|
Post by messi on Mar 27, 2019 10:26:29 GMT -8
And by tournament, I mean the NCAA and NIT. Between the disappointment of how this season finished, the anticipation of the next recruiting class, should he stay or go, etc. I'm just curious.
And I say "non-tournament", because as we just saw, a 10-8 conference record and a 4th place finish, looks nice at first but that doesn't guarantee playoffs.
BTW, that's not me who voted first.
|
|
|
Post by beaver94 on Mar 27, 2019 10:47:53 GMT -8
I chose 1 season, but I'm basing that on Tres returning. If Tres returns and they can't make a tournament, while only losing 2 players of this roster, then the program isn't building. If Tres doesn't return I'd be generous and give him a second season unless next year turned into another season like the one that Tres was injured.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 27, 2019 12:03:55 GMT -8
It 100% totally depends. Outside of 2016-17, I am a fan of what I have seen out of Tinkle. I am so sick of watching the basketball team lose in the pre-Tinkle era. If Tinkle can get Oregon State to .500+ next year in conference, he deserves another year. After that, if we have not gotten back to 19+ wins, we may need to reevaluate.
From what I have seen so far, I am happy (though not ecstatic) with the program.
|
|
|
Post by osufan2k on Mar 27, 2019 12:54:21 GMT -8
It 100% totally depends. Outside of 2016-17, I am a fan of what I have seen out of Tinkle. I am so sick of watching the basketball team lose in the pre-Tinkle era. If Tinkle can get Oregon State to .500+ next year in conference, he deserves another year. After that, if we have not gotten back to 19+ wins, we may need to reevaluate. From what I have seen so far, I am happy (though not ecstatic) with the program. Okay.. I'm being serious here and not trying to be a smart ass, but what exactly are you happy about with the current state of the program? Tinkle's recruiting is suspect, his coaching is suspect, his game planning is suspect. He runs a clean program and is a good person, i'll give him that, but what else is positive? 5 seasons into his tenure and he has 1 appearance in the NCAA tourney (thanks GP2) and no NIT appearances. A below .400 conference winning record and now his experienced players are graduating or will be gone after next year. I just don't see how the program will ever get better under his direction.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 27, 2019 14:17:39 GMT -8
I would think if everyone comes back and stays healthy, if the team doesn't make a tournament next season his seat should be very hot. At that point it really depends on how the season goes. Another year like 2016-17 and he's gone, another year like this season, as frustrating at it ended up being, I can't see him getting fired for putting together a competitive top third in the league team.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 27, 2019 21:08:45 GMT -8
It 100% totally depends. Outside of 2016-17, I am a fan of what I have seen out of Tinkle. I am so sick of watching the basketball team lose in the pre-Tinkle era. If Tinkle can get Oregon State to .500+ next year in conference, he deserves another year. After that, if we have not gotten back to 19+ wins, we may need to reevaluate. From what I have seen so far, I am happy (though not ecstatic) with the program. Okay.. I'm being serious here and not trying to be a smart ass, but what exactly are you happy about with the current state of the program? Tinkle's recruiting is suspect, his coaching is suspect, his game planning is suspect. He runs a clean program and is a good person, i'll give him that, but what else is positive? 5 seasons into his tenure and he has 1 appearance in the NCAA tourney (thanks GP2) and no NIT appearances. A below .400 conference winning record and now his experienced players are graduating or will be gone after next year. I just don't see how the program will ever get better under his direction. So far, Wayne's Pac-12 wins are 7, 8, 9, 10, and 1. Wayne's total wins are 16, 17, 18, 19, and 5. Which one is not like the other? If you assume a normal distribution, winning five games 2016-17 is outside of the 99.99% confidence interval, i.e. there is less than a 1 in 10,000 chance that five wins is a naturally-occurring event. Or, to put that another way, assuming a normal distribution, you would expect to see another five-win season in 10,000 years. Including 2016-17 is purposefully included to skew Wayne's otherwise very positive results (at least when compared to all other coaches of the past quarter century). Removing 2016-17, Wayne was 36-27 with GPII and 34-29 without GPII. Wayne was exactly 17-19 in Pac-12 play with GPII and 17-19 in Pac-12 play without GPII. Wayne went 1-2 in the Pac-12 Tournament with GPII and 1-2 in the Pac-12 Tournament without GPII. In non-conference play, the difference appears to be four points in two games over the past two years. As for his pros and cons, it seems like he does not do a great job at game preparation (for whatever reason) but is very good at making in-game adjustments. The team was heady and tended to make very good use of timeouts during the bulk of the game. The end of games sometimes turned into a hot mess, which should mostly fall in Tinkle's lap. That UCLA game was a great example of how to not make the postseason. In my opinion, Tinkle is an above average (although not great) recruiter, who has shown an ability to find diamonds in the rough. In my opinion, Tinkle is an above average (although not great) developer of talent. There are better coaches out there for sure, but the odds of the current AD finding one are very close to 0%. I would much rather watch a competitive 7-11 with flashes of 10-8 or 11-7 than the record-setting historically ugly basketball that we saw the quarter century before Tinkle showed up.
