(04-04-2014 08:30 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Where's saluki?

I'm assuming out with friends/family enjoying his evening.

It is Friday night. Most people have more of life than me

(04-04-2014 05:39 PM)450bench Wrote:  Cal > Josh

Kirk > Josh

Bartow > Josh

Finch > Josh

No question about it.

(04-04-2014 02:52 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Going back to Gene Bartow, here's an update on how Pastner compares to other Tigers coaches:

* Through each coach's first 5 seasons, Pastner has won the most games at 130. Cal is second at 115.
* Pastner has the highest win % through his first 5 seasons at 75%. Second is Bartow at 72%. Cal, Kirk, Yates and Finch are all in the 60's.
* Pastner's 75% is second in career win % to Cal at 79%. Kirk is 73% and Bartow is 72%.
* Pastner leads the way in NCAA appearances during first 5 years with 4. Kirk had 3. Finch and Cal had 2. Yates and Bartow had 1.
* Pastner has the highest career % of getting teams to the tourney at 80%. Kirk was 71%, Cal was 67%, Finch was 55% and Bartow 25%.
* Pastner is third in NCAA wins during the first 5 years at 2 wins. Ahead - Kirk had 4 and Bartow had 3. Behind - Finch and Cal had 1.
* Pastner is tied with Bartow for cleanest program - with 0 scandals.

Of course, a lot of Kirk's and Cal's numbers are actually vacated, which moves Pastner on up.

Some perspective, maybe?

The best thing to note about these numbers is that Pastner was able to achieve all this against absolutely the worst five years of compitition this program has faced since Moses built his boat.

To add some perspective...

(04-04-2014 08:38 PM)Sundanceuiuc Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 08:30 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Where's saluki?

I'm assuming out with friends/family enjoying his evening.

It is Friday night. Most people have more of life than me

And me

(04-04-2014 04:06 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Ok...Just one question...

How many of those other previous coaches were in a league where no one else could even challenge them at all. A league that was Lucky...Extremely lucky if they got 2 teams in teh dance.

If Pastner started his career in the current iteration of the ACC he may already be gone...

First year no tourney...Second year no Tourney...Third year don't know about this one think we got screwed...Fourth Year low seed First Round Exit.

If it were that easy, why didn't those other C-USA coaches do it? Tim Floyd? Eustachy? Mike Davis? Pick your name? None of those guys even competed against us, and yet Josh was a 31 yo first time head coach and dominated them all. Josh ain't perfect but this argument does not hold water.

(04-04-2014 03:42 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 03:25 PM)oakland steve Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 02:52 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Going back to Gene Bartow, here's an update on how Pastner compares to other Tigers coaches:

* Through each coach's first 5 seasons, Pastner has won the most games at 130. Cal is second at 115.
* Pastner has the highest win % through his first 5 seasons at 75%. Second is Bartow at 72%. Cal, Kirk, Yates and Finch are all in the 60's.
* Pastner's 75% is second in career win % to Cal at 79%. Kirk is 73% and Bartow is 72%.
* Pastner leads the way in NCAA appearances during first 5 years with 4. Kirk had 3. Finch and Cal had 2. Yates and Bartow had 1.
* Pastner has the highest career % of getting teams to the tourney at 80%. Kirk was 71%, Cal was 67%, Finch was 55% and Bartow 25%.
* Pastner is third in NCAA wins during the first 5 years at 2 wins. Ahead - Kirk had 4 and Bartow had 3. Behind - Finch and Cal had 1.
* Pastner is tied with Bartow for cleanest program - with 0 scandals.

Of course, a lot of Kirk's and Cal's numbers are actually vacated, which moves Pastner on up.

Some perspective, maybe?

This place is allergic to facts, you probably just put 10-20 posters in the ER with that op.

Why does everyone HAVE to try to boost up Pastner by putting him over other coaches?

This game is so tired. I can find 10 coaches who have had worse starts than Pastner who have become HOF type coaches and find 10 coaches that started out better than Pastner that are lucky to be 2nd level assistants now.

There are so many other variables that go into why "the first ___ years" went a certain way for any particular coach.

Why not judge a coach (crazy idea here) not by how he stacks up on paper vs. another coach in another time but by how he has done in the immediate past with a nod to his overall resume?

See, presenting facts is not really boosting up. However, taking shots with no facts to back it up is the opposite of boosting up, whatever that is.

The reason some of us present facts is to try to counter the anecdote and hyperbole that runs rampant with absolutely no substance. It's easy to say he should win ___. But when put under the light of context and relativity, the opinion argument sort of shrinks.

I see both sides ... I think, for me, I've just expected more with the talent we've supposedly had. That's come from what I've been told to reasonably expect. Then when it doesn't happen, I'm told my expectations were too high or the talent was really 'a cancer' (for instance). Who knows. I just keep hearing 'next year'. Maybe that'll pay off one day.

(04-04-2014 04:06 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Ok...Just one question...

How many of those other previous coaches were in a league where no one else could even challenge them at all. A league that was Lucky...Extremely lucky if they got 2 teams in teh dance.

If Pastner started his career in the current iteration of the ACC he may already be gone...

First year no tourney...Second year no Tourney...Third year don't know about this one think we got screwed...Fourth Year low seed First Round Exit.

