Author Topic: oscar is...  (Read 14451 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #50 on: January 15, 2017, 03:11:34 PM »
he's a lock to get at least 18 wins this year.  i like the look of that 0-4 against rpi 100s, but that's sure to improve as we move into the meat of the conference schedule.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #51 on: January 15, 2017, 03:38:09 PM »
Those RPI numbers seem pretty telling. I guess I don't have much to compare them with, but it seems like we purposefully play a bunch of shitty teams because we're not very good against quality teams. 20-44 against top 50 competition? I mean, yeah, I expect a dropoff from 51-100, but a 50% decline tells me we haven't had a program that's capable of competing against tourney competition while he's been here. Ultimately why I want him gone, I don't care if we're 12-6 vs NIT/CBI/CIT level competition. If you're not capable of beating NCAA tournament teams regularly (at least hold serve at home, goodness that number sucks), then what's the point of keeping the guy around? He's slightly better than Wooly or Asbury, good for him I guess.

I guess I'll just leave this here.




Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41955
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #52 on: January 15, 2017, 03:43:51 PM »
I guess I'll just leave this here.

Quote from: john currie
oscar has more total career wins.

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #53 on: January 15, 2017, 04:08:22 PM »
Frank did better guys. That road difference is stark

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #54 on: January 15, 2017, 04:15:35 PM »
Those RPI numbers seem pretty telling. I guess I don't have much to compare them with, but it seems like we purposefully play a bunch of shitty teams because we're not very good against quality teams. 20-44 against top 50 competition? I mean, yeah, I expect a dropoff from 51-100, but a 50% decline tells me we haven't had a program that's capable of competing against tourney competition while he's been here. Ultimately why I want him gone, I don't care if we're 12-6 vs NIT/CBI/CIT level competition. If you're not capable of beating NCAA tournament teams regularly (at least hold serve at home, goodness that number sucks), then what's the point of keeping the guy around? He's slightly better than Wooly or Asbury, good for him I guess.

I guess I'll just leave this here.



That is actually pretty incredible when you match up the numbers.  We talk about wanting Frank back and all the good he did, but when you compare those numbers the two coaches aren't even close to each other.  Say what you want about the first 2 years, but what if oscar didn't have Frank's players?   :sdeek:

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #55 on: January 15, 2017, 04:25:25 PM »
Those RPI numbers seem pretty telling. I guess I don't have much to compare them with, but it seems like we purposefully play a bunch of shitty teams because we're not very good against quality teams. 20-44 against top 50 competition? I mean, yeah, I expect a dropoff from 51-100, but a 50% decline tells me we haven't had a program that's capable of competing against tourney competition while he's been here. Ultimately why I want him gone, I don't care if we're 12-6 vs NIT/CBI/CIT level competition. If you're not capable of beating NCAA tournament teams regularly (at least hold serve at home, goodness that number sucks), then what's the point of keeping the guy around? He's slightly better than Wooly or Asbury, good for him I guess.

I guess I'll just leave this here.



That is actually pretty incredible when you match up the numbers.  We talk about wanting Frank back and all the good he did, but when you compare those numbers the two coaches aren't even close to each other.  Say what you want about the first 2 years, but what if oscar didn't have Frank's players?   :sdeek:

Oh please. Frank followed Huggs, with Huggs players. Without that, these numbers are probably a lot closer.

If oscar didn't have the luxury of taking over a mutiny, his numbers would be worse as well.

The Big Train

  • Guest
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #56 on: January 15, 2017, 04:30:12 PM »
Those RPI numbers seem pretty telling. I guess I don't have much to compare them with, but it seems like we purposefully play a bunch of shitty teams because we're not very good against quality teams. 20-44 against top 50 competition? I mean, yeah, I expect a dropoff from 51-100, but a 50% decline tells me we haven't had a program that's capable of competing against tourney competition while he's been here. Ultimately why I want him gone, I don't care if we're 12-6 vs NIT/CBI/CIT level competition. If you're not capable of beating NCAA tournament teams regularly (at least hold serve at home, goodness that number sucks), then what's the point of keeping the guy around? He's slightly better than Wooly or Asbury, good for him I guess.

I guess I'll just leave this here.



That is actually pretty incredible when you match up the numbers.  We talk about wanting Frank back and all the good he did, but when you compare those numbers the two coaches aren't even close to each other.  Say what you want about the first 2 years, but what if oscar didn't have Frank's players?   :sdeek:

Oh please. Frank followed Huggs, with Huggs players. Without that, these numbers are probably a lot closer.

If oscar didn't have the luxury of taking over a mutiny, his numbers would be worse as well.

This wasn't the first time oscar inherited a good team.  Frank was a first time head coach when he took over, it's not like Huggs got rid of the Woolridge culture in a single year.