|
|
|
Post by jefframp on Mar 28, 2019 5:20:12 GMT -8
Edited:
I think anyone who can recruit 3 All PAC-12 Scholar Athletes can stay as long as he likes if he keeps the PAC-12 win total at or above 50% *from here on out*.
|
|
|
Post by beaverbeliever71 on Mar 28, 2019 9:08:09 GMT -8
I think anyone who can recruit 3 All PAC-12 Scholar Athletes can stay as long as he likes if he keeps the PAC-12 win total at or above 50%. Well Tinkle is 28-48 in conference so you're not talking about our current coach. Where did you come up with 28-48?..thats 76 games.. you play 18 conference games. 18x5 seasons= 90..
|
|
|
Post by osufan2k on Mar 28, 2019 11:01:25 GMT -8
Okay.. I'm being serious here and not trying to be a smart ass, but what exactly are you happy about with the current state of the program? Tinkle's recruiting is suspect, his coaching is suspect, his game planning is suspect. He runs a clean program and is a good person, i'll give him that, but what else is positive? 5 seasons into his tenure and he has 1 appearance in the NCAA tourney (thanks GP2) and no NIT appearances. A below .400 conference winning record and now his experienced players are graduating or will be gone after next year. I just don't see how the program will ever get better under his direction. So far, Wayne's Pac-12 wins are 7, 8, 9, 10, and 1. Wayne's total wins are 16, 17, 18, 19, and 5. Which one is not like the other? If you assume a normal distribution, winning five games 2016-17 is outside of the 99.99% confidence interval, i.e. there is less than a 1 in 10,000 chance that five wins is a naturally-occurring event. Or, to put that another way, assuming a normal distribution, you would expect to see another five-win season in 10,000 years. Including 2016-17 is purposefully included to skew Wayne's otherwise very positive results (at least when compared to all other coaches of the past quarter century). Removing 2016-17, Wayne was 36-27 with GPII and 34-29 without GPII. Wayne was exactly 17-19 in Pac-12 play with GPII and 17-19 in Pac-12 play without GPII. Wayne went 1-2 in the Pac-12 Tournament with GPII and 1-2 in the Pac-12 Tournament without GPII. In non-conference play, the difference appears to be four points in two games over the past two years. As for his pros and cons, it seems like he does not do a great job at game preparation (for whatever reason) but is very good at making in-game adjustments. The team was heady and tended to make very good use of timeouts during the bulk of the game. The end of games sometimes turned into a hot mess, which should mostly fall in Tinkle's lap. That UCLA game was a great example of how to not make the postseason. In my opinion, Tinkle is an above average (although not great) recruiter, who has shown an ability to find diamonds in the rough. In my opinion, Tinkle is an above average (although not great) developer of talent. There are better coaches out there for sure, but the odds of the current AD finding one are very close to 0%. I would much rather watch a competitive 7-11 with flashes of 10-8 or 11-7 than the record-setting historically ugly basketball that we saw the quarter century before Tinkle showed up. Okay, so you're happy and content with Tinkle being an average coach who consistently loses 60% of the conference games he coaches! That 16-17 team that you like to dismiss had multiple 4* players. Tinkle played the first 6, then missed the rest of the season. Thompson missed the first 7 games, but then played the rest of the season. Eubanks and McLaughlin played the entire seasons. That is four 4* players on a team that won 5 games. Tinkle completely relied on GP2 and was not prepared after he graduated. Tres got hurt and Wayne had no backup plan. He's an above average developer of talent? How? Other than working to increase his son's stat sheet, what has he done for the big men on the roster? Kelly, Washington, and big G were a combined 3-6 7pts against Colorado in the tournament. THE BENCH SCORED 2 POINTS THAT GAME! Not once this entire season did someone NOT named Tinkle or Thompson have the high score of the game. That is developing talent?
