not... well, not with the level of play we've seen this season. Again, never thought CR was the answer. But, if he, his coaching, and his recruits were so inferior to the current regime twist some stats to tell us all why the results aren't better? Come on, this question keeps eluding your revisionist version of fact.
|
|
gzr
Freshman
Posts: 106
|
Post by gzr on Dec 28, 2018 22:14:11 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. He was clearly a more productive player than Angus in college and has far surpassed his accomplishments as a pro. That makes him a better player. WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the projected starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow. If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close. So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR. Robinson's best coaching job was his first year when he got a bunch of "misfits" to play a certain way. The were receptive because they had been aboard a sinking ship and wanted some success anyway they could get it. By the time Roberto came around, most of the players had become victims of hearing loss. Most of them could not understand "the enormity of it all" I see some of the same things now--I am sure WT gets mightily frustrated with some of the antics he sees. I am sure he knows better, the problem is how to coach the uncoachable especially when they are related to the coaching staff. There is only one thing most of these players today understand and that is playing time. How do you impress on 2 year olds that there is a consequence for misbehaving? It is a tough problem, any parent can tell you that. I am still hopeful that winning the game will trump playing for a "contract".
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Dec 28, 2018 23:05:32 GMT -8
I think the perspective here is pretty harsh on both WT and CR. First, both coaches appeared to be better coaches when they had less talented teams, possibly because those kids are more coachable. But more likely, you can't really challenge for the upper half of the conference with that approach - the dominate teams operate within a structure that enables the talented players the ability ad hoc on mismatches. Long gone are the days of running back-door cuts until something breaks down - the shot clock ended that. We've seen that its possible to be respectable with really stingy defense and very conservative offense. Both coaches have proven they can micromanage inferior talent to overachieve. CR subsequently proved he wasn't able to make the transition to higher-level talent operating with a lot more run-time decisions needed of the players, and so far WT hasn't either. However, that's a very hard thing to do - there's a lot of coaches that haven't been able to do that either, even with significantly more talent (e.g. Alford, Romar, Dawkins).
Recruiting is really the bottom line in today's game. Great coaching no longer closes enough of the talent gap. It's tempting to look across at our Women's program and think the same thing is possible on the men's side (getting the program to near elite without elite recruiting), but it's just a very different game. Nobody is making tournament runs without pretty serious talent.
My biggest concern about WT has been and continues to be the recruiting - he's done a respectable job to date on that front, but he could hit a wall like CR - and appears to be happening, quite frankly. His last 3 recruiting classes have netted 3 contributors of significance in Hollins, E. Thompson and Kelley. Hollins' season so far would have him being benched if these classes had been stronger, and Kelley has really been a positive outlier (that type of situation often becomes a wasted scholarship that stronger programs wouldn't risk). Getting and retaining 2 high-impact players (Hollins isn't one yet) in 3 years is not a recipe for success.
Maybe the 2019 class has 3 Pac-12 caliber players. I sure hope so, because there's been some misses that need covered. And that concerns me much more than too much standing around or losing to Kent State at home.
|
|
|
Post by beavsinorange on Dec 28, 2018 23:08:55 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. He was clearly a more productive player than Angus in college and has far surpassed his accomplishments as a pro. That makes him a better player. WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the projected starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow. If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close. So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR. The 2016-17 year was a serious of unfortunate events. My memory is fuzzy that year but we had a major injury with Tres and played a bunch of walk ons. We lost Duvivier and Bruce before the season. Stevie was hurt most of the year and Jaquori was quite raw. The team played with tons of heart but was way short in talent. Last year was a major bounce improvement, yet disappointing because of so many close losses. I may be criticized for this and I don’t care, but in my opinion Tinkle is a fabulous coach. He freaking took Oregon State to the tourney after a 26 year drought. It wasn’t just GP2 that carried us. We had Tres, Stevie, Bruce, Drew, Malcolm Langston al those guys playing well in their roles. Tinkle had that group exceed expectations while playing a tough schedule. The losses have been frustrating I get that. But, damnit I believe in this team and this Coaching staff, and I will not give up the faith. BeaverNation is my Family and I never turn my back on family.I will never stop going to Gill and cheering hard for the Beavs.