Comparing those two situations is not a very good argument. 

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #57 on: January 15, 2017, 04:31:31 PM »
Those RPI numbers seem pretty telling. I guess I don't have much to compare them with, but it seems like we purposefully play a bunch of shitty teams because we're not very good against quality teams. 20-44 against top 50 competition? I mean, yeah, I expect a dropoff from 51-100, but a 50% decline tells me we haven't had a program that's capable of competing against tourney competition while he's been here. Ultimately why I want him gone, I don't care if we're 12-6 vs NIT/CBI/CIT level competition. If you're not capable of beating NCAA tournament teams regularly (at least hold serve at home, goodness that number sucks), then what's the point of keeping the guy around? He's slightly better than Wooly or Asbury, good for him I guess.

I guess I'll just leave this here.



That is actually pretty incredible when you match up the numbers.  We talk about wanting Frank back and all the good he did, but when you compare those numbers the two coaches aren't even close to each other.  Say what you want about the first 2 years, but what if oscar didn't have Frank's players?   :sdeek:

Oh please. Frank followed Huggs, with Huggs players. Without that, these numbers are probably a lot closer.

If oscar didn't have the luxury of taking over a mutiny, his numbers would be worse as well.

This wasn't the first time oscar inherited a good team.  Frank was a first time head coach when he took over, it's not like Huggs got rid of the Woolridge culture in a single year.

Comparing those two situations is not a very good argument.

Are you serial?

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
oscar is...
« Reply #58 on: January 15, 2017, 04:32:46 PM »
It's simple, Frank got better as he went along, mainly with his own players. oscar is on his 2nd set of his own players after running off his first and it's not getting better.

And I don't buy the hypothetical Frank mutiny.

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3411
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #59 on: January 15, 2017, 04:36:54 PM »
It's simple, Frank got better as he went along, mainly with his own players. oscar is on his 2nd set of his own players after running off his first and it's not getting better.

And I don't buy the hypothetical Frank mutiny.

Look at Kenpom, they absolutely got better.

Offline SdK

  • Libertine
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20951
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #60 on: January 15, 2017, 04:38:16 PM »
I must have forgot who was on the collective respective first year teams for each coach here.


Also, this isn't meant as a oscar apology. He is absolutely to blame for his own shitty numbers. The cupboard wasn't bare.

It was more of a statement on what I perceive that each coach walked into. Maybe I'm a homer, but I absolutely believe Jake was a very very very very special player and that Frank isn't close to as successful without him.


I don't really wanna argue. I was just saying what I thought about the numbers. Frank is clearly the better coach. I just don't like either coach.

I'll buy mutiny based upon the next seasons results. I don't think oscar wins the Big 12 without the players feeling some relief about Frank being gone.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #61 on: January 15, 2017, 04:39:30 PM »
It's simple, Frank got better as he went along, mainly with his own players. oscar is on his 2nd set of his own players after running off his first and it's not getting better.

kenpom thinks this team is roughly comparable to martin's last year at kstate and weber's first.  it's been a strange path to (almost) get back to where we were.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3411
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #62 on: January 15, 2017, 04:41:51 PM »
Those RPI numbers seem pretty telling. I guess I don't have much to compare them with, but it seems like we purposefully play a bunch of shitty teams because we're not very good against quality teams. 20-44 against top 50 competition? I mean, yeah, I expect a dropoff from 51-100, but a 50% decline tells me we haven't had a program that's capable of competing against tourney competition while he's been here. Ultimately why I want him gone, I don't care if we're 12-6 vs NIT/CBI/CIT level competition. If you're not capable of beating NCAA tournament teams regularly (at least hold serve at home, goodness that number sucks), then what's the point of keeping the guy around? He's slightly better than Wooly or Asbury, good for him I guess.

I guess I'll just leave this here.



That is actually pretty incredible when you match up the numbers.  We talk about wanting Frank back and all the good he did, but when you compare those numbers the two coaches aren't even close to each other.  Say what you want about the first 2 years, but what if oscar didn't have Frank's players?   :sdeek:

Oh please. Frank followed Huggs, with Huggs players. Without that, these numbers are probably a lot closer.

If oscar didn't have the luxury of taking over a mutiny, his numbers would be worse as well.

This wasn't the first time oscar inherited a good team.  Frank was a first time head coach when he took over, it's not like Huggs got rid of the Woolridge culture in a single year.

Comparing those two situations is not a very good argument.
Culture is an excuse for not being coached well enough and/or not being talented enough.

We moved up from 57 -> 25 in kenpom in 2008 because Micheal Beasley was a really talented player. We move down to 51 a year later because Beasley was a really talented player. Frank was good enough to not eff it up.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #63 on: January 15, 2017, 04:46:04 PM »
I absolutely believe Jake was a very very very very special player and that Frank isn't close to as successful without him.

martin was on the staff that recruited pullen. and although young, stewart and walker got some playing time under huggins, the team as a whole was not an established group carrying over a coaching philosophy from the previous regime.  weber had nothing to do with any of the players that were important to his first year's success and the group was experienced and had played together successfully for years prior to his arrival.


both coaches had pretty nice situations to step into, but they aren't very comparable.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #64 on: January 15, 2017, 04:56:42 PM »
It's simple, Frank got better as he went along, mainly with his own players. oscar is on his 2nd set of his own players after running off his first and it's not getting better.

kenpom thinks this team is roughly comparable to martin's last year at kstate and weber's first.  it's been a strange path to (almost) get back to where we were.

True, but it will be extremely fluid from now on. If oscar manages to get the defense better and ends up 27 or better, then this is likely a tournament team and he'll be fine. If we keep losing, even close, kenpom will fall into the 40s.

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3411
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #65 on: January 15, 2017, 04:57:44 PM »
I absolutely believe Jake was a very very very very special player and that Frank isn't close to as successful without him.

martin was on the staff that recruited pullen. and although young, stewart and walker got some playing time under huggins, the team as a whole was not an established group carrying over a coaching philosophy from the previous regime.  weber had nothing to do with any of the players that were important to his first year's success and the group was experienced and had played together successfully for years prior to his arrival.


both coaches had pretty nice situations to step into, but they aren't very comparable.

I think the only thing that is evident for the past 20 years is Huggins is on a complete different level when evaluating guards than anyone else.

I am still no happy about the Stefhon Hannah.

Offline Canary

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2962
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #66 on: January 15, 2017, 05:01:12 PM »
It's simple, Frank got better as he went along, mainly with his own players. oscar is on his 2nd set of his own players after running off his first and it's not getting better.

kenpom thinks this team is roughly comparable to martin's last year at kstate and weber's first.  it's been a strange path to (almost) get back to where we were.

True, but it will be extremely fluid from now on. If oscar manages to get the defense better and ends up 27 or better, then this is likely a tournament team and he'll be fine. If we keep losing, even close, kenpom will fall into the 40s.
Head, not heart, _fan, how many more wins do we get this year?

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #67 on: January 15, 2017, 05:03:46 PM »
I would guess 5-6 more wins.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #68 on: January 15, 2017, 05:04:44 PM »
If we keep losing, even close, kenpom will fall into the 40s.

we can lose to winless osu on wed and improve our kenpom rating.  there is a path.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Canary

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2962
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #69 on: January 15, 2017, 05:05:23 PM »
I'm hoping for seven but doubt we can get there.

Offline Mixed-Nutz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3411
  • Square
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #70 on: January 15, 2017, 05:05:29 PM »
It's simple, Frank got better as he went along, mainly with his own players. oscar is on his 2nd set of his own players after running off his first and it's not getting better.

kenpom thinks this team is roughly comparable to martin's last year at kstate and weber's first.  it's been a strange path to (almost) get back to where we were.

True, but it will be extremely fluid from now on. If oscar manages to get the defense better and ends up 27 or better, then this is likely a tournament team and he'll be fine. If we keep losing, even close, kenpom will fall into the 40s.

Half the games are in. If you look at the AdjEM it is easier for us to creep up, just slightly. With a project record of 6-8 through out and with our biggest spreads being loses, WVU, @BU, @WVU and @ISU. Keeping it close would probably help us.

Offline kso_FAN

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 29506
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #71 on: January 15, 2017, 05:06:55 PM »
If we keep losing, even close, kenpom will fall into the 40s.

we can lose to winless osu on wed and improve our kenpom rating.  there is a path.

I don't think close losing is sustainable. Eventually a game will be uglier (similar to the last 8 minutes of Baylor) leading to substantial drops in kenpom.

If we win the 5-6 games I think we will, we may end up in the upper 30s.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #72 on: January 15, 2017, 05:11:58 PM »
I don't think close losing is sustainable. Eventually a game will be uglier (similar to the last 8 minutes of Baylor) leading to substantial drops in kenpom.

we can also win games by more than is predicted.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #73 on: January 15, 2017, 05:13:59 PM »
i mean if we can get the loss to the cows, we can go .500 from there out and still easily miss the tourney.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Trim

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 41955
  • Pfizer PLUS Moderna and now Pfizer Bivalent
    • View Profile
Re: oscar is...
« Reply #74 on: January 15, 2017, 05:19:51 PM »
i mean if we can get the loss to the cows, we can go .500 from there out and still easily miss the tourney.

It's funny to think how the AD staff that's assigned to keep tabs on things explains this sort of discussion to currie.