PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3584
Reg: 02-15-15
|
03-02-16 01:04 AM - Post#203122
In response to Kit
Harvard's success will not be contagious, just as Gonzaga's success has not benefited San Francisco or Loyola-Marymount. It is up to the individual institutions to ensure that they succeed.
That's your opinion but the Ivy league is a long way more attractive than the West Coast Conference. Better basketball overall and far better academics. The elite academics is what give the Ivy's a chance to become a top 10 conference. That's not happening in the West Coast conference.
|
Tiger69
Postdoc
Posts: 2814
Reg: 11-23-04
|
03-02-16 01:41 AM - Post#203124
In response to PennFan10
Unlike Mike, I keep no data. He is out of my league. I read and try to learn from his analyses.
I merely watch my own team, hope for high recruits and am often disappointed. (Have we EVER recruited a 4 star? Even Ian Hummer was only a 3). But then along comes someone like Henry Caruso or Spencer Weisz or Pete Miller, all 2* or less, and things work out just fine. It would be nice to have a squad full of 3 and 4 star players. But good coaches have made winners from players with less glitter. There still seems to be a fair amount of under publicized talent coming out of high school for the observant recruiter.
|
Kit
Senior
Posts: 380
Loc: Central Massachusetts
Reg: 11-29-04
|
03-02-16 01:48 AM - Post#203126
In response to PennFan10
Has the Ivy League ever been a multi-bid conference? The WCC has three teams that are perennial tournament participants (Gonzaga, St. Mary's, and BYU) If you think the Ivies will become a top ten conference, you obviously are disconnected from reality.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 08:39 AM - Post#203127
In response to Kit
People have thought I've been nuts since I started espousing these growth views a little less than a decade ago. At that point, the thought of getting out of the 20s as a conference was ambitious, and the thought of doing it six years in a row was borderline nuts. The thought of winning four NCAA games in a decade was sheer insanity.
But if you saw the underlying trends, you knew that it was all possible. The flattening of the media landscape, the massive increase in financial aid and the increased support behind traditionally dormant programs all contributed to a stepwise increase in the level of play in this league. And none of those three things has stopped improving. Bet against a Top 10 and/or two-bid league at your own peril.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
The New Normal
03-02-16 10:22 AM - Post#203134
In response to mrjames
The real reason for Ivy improvement is the invention of the "One and Done." It sucks experience out of the major programs. The George Mason and VCU runs showed that mid-major programs with experience have a distinct advantage come tournament time. This year, in particular, there is no great team to blow away the competition. Whether the Ivy representative is Princeton or Yale, I expect it to be very competitive in NCAA play.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: The New Normal
03-02-16 10:31 AM - Post#203137
In response to palestra38
Well, here's a counterpoint... The one-and-done should have done nothing to our relative standing among other mid- and low-major leagues. While it could be assumed to draw all leagues closer together, it can't really explain why we used to average somewhere in the 20-25 range and now we average 15th.
In fact, you could make an argument that it should hurt us a little bit relative to other mid-major leagues, because having talented, experienced players is now relatively more valuable in a one-and-done world, and we artificially restrict our access to talented, experienced players through our policies regarding redshirting and graduate players.
The real reason for the Ivy improvement is financial aid. Ask all eight staffs to rank the reasons why we're at a different level than a decade ago, and I'd be shocked if anyone ranks anything other than fin aid first. And if we had full scholarships, we'd easily be a top 10 league. It's a shame how many good kids we lose because the $10K per year they'd have to pay is just too much relative to a free ride from a high-academic, high-major school, but hey, that used to be $20-30K before the financial aid expansion, so it has helped.
|
T.P.F.K.A.D.W.
PhD Student
Posts: 1171
Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
|
Re: The New Normal
03-02-16 10:41 AM - Post#203139
In response to mrjames
Well, here's a counterpoint... The one-and-done should have done nothing to our relative standing among other mid- and low-major leagues. While it could be assumed to draw all leagues closer together, it can't really explain why we used to average somewhere in the 20-25 range and now we average 15th.