|
|
|
Post by beavsinorange on Dec 28, 2018 23:31:01 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. He was clearly a more productive player than Angus in college and has far surpassed his accomplishments as a pro. That makes him a better player. WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the projected starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow. If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close. So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR. The 2016-17 year was a serious of unfortunate events. My memory is fuzzy that year but we had a major injury with Tres and played a bunch of walk ons. We lost Duvivier and Bruce before the season. Stevie was hurt most of the year and Jaquori was quite raw. The team played with tons of heart but was way short in talent. Last year was a major bounce improvement, yet disappointing because of so many close losses. I may be criticized for this and I don’t care, but in my opinion Tinkle is a fabulous coach. He freaking took Oregon State to the tourney after a 26 year drought. It wasn’t just GP2 that carried us. We had Tres, Stevie, Bruce, Drew, Malcolm Langston al those guys playing well in their roles. Tinkle had that group exceed expectations while playing a tough schedule. The losses have been frustrating I get that. But, damnit I believe in this team and this Coaching staff, and I will not give up the faith. BeaverNation is my Family and I never turn my back on family.I will never stop going to Gill and cheering hard for the Beavs. This is why I believe we will do well in PAC 12 play. 1. Kylor Kelly- the dude is a shot blocking beast with major upside. He is only going to get better. He has got better each game. 2. The PAC 12 is down- So far I’ve watched most of the teams play this season in the PAC 12 and I certainly believe that the Beavs can beat anyone in the PAC 12. That is, if we play to our potential. We could also lose most teams to if we’re not focused. 3. Although the 4 losses have been winnable games, give credit to Kent St St Louis T A&am and Missouri. All 4 of those teams have Top 100 NET rankings. In addition we beat ODU and Penn two teams in top 100. Despite not playing our best, we could have won any of those games we lost. 4. Stevie and Hollins will likely break out of their slumps. They’re to talented not to. Tres will get better. And Ethan coul be one of PAC 12s best. Call me a blind optimist but I choose to believe and look at things half glass full.
|
|
|
Post by beavsinorange on Dec 28, 2018 23:33:45 GMT -8
The 2016-17 year was a serious of unfortunate events. My memory is fuzzy that year but we had a major injury with Tres and played a bunch of walk ons. We lost Duvivier and Bruce before the season. Stevie was hurt most of the year and Jaquori was quite raw. The team played with tons of heart but was way short in talent. Last year was a major bounce improvement, yet disappointing because of so many close losses. I may be criticized for this and I don’t care, but in my opinion Tinkle is a fabulous coach. He freaking took Oregon State to the tourney after a 26 year drought. It wasn’t just GP2 that carried us. We had Tres, Stevie, Bruce, Drew, Malcolm Langston al those guys playing well in their roles. Tinkle had that group exceed expectations while playing a tough schedule. The losses have been frustrating I get that. But, damnit I believe in this team and this Coaching staff, and I will not give up the faith. BeaverNation is my Family and I never turn my back on family.I will never stop going to Gill and cheering hard for the Beavs. This is why I believe we will do well in PAC 12 play. 1. Kylor Kelly- the dude is a shot blocking beast with major upside. He is only going to get better. He has got better each game. 2. The PAC 12 is down- So far I’ve watched most of the teams play this season in the PAC 12 and I certainly believe that the Beavs can beat anyone in the PAC 12. That is, if we play to our potential. We could also lose most teams to if we’re not focused. 3. Although the 4 losses have been winnable games, give credit to Kent St St Louis T A&am and Missouri. All 4 of those teams have Top 100 NET rankings. In addition we beat ODU and Penn two teams in top 100. Despite not playing our best, we could have won any of those games we lost. 4. Stevie and Hollins will likely break out of their slumps. They’re to talented not to. Tres will get better. And Ethan coul be one of PAC 12s best. Call me a blind optimist but I choose to believe and look at things half glass full. Also number 5, our Defense with Kelley and our length will give teams fits in the conference this year.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 29, 2018 0:15:42 GMT -8
People like to use Scott Ruek as an example... so name the next Scott Ruek. You say there are tons just like him. Pick almost every successful D1 coach. They didn't typically begin at UConn, Duke, MissSt, NC, etc etc etc. And how many "successful" D1 coaches are there? Tinkle took over a team that hadn't been to the Tournament in 24 years, got them there in 2 and has had 1 losing season in 4 years versus 19 losing seasons the previous 24 seasons ... and according to you he's not successful. How many "successful" coaches are there? You said there are tons of assistants who can walk in and be successful here, at a school with a rather poor basketball history the last quarter century... so there must be what, at least a hundred, hundred fifty successful Mark Few level coaches head coaching at the D1 level right now? Seems like you act that way anyways. My guess is if you hold all coaches to the standard you're holding Tinkle to there may be a dozen max currently coaching that have actually turned around the program they're at, and that's in years worth of hires. A lot of so-called "successful" coaches are just stepping into successful programs to replace other successful coaches who were hired away or retired. Even if you include coaches at schools who've done well in recent history prior to their hiring, just how many successful coaches are there?