Well, no matter if it was the Metro, GMC, CUSA or AAC - we were not in a "power" conference. That much is consistent. There were certainly years in tougher leagues than some of the CUSA years. (Of course, Cal also benefited in those years with some of his best seasons - reflected in the numbers.)

Who can say what CJP's first 4 teams would do in a tougher league? We do know that CJP has had 1 team in an undisputed tough league. He went 71% this year, 100% NCAA participation and got an NCAA win. So the "tough" league didn't really hurt his numbers reported.

(04-04-2014 04:40 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  It's obvious that Josh is the greatest coach in Memphis history. Mods can you please lock the thread.

Whoa, put on the breaks, Bro. No one said greatest ever. But it is pretty factual to say he's had one of the greatest "first 5 years" in Memphis history.

(04-04-2014 05:37 PM)mempho_to_diego Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 03:42 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  This game is so tired. I can find 10 coaches who have had worse starts than Pastner who have become HOF type coaches and find 10 coaches that started out better than Pastner that are lucky to be 2nd level assistants now.

I would love to see this list. By the way, the 10 coaches who have had worse starts than Pastner who have become HOF type coaches ... you would still have to look at numbers ... are these coaches from this era or a different?

Not sure about starting worse. But there was another thread the other day, and I checked the numbers. Pastner has had a comparable career start to Cal, K, Knight, Self, Roy - to name a few. But that's just if you compare wins, NCAA appearances/wins and actual facts. If you use some of the other ambiguous criteria, who knows.

Not sure who the 10 might be that started out better and are now assistants.

(04-04-2014 10:50 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 04:40 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  It's obvious that Josh is the greatest coach in Memphis history. Mods can you please lock the thread.

Whoa, put on the breaks, Bro. No one said greatest ever. But it is pretty factual to say he's had one of the greatest "first 5 years" in Memphis history.

The eye test may tell you his teams were disappointing, undisciplined, soft and inconsistent.

(04-04-2014 11:00 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 10:50 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 04:40 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  It's obvious that Josh is the greatest coach in Memphis history. Mods can you please lock the thread.

Whoa, put on the breaks, Bro. No one said greatest ever. But it is pretty factual to say he's had one of the greatest "first 5 years" in Memphis history.

The eye test may tell you his teams were disappointing, undisciplined, soft and inconsistent.

Ahhh, the old eye test. When all facts let you down, issue the eye test...Billy Packer, is that you?

Still waiting on that top 10 list

(04-04-2014 11:02 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(04-04-2014 03:06 PM)UofMTigerFan Wrote:  Those number will absolutely make the naysayers sick. Can't wait to hear the excuses...

Didn't take long. Of course, it's funny that they have absolutely no facts to stand on. So they throw out opinions and weak attempts at comedic insult.

So you like the product on the court? You're ok with the defense? The offensive structure? The results in the postseason? You're ok with being highly ranked going into every season and falling well below those expectations at the end of every season?
Hey, if that's ok with you then, yes, Pastner is the second coming of the fried bologna sandwich.

I'm ok with the graduation rate. I'm great with no arrests. I'm great with the positive light he is giving our school.

I would like to see us play better D. I also see a coach growing every year. That's apparently something some of you do not see happening.

(04-04-2014 11:12 PM)UofMTigerFan Wrote:  I'm ok with the graduation rate. I'm great with no arrests. I'm great with the positive light he is giving our school.

I would like to see us play better D. I also see a coach growing every year. That's apparently something some of you do not see happening.

Then hire a biology teacher with a psyche degree to run the basketball program.

I'll take an azz kicker who drives a 72 Chevy truck with a knack for getting kids to overachieve and a soft spot for laughing at media hacks who make fun of his cigar smoking, profanity laced press conferences.

Once again, stats wise JP is doing a good job for a program with our history.

I believe he can get us to the championship and you do not. I guess we will know soon enough who is right.

(04-04-2014 11:22 PM)UofMTigerFan Wrote:  Once again, stats wise JP is doing a good job for a program with our history.

I believe he can get us to the championship and you do not. I guess we will know soon enough who is right.

And I hope you are right and I am wrong.

Because at the end of the day, the realists, the naive nellies, the know it all's and the know nothing's are all fans and want the same thing.

The greatest first five year slop is just that. When you are piling up victories against Rice, Central Florida, Marshall, Houston, UTEP, it's not all that impressive. We get in a real conference again and we don't win the regular season or the conference tournament that was being played on our home floor. Beating George Washington and St. Mary's doesn't get folks excited. We played Virginia well for about 5 or 6 minutes then got blown out. If Josh will finish at least 2nd in the league regular season and 2nd in the conference tourney and go to at least the sweet 16 and lose in a close competitive way, then I would say Josh is a good coach, his players respond to him, he motivates them to play together and at a high level. Then I would be on here saying Josh is great and I hope he stays forever. However he hasn't done any of those things. I hope he does next season, after all it will be year six.

A significant portion of Josh's wins came against triple digit (some very high triple digit) RPI teams, so instead of praising him for these oh so wonderful victories, I give him more credit for not losing any games he wasn't supposed to.

But then again, josh didn't make those baskets in those games, he didn't get those rebounds or steals. Josh didn't hit the free throws to win it, so how much credit does he really get? It's a players game and our players made shots.