In fact, you could make an argument that it should hurt us a little bit relative to other mid-major leagues, because having talented, experienced players is now relatively more valuable in a one-and-done world, and we artificially restrict our access to talented, experienced players through our policies regarding redshirting and graduate players.
The real reason for the Ivy improvement is financial aid. Ask all eight staffs to rank the reasons why we're at a different level than a decade ago, and I'd be shocked if anyone ranks anything other than fin aid first. And if we had full scholarships, we'd easily be a top 10 league. It's a shame how many good kids we lose because the $10K per year they'd have to pay is just too much relative to a free ride from a high-academic, high-major school, but hey, that used to be $20-30K before the financial aid expansion, so it has helped.
Mike, is your data set deep enough to do some kind of regression analysis on experience/age vs. success? I'm thinking an average of minutes played weighted against class vs. wins/KenPom/what have you.
So Team X has 3 freshmen who collectively average 12 mpg, 2 sophs who average 18 mpg, 2 juniors who average 20 mpg, etc. (I'm too lazy to figure out the senior class.) Team X ends the season at #110 in KenPom. Compare to Team Y, Team Z, etc.
Seems this would be testable.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: The New Normal
03-02-16 10:42 AM - Post#203140
In response to mrjames
Agreed, although I would chalk it up to relative value more than mere dollars. The Ivies are more competitive (admissions-wise) than ever even among those paying full freight. The value of an Ivy diploma simply is viewed as greater than 30-40 years ago which, combined with better financial aid, gets us more good players. But Amaker is the real factor in turning that pitch into talent. That's why I wanted Penn to hire a similar big name coach---although SD is no slouch, he also is not a draw of big time talent as is Amaker.
|
1LotteryPick1969
Postdoc
Posts: 2272
Age: 73
Loc: Sandy, Utah
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 11:15 AM - Post#203144
In response to hoopla
Very funny play by play Mike
Almost as good as Jon Solomon:
http://www.princetonbasketball.com/?p=49
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: The New Normal
03-02-16 11:32 AM - Post#203149
In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.
Hmm... I want to make sure I totally get this, because I'm intrigued... You mean to compare the recruiting rankings with the minutes that each class winds up earning against the wins they produce? I'm interested to hear more...
|
T.P.F.K.A.D.W.
PhD Student
Posts: 1171
Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
|
Re: The New Normal
03-02-16 12:22 PM - Post#203153
In response to mrjames
Hmm... I want to make sure I totally get this, because I'm intrigued... You mean to compare the recruiting rankings with the minutes that each class winds up earning against the wins they produce? I'm interested to hear more...
Well, I wasn't even considering recruiting rankings, but now that I think about it I guess that's an integral part of setting initial expectations....I was more responding to P38's assertion that "experience" correlates with success. I was thinking "success" as defined by wins/KenPom/whatever. P38 was thinking more along the lines of NCAA tourney success.
The real reason for Ivy improvement is the invention of the "One and Done." It sucks experience out of the major programs. The George Mason and VCU runs showed that mid-major programs with experience have a distinct advantage come tournament time.
Shouldn't this be testable? Is it possible to compare "experience" (I'm thinking some metric of aggregate career minutes played) against "success" (however you wish to define it)? So, can we expect a mid-major starting four seniors and a junior to overperform against a high-major starting three five-star freshmen and two five-star sophs?
|
Dr. V
PhD Student
Posts: 1537
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 05:30 PM - Post#203171
In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.
Who is similar to an Amaker and would be willing to coach in the Ivies? Amaker is a fluke. A great player who played at a top school, won a national championship and then was an assistant coach to the best college coach in this era, all of which gave Amaker a huge amount of exposure and, thus, celebrity status. Then add to that his having coached in the Big East and Big Ten, but having been fired from the Big Ten job. He has celebrity and contacts as few do. That he was also available just when a bit of his shine had worn off when H was looking was just the right confluence of circumstances.
Saying that Penn or any other Ivy should hire another Amaker reminds me of a Columbia fan who asked why we had not hired a Bagnolli a lot earlier. Right, very successful Ivy coaches who happened to retire and then want to un-retire just when another Ivy is looking for a head coach can be found on every street. corner.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 05:43 PM - Post#203172
In response to Dr. V
It's hard to say whether or not Amaker's hiring was a fluke. I'm not sure how I feel about that statement.
What we know is this: There are plenty of "name" coaches getting fired every year, so for every Ivy opening there's usually one or two Amaker types available. At the same time, most Ivies probably don't have the resources to make these coaches a competitive offer. These also happen to be the Ivies most likely to experience more of the coaching turnover.
I will say that we're probably only talking about two schools that could make such a play right now: Harvard and Penn. Princeton has historically had a cap on coaching salaries, and none of the other Ivies seem to have the resources/appetite to go to $500K+ with their offers.
So, yeah, maybe it was a fluky confluence of factors, but that might be a different question than whether it would be fluky going forward.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 05:44 PM - Post#203173
In response to Dr. V
Actually, there are coaches in the Amaker mold who are available all the time. Just last year, I was asking why we wouldn't talk to Ben Howland, a guy who had tremendous success at the very top of college basketball (much more so than Amaker--3 Final Fours) and had Eastern Basketball connections (Pitt). If Penn had offered an Amaker type contract, might he have been interested? Who knows. But there is almost always a big time coach between jobs. If the Ivies offer the equivalent of scholarships in their financial aid programs and a certain cachet, why wouldn't they want to come here? But as I understand it, Penn is paying Donahue less than half of what Amaker is getting. You won't get a Ben Howland for that.
|
Stuart Suss
PhD Student
Posts: 1439
Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 07:18 PM - Post#203177
In response to palestra38
We discussed Ben Howland multiple times, here and here.
Ben Howland is being paid at least 2.05 million dollars annually. There is no way that this President and this chairman of the Board of Trustees would have offered a sufficient salary to have lured Ben Howland away from an SEC job, even a lower level one.
|
JadwinGeorge
Senior
Posts: 357
Age: 75
Reg: 12-04-15
|
03-02-16 08:35 PM - Post#203181
In response to Stuart Suss
Oh dear, mrjames is confused about how he feels. Amaker got a boatload of money and perks that other Ivy schools will not consider. The booster club contributes to his compensation to a degree unfathomable elsewhere in the league. The Ivy schools are not going "to make a play" because they probably have no idea what that means. The least endowed Ivy school is worth something over $3 billion. I don't think $$$ is the issue here.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-02-16 08:59 PM - Post#203183
In response to JadwinGeorge
Well, that's the money that the school has, not the basketball program. At present, money is very much the issue here. While the games are fun for fans, Ivy programs are playing guarantee games not to line their pockets but to make a budget work. It might not always be that way, but it is for now. Also, to be fair, I don't believe Tommy got that money from the start, but rather secured greater commitments when he was nearly pried away for the Miami job.
|
Old Bear
Postdoc
Posts: 3992
Reg: 11-23-04
|
03-02-16 10:15 PM - Post#203189
In response to mrjames
Miami has a better coach, IMHA.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-03-16 12:17 AM - Post#203193
In response to Stuart Suss
Miss. State overpaid for him. Penn is a much better job. He will lose there. He cannot win. An Amaker package of about $1.3 total would be competitive.
|
JadwinGeorge
Senior
Posts: 357
Age: 75
Reg: 12-04-15
|
03-03-16 08:04 AM - Post#203194
In response to palestra38
The Ivy schools enforce budget discipline based on a set of operating priorities. Intercollegiate athletics is far from the top of that list, and that is as it should be. I am reasonably sure that Princeton is not going to make any offers of "An Amaker package..." I suspect Sydney Johnson learned this the hard way. Henderson may not be from the "Amaker mold" but he and Brian Earl have done a nice job establishing a recruiting process that has yielded an abundant crop of positive contributors. He has had staff turnover every year, too, but finds hard-working assistants to fill vacancies.
|