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 29, 2018 0:52:15 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow. If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close. So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR. My gawd... you truly love moving targets and throwing in/ignoring details that don't suit your intended, if not nonsensical, points. So fact #1... Coaching records don't have outliers... it's their record. EVERY YEAR COUNTS. Fact #2...WT is 6 or so games below CR's record in the 1st 4+ years. WT will fall further behind after year 5 as CR's poorly coached team won 21 games that year. WT will not... well, not with the level of play we've seen this season. Again, never thought CR was the answer. But, if he, his coaching, and his recruits were so inferior to the current regime twist some stats to tell us all why the results aren't better? Come on, this question keeps eluding your revisionist version of fact. A little point of order, CR’s 5th season he won only 14 games, and 7 of his wins the first 4 seasons were CBI wins. Toss those CBI wins out and their win/loss record the first 4 years are pretty close to identical despite the outlier (until he has another bad season, at least a losing one, or has a year with no juniors or seniors that he recruited here, I’ll consider it an outlier) year.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 29, 2018 1:06:01 GMT -8
My gawd... you truly love moving targets and throwing in/ignoring details that don't suit your intended, if not nonsensical, points. So fact #1... Coaching records don't have outliers... it's their record. EVERY YEAR COUNTS. Fact #2...WT is 6 or so games below CR's record in the 1st 4+ years. WT will fall further behind after year 5 as CR's poorly coached team won 21 games that year. WT will not... well, not with the level of play we've seen this season. Again, never thought CR was the answer. But, if he, his coaching, and his recruits were so inferior to the current regime twist some stats to tell us all why the results aren't better? Come on, this question keeps eluding your revisionist version of fact. A little point of order, CR’s 5th season he won only 14 games, and 7 of his wins the first 4 seasons were CBI wins. Toss those CBI wins out and their win/loss record the first 4 years are pretty close to identical despite the outlier (until he has another bad season, at least a losing one, or has a year with no juniors or seniors that he recruited here, I’ll consider it an outlier) year. Corrected... year 4 was 21. My bad. The jumble of stats I guess was CR is plus 6 after year 4, in meaning 21 this year would only put WT ahead?? But, point of fact, CBI wins do count. If they were losses they would and people would bitch. As wins they now are a negative? Like those opponents weren't as worthy as some of the recent OOC opponents because it was the CBI? Thru all the opinion and numbers my main point, lost in my and others' skewed info... CR is/was roundly criticized and WT is said to be better in both key areas of that criticism yet results are no better. CR Pac12 thru 4 losing seasons: 27-45... 8th, 5th, 9th, 9th WT Pac12 thru 3 of 4 losing seasons 25-47... 7th, 6th, 12th, 10th PS- as easy as the 5 win season is an outlier, so is the tourney season that folks seem to think solidifies WT as a good coach. An invite is largely not a result of WT at 19 W's, 9-9/6th in Pac12. It is more about the state of hoops and the committee's choices. Having 6 Pac12 teams in the tourney is as much the outlier as injuries are. Both out of a coaches control. But, Jan 5th on will tell. Team best turn a corner or the first 5 Pac12 games could get ugly... or show us signs of "life".
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 29, 2018 1:52:26 GMT -8
So as far as a direct Tinkle/Robinson comparison goes, I’m not sure if I’ve personally compared their coaching styles, but others have. I’ve commented specifically on Robinson’s recruiting in one fashion, he blew it two or three years in a row at the end of his tenure, add to that that he basically lost the team his final year and a bunch of talent left and Tinkle was left very little to work with. Tinkle had zero returning starters his first year and nothing at all in years 3 or 4 which should have had some CR recruited players. Robinson inherited multiple players who had started for at least a year, and relied heavily on Jay John recruits his first 3 years, having significant contributors Calvin Haynes, Omari Johnson and Latham Wallace to work with his third year. Tinkle never had the luxury of experienced players when he started here, that’s the major reason I consider his third season here an outlier.
