(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:35 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:29 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:04 PM)450bench Wrote:  "Haphazard approach to acquiring a point guard"

What???

How about higgledy-piggledy then?
hap·haz·ard: lacking any obvious principle of organization.

synonyms: random, unplanned, unsystematic, unmethodical, disorganized, disorderly, irregular, indiscriminate, chaotic, hit-and-miss, arbitrary, aimless, careless, casual, slapdash, slipshod, chance, accidental, higgledy-piggledy

What's the basis for this line of thought?
Clearly the staff is on Lomax, Harris and others.

The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:35 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:29 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  How about higgledy-piggledy then?
hap·haz·ard: lacking any obvious principle of organization.

synonyms: random, unplanned, unsystematic, unmethodical, disorganized, disorderly, irregular, indiscriminate, chaotic, hit-and-miss, arbitrary, aimless, careless, casual, slapdash, slipshod, chance, accidental, higgledy-piggledy

What's the basis for this line of thought?
Clearly the staff is on Lomax, Harris and others.

The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

Produced, did he? I suppose that is why so many were so happy to see him go. You included as I recall. But when you have the bias you have professed against our current staff, you can just rewrite reality to fit your narrative I suppose.

(08-06-2017 09:51 AM)72Tiger Wrote:  I don't know anything about recruiting, but the tweet from the Dosunmu kid was nice to see.

I agree. I liked it as well.

(08-06-2017 10:35 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  I do not care what method Tubby employs even when it makes little sense to me as long as the method results in signing a high quality PG.

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:35 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:29 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  How about higgledy-piggledy then?
hap·haz·ard: lacking any obvious principle of organization.

synonyms: random, unplanned, unsystematic, unmethodical, disorganized, disorderly, irregular, indiscriminate, chaotic, hit-and-miss, arbitrary, aimless, careless, casual, slapdash, slipshod, chance, accidental, higgledy-piggledy

What's the basis for this line of thought?
Clearly the staff is on Lomax, Harris and others.

The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

The promise of the postseason made it a much easier sell to recruits. Easier to sell a chance at a championