2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,803
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on May 13, 2022 11:45:39 GMT -8
When we picked up WT from Montana, I immediately thought of Mike Montgomery, who translated his success at Montana into similar success at Stanford....and these recent "revelations" about WT and team dynamics made me wonder.....
But the Big Sky seems to be slightly different, and I am wondering if it also accommodates different coaching approaches.
Players at the Big Sky level seem less likely to be destined for the NBA (Damian Lilliard aside - and note, I am just basing this on the theory that "if you are recognized to have NBA potential, you are probably at one of the more visible "feeder" schools). So players at that level might be more interested in team success than personal success? So they get along better and require less coaching intervention in team dynamics?
If there are fewer one-and-dones at the Big Sky level, then perhaps players there are more interested in studies and by extension are more adept at managing themselves? Perhaps Montgomery had some of the same going on at Stanford where you have to be somewhat academically inclined to get in? So perhaps you can go lighter on some aspects of coaching because the players have a slightly different mindset?
Success in the Big Sky is mostly driven by winning the tournament and getting the automatic bid. So teams can focus on growing and developing during the season as long as travails early in the season translate into post-season success. Peak at the right time, and get the bid, otherwise you are probably headed to the NIT?
I guess I could see if any of this would apply to other Big Sky to Big League coaching moves (Jud Heathcoate and LarryK come to mind). I am just trying to figure out why WT hasn't been "more" successful. There are obviously myriad reasons, but I guess in the off season I am far less frustrated at the season and can have some idle thoughts.
Go Beavers!
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on May 13, 2022 18:42:42 GMT -8
Montana is a "have" in the Big Sky. Plenty of resources. OSU is a "have-not" in the Pac-12, with resources in the lower fourth of the league.
Missoula is one of the nicest places in the Big Sky. Corvallis is a tough sell to kids when the alternatives are LA, Phoenix, the Bay Area, Boulder/Denver, SLC, Seattle, over-the-top facilities and gear in Eugene, and an entrenched, powerful program in Tucson, which is a dump but a warm, sunny dump with a 40-year tradition of excellence.
Not excuses. Just facts.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on May 15, 2022 6:58:12 GMT -8
Comes down to recruiting. WT was getting low 3-star and high-2stars at Montana primarily with some mid-3 stars mixed in. Outside of the family trees, he’s only been getting primarily mid to high 3-stars stars at OSU. Hard to consistently win at a P5 school with those types of recruits unless you are recruiting for a well-defined system and know exactly what you want in players to run that system well. WT and OSU don’t have such a system, so basically his teams are undermanned consistently. If/when WT is let go in the future, I think they really need to look at coaches that run a well-defined specific system either on offense or defense (or both). Which system(s) is really less important than having one and being able to recruit at a high level for that system. I just have my doubts that the Beavers will ever (or at least in my lifetime) be able to simply out recruit the rest of the Pac 12 to be a consistent winner.
|
|
|
Post by william44 on May 15, 2022 9:43:06 GMT -8
It all Boils down to investment. u of o gets 4 and 5 star transfers. They generally get the players. Their Coach is a consistent winner. We go from elite 8 to the dumpster. Arizona is good as well as ucla usc and than the rest. Whether we call ourselves underfunded or unfortunate to fix this some things must change. Investment whatever that entails to erase the stigmas that keep seeing us repeat the past.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on May 15, 2022 14:25:07 GMT -8
The dux recruiting is something we can't beat simply because of NIL.
Quickly name every school in the country where daydreaming hotshot recruits think they've got a decent shot at getting a shoe contract while in college if they play well enough.
The quacks had the richest owner in college athletics the last couple of decades, the new NIL rules exacerbate his effect.
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on May 16, 2022 9:42:54 GMT -8
Speaking of richest owners (recently deceased), if you play sports in Stillwater do you get your own oilwell?
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on May 16, 2022 10:10:24 GMT -8
Speaking of richest owners (recently deceased), if you play sports in Stillwater do you get your own oilwell? Well, he died 2 1/2 years ago, so I guess it depends on if his estate is still bankrolling them or not.
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on May 16, 2022 10:26:45 GMT -8
Speaking of richest owners (recently deceased), if you play sports in Stillwater do you get your own oilwell? Well, he died 2 1/2 years ago, so I guess it depends on if his estate is still bankrolling them or not. Indeed his trust still is involved with donations and funding. The guy will be "bankrolling" them in perpetuity with all he did both athletically and academically. Basically every athletic facility was improved or built on his funds, along with dozens of endowments for professorships and programs. It is estimated he had donated over $700 mil in funds most of which involved other big donors matching parts that have totalled close to to $2 billion for the university as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on May 16, 2022 12:05:07 GMT -8
Montana is a "have" in the Big Sky. Plenty of resources. OSU is a "have-not" in the Pac-12, with resources in the lower fourth of the league. Missoula is one of the nicest places in the Big Sky. Corvallis is a tough sell to kids when the alternatives are LA, Phoenix, the Bay Area, Boulder/Denver, SLC, Seattle, over-the-top facilities and gear in Eugene, and an entrenched, powerful program in Tucson, which is a dump but a warm, sunny dump with a 40-year tradition of excellence. Not excuses. Just facts. SLC. Funny.
|
|
|
Post by treasurevalleybeav on May 16, 2022 12:33:19 GMT -8
Speaking of richest owners (recently deceased), if you play sports in Stillwater do you get your own oilwell? Well, he died 2 1/2 years ago, so I guess it depends on if his estate is still bankrolling them or not. Hey dying wouldn't get in the way of a REAL fan lol
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on May 16, 2022 12:53:55 GMT -8
Comes down to recruiting. WT was getting low 3-star and high-2stars at Montana primarily with some mid-3 stars mixed in. Outside of the family trees, he’s only been getting primarily mid to high 3-stars stars at OSU. Hard to consistently win at a P5 school with those types of recruits unless you are recruiting for a well-defined system and know exactly what you want in players to run that system well. WT and OSU don’t have such a system, so basically his teams are undermanned consistently. If/when WT is let go in the future, I think they really need to look at coaches that run a well-defined specific system either on offense or defense (or both). Which system(s) is really less important than having one and being able to recruit at a high level for that system. I just have my doubts that the Beavers will ever (or at least in my lifetime) be able to simply out recruit the rest of the Pac 12 to be a consistent winner. Great post. Equating Big Sky to Pac12 in any way is ridiculous. WT took the job eyes wide open. When you step up in your career so does the your performance level. WT's did not in any consistent way. Mentioning other Big Sky coaches who transitioned to P5 success also is meaningless. They are the exception, WT isn't in the same stratosphere as some of those mentioned. The idea that finding a younger coach with the qualities you mention that can also recruit isn't possible is BS. It's mind blowing that there are folks here that keep using $ and past coaches to excuse such a poor coaching tenure. NC SOS is the only reason WT has any winning records. Pac12 record is an abomination. Recruiting level is embarrassing. The latest revelation of behind the scenes crap isn't news. It's just a continuation of past events. I wonder how many highly successful schools, P5 and mid majors, have had bad former coaches and spend less on hoops. Probably many...
|
|
|
Post by seastape on May 16, 2022 13:23:37 GMT -8
Comes down to recruiting. WT was getting low 3-star and high-2stars at Montana primarily with some mid-3 stars mixed in. Outside of the family trees, he’s only been getting primarily mid to high 3-stars stars at OSU. Hard to consistently win at a P5 school with those types of recruits unless you are recruiting for a well-defined system and know exactly what you want in players to run that system well. WT and OSU don’t have such a system, so basically his teams are undermanned consistently. If/when WT is let go in the future, I think they really need to look at coaches that run a well-defined specific system either on offense or defense (or both). Which system(s) is really less important than having one and being able to recruit at a high level for that system. I just have my doubts that the Beavers will ever (or at least in my lifetime) be able to simply out recruit the rest of the Pac 12 to be a consistent winner. I agree with what you say here, but I think OSU should be able to consider itself a program that can win a decent amount of the time with losing periods in between. Basketball needs to recruit only 2-3 (mostly 3) good players/year to have a decent program that has above average seasons and finishes in the top 4 of the conference a decent percentage of the time. Can OSU go to the NCAAs (or at least NIT) every year? No, but expecting the post-season 30-50% of the time with should not be too much to expect. I know that's a broad range, but with OSU's budget we should expect down times but also should expect good seasons every so often, as well. We may not have the resources to be there 9 years out of ten, but to be in the NCAAs or the NIT 2-5 times a decade should not be too much to expect. Tinkle is close, but his two dismal seasons stick out. He is also consistently slow to get the team going and I think we lose a lot of post-season opportunities because of it. His teams usually aren't ready to go until February at the earliest and we lose a lot of winnable games because of it.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on May 16, 2022 14:00:36 GMT -8
On expecting postseason 30-50% of the time-
Tinkle is 2 of 7 for 28.57%. The Beavs arguably got snubbed in postseason in 2019 because a large number of automatic qualifiers got in, the Beavs actually had a pretty good RPI ranking (85 is what I saw somewhere) that season. In 2020 the Beavers had beaten a few top 10/20 teams and were still alive in the conference playoffs when the season ended and had even a higher ranking than the previous year at the time. It's very likely if the season had continued the Beavs would have seen postseason.