|
|
|
Post by bvrblvr on Mar 28, 2019 11:38:32 GMT -8
I don't know if WT is the final answer to OSU's basketball woes or not. But I do know the two most successful coaches OSU has had in the last 90 years are the only two that coached longer than 6 seasons. I'd like to try a couple more years of stability and see if momentum can continue to move in a positive direction. Cut bait now and I'm fairly certain we'll be having this discussion again in roughly 5 or 6 seasons. There's no guarantee it will work out - but at least its trying something different than the pattern since 1989; name new coach - five or six seasons - fire coach - name new coach - wash - repeat.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 28, 2019 11:50:13 GMT -8
Edited: I think anyone who can recruit 3 All PAC-12 Scholar Athletes can stay as long as he likes if he keeps the PAC-12 win total at or above 50% *from here on out*. He didn't "recruit" any scholars... that is ALL those kids and has ZERO to do with WT and is a huge stretch to even intimate such. Those kids excelled in school on their own effort and the ability to be both a student and athlete. The athletic academic center and personnel does a great job, but WT has zero to do with their academic successes, let alone stating he "recruited" then as such. Again... a huge reach in support of a guy that no one seems to speak to his actually game prep, in-game coaching, system, player development, recruiting...
|
|
|
Post by OSUprof on Mar 28, 2019 12:02:37 GMT -8
Excellence cannot be achieved if one continually accepts the excuses for failure.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 28, 2019 12:16:51 GMT -8
Edited: I think anyone who can recruit 3 All PAC-12 Scholar Athletes can stay as long as he likes if he keeps the PAC-12 win total at or above 50% *from here on out*. He didn't "recruit" any scholars... that is ALL those kids and has ZERO to do with WT and is a huge stretch to even intimate such. Those kids excelled in school on their own effort and the ability to be both a student and athlete. The athletic academic center and personnel does a great job, but WT has zero to do with their academic successes, let alone stating he "recruited" then as such. Again... a huge reach in support of a guy that no one seems to speak to his actually game prep, in-game coaching, system, player development, recruiting... You have to give him a little credit. He and his staff do demand that they succeed in the classroom. There are a lot of coaches out there that don't give a crap about the academic side as long as their players are doing enough to stay eligible. And, with the one & doners, the coaches don't really have any incentive to preach academics....they just need them to stay eligible until March
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 28, 2019 12:47:09 GMT -8
Excellence cannot be achieved if one continually accepts the excuses for failure. Yeah, Apple should have cut that Jobs guy loose early on after his first few failures, and certainly never should have rehired him. There's no excuse for failure, and one who fails can never succeed. Colonel Sanders, Walt Disney, Ray Kroc all had huge failures along the way but stuck with it well beyond the point most would give up. Not saying Tinkle is any of those guys, but OSU has had a history of giving up on coaches after 4 and 5 years. From the 1991/92 season through the 2013/14 season OSU produced two winning records and one .500 season. 23 freaking years and only 3 competitive-ish seasons. In Tinkle's case, he has produced the best years OSU has had in 30 years (3 winning records and one .500 season in 5 years) and there are people here who are saying he needs to be gone. In pretty much every sport that we've had long term coaches, their best years weren't in their first 5 seasons, closer to a decade out. OSU may never have that kind of coach again if they cut and run continually, especially on coaches who are actually producing competitive teams.
|
|
|
Post by jefframp on Mar 28, 2019 13:25:09 GMT -8
Excellence cannot be achieved if one continually accepts the excuses for failure. Patience grasshopper.........patience. Dana Altman has had pretty good success but I wouldn't touch that program with a ten foot pole. Gonzaga would probably be my gold standard but those coaches are apparently "Few" and far between.
|
|