Tinkle just may have his own issues at retaining talent, we’ll see if that’s an issue going into the future or it’s a bump in the road. The team has a lot of work to do to get up towards the top end of the league. I guess my biggest beef with the coaching right now is they need to react when one or two players are having poor shooting games, let others pick up the slack when that happens, this team feels deeper than it has been. One or two players having an off night shouldn’t cost games against the level of talent we’ve been playing so far.
As far as the CBI thing goes, 5 of those 7 wins came in a season Robinson was 13 and 17. 2 of his 4 trips to the CBI the teams had losing records for the regular season. I’m pretty sure Tinkle and company turned a CBI offer their first year and they were busy with the NCAA tournament the next year. He probably could have added some wins if they’d gone to the CBI those years, the level of talent in that tournament is arguably lower than our preseason schedule has been.
|
|
bill82
Sophomore
OSU's 10,157th Best Donor
Posts: 1,000
|
Post by bill82 on Dec 29, 2018 5:51:54 GMT -8
If Tinkle has not "lost the team" yet, I need some help on the definition. At the pressers he has said the players do not follow the game plan on offense or defense. He has said they don't pass, catch, stop, run a backdoor or rebound correctly. What is left? They have enough talent to play as individuals and still win 6 or 7 Pac-12 games. That will give us a winning season. But if we are happy with the team playing as individuals, why waste money on a head coach?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2018 7:47:07 GMT -8
If Tinkle has not "lost the team" yet, I need some help on the definition. At the pressers he has said the players do not follow the game plan on offense or defense. He has said they don't pass, catch, stop, run a backdoor or rebound correctly. What is left? They have enough talent to play as individuals and still win 6 or 7 Pac-12 games. That will give us a winning season. But if we are happy with the team playing as individuals, why waste money on a head coach? Wait, head coach is optional?? Maybe the time has come for player coaches. Think of the cost savings. And might be a recruiting angle. Sure there is always going to be a couple of dudes wearing dress clothes to handle the admin stuff and yell at the refs but any stiff can do that.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Dec 29, 2018 7:52:45 GMT -8
Drew's NBA status is based on athleticism and potential. If Drew had a great skill set he'd be at a far different level.
You can't be at a higher level than the NBA. He's in the NBA because the Spurs, one of the league's top organizations, think he's an NBA player. WT is not at .500... and his OSU teams have been horrendous on the road.
Take away the 5-27 year, which clearly was an outlier, the starting lineup played in ONE game together, and he's 59-47, 60-47 after tomorrow. If recruiting and coaching has been better why have the results in the first four+ years been worse than the bond broker pretending to coach?Robinson had two losing seasons in his first four at OSU. Tinkle has one. Robinson's first four teams never won more than eight Pac-10 games (7,8,5,7); Tinkle won 8, 9 and 7 last year. Robinson's fifth year he was 14-18, 4-14. We will exceed that this year. We have played in an NCAA tournament; Robinson never came close. So, the first four+ years are clearly better under Tinkle than CR. My gawd... you truly love moving targets and throwing in/ignoring details that don't suit your intended, if not nonsensical, points. So fact #1... Coaching records don't have outliers... it's their record. EVERY YEAR COUNTS. Fact #2...WT is 6 or so games below CR's record in the 1st 4+ years. WT will fall further behind after year 5 as CR's poorly coached team won 21 games that year. WT will not... well, not with the level of play we've seen this season. Again, never thought CR was the answer. But, if he, his coaching, and his recruits were so inferior to the current regime twist some stats to tell us all why the results aren't better? Come on, this question keeps eluding your revisionist version of fact. If a "moving target" is specifically countering every one of your claims, then guilty as charged. Without the unnecessary snark. And yes, his record through nearly 15 years of being a DI head coach shows that the 5-27 record was clearly the outlier.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 29, 2018 9:03:38 GMT -8
Yep, in 12 years as a head coach he’s had that one 5 win season, a season he came up 1 game shy of .500, a single.500 season and 9 winning seasons. Hardly the train wreck painted by some.
|
|