Just saying his record is not that far off of "expectations" and circumstance does play into it to some extent
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on May 16, 2022 15:00:44 GMT -8
Comes down to recruiting. WT was getting low 3-star and high-2stars at Montana primarily with some mid-3 stars mixed in. Outside of the family trees, he’s only been getting primarily mid to high 3-stars stars at OSU. Hard to consistently win at a P5 school with those types of recruits unless you are recruiting for a well-defined system and know exactly what you want in players to run that system well. WT and OSU don’t have such a system, so basically his teams are undermanned consistently. If/when WT is let go in the future, I think they really need to look at coaches that run a well-defined specific system either on offense or defense (or both). Which system(s) is really less important than having one and being able to recruit at a high level for that system. I just have my doubts that the Beavers will ever (or at least in my lifetime) be able to simply out recruit the rest of the Pac 12 to be a consistent winner. I agree with what you say here, but I think OSU should be able to consider itself a program that can win a decent amount of the time with losing periods in between. Basketball needs to recruit only 2-3 (mostly 3) good players/year to have a decent program that has above average seasons and finishes in the top 4 of the conference a decent percentage of the time. Can OSU go to the NCAAs (or at least NIT) every year? No, but expecting the post-season 30-50% of the time with should not be too much to expect. I know that's a broad range, but with OSU's budget we should expect down times but also should expect good seasons every so often, as well. We may not have the resources to be there 9 years out of ten, but to be in the NCAAs or the NIT 2-5 times a decade should not be too much to expect. Tinkle is close, but his two dismal seasons stick out. He is also consistently slow to get the team going and I think we lose a lot of post-season opportunities because of it. His teams usually aren't ready to go until February at the earliest and we lose a lot of winnable games because of it. He made it to the Tournament twice. Oregon State got screwed in 2019. (San Diego got into the NIT with a worse record and finish in the West Coast Conference.) Oregon State was basically a lock to go to the NIT in 2020, but COVID-19 wiped it out. 2014-15 was a great season, given the fact that Robinson left the cupboards almost completely bare. 2017-18 was so-so, about what you would expect from Oregon State every year. (But far better than what Oregon State has received from every coach not named Tinkle since Ralph Miller retired.) And there were the two dumpster fire seasons. Tinkle is not close. Tinkle has greatly exceeded expectations and greatly exceeded what you could expect from a normal coach considering the complete lack of commitment from the boosters/Athletic Department. Every year that Oregon State is not .500 or worse is due to superior coaching or superior talent. The down years suck, but I would rather have down years with a 1/7 shot of a Pac-12 Championship than just finishing .500 (or probably worse) every year with a different coach.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on May 16, 2022 15:16:56 GMT -8
I agree with what you say here, but I think OSU should be able to consider itself a program that can win a decent amount of the time with losing periods in between. Basketball needs to recruit only 2-3 (mostly 3) good players/year to have a decent program that has above average seasons and finishes in the top 4 of the conference a decent percentage of the time. Can OSU go to the NCAAs (or at least NIT) every year? No, but expecting the post-season 30-50% of the time with should not be too much to expect. I know that's a broad range, but with OSU's budget we should expect down times but also should expect good seasons every so often, as well. We may not have the resources to be there 9 years out of ten, but to be in the NCAAs or the NIT 2-5 times a decade should not be too much to expect. Tinkle is close, but his two dismal seasons stick out. He is also consistently slow to get the team going and I think we lose a lot of post-season opportunities because of it. His teams usually aren't ready to go until February at the earliest and we lose a lot of winnable games because of it. He made it to the Tournament twice. Oregon State got screwed in 2019. (San Diego got into the NIT with a worse record and finish in the West Coast Conference.) Oregon State was basically a lock to go to the NIT in 2020, but COVID-19 wiped it out. 2014-15 was a great season, given the fact that Robinson left the cupboards almost completely bare. 2017-18 was so-so, about what you would expect from Oregon State every year. (But far better than what Oregon State has received from every coach not named Tinkle since Ralph Miller retired.) And there were the two dumpster fire seasons. Tinkle is not close. Tinkle has greatly exceeded expectations and greatly exceeded what you could expect from a normal coach considering the complete lack of commitment from the boosters/Athletic Department. Every year that Oregon State is not .500 or worse is due to superior coaching or superior talent. The down years suck, but I would rather have down years with a 1/7 shot of a Pac-12 Championship than just finishing .500 (or probably worse) every year with a different coach. Tinkle has never won a Pac-12 Championship. But, Jimmy Anderson has.
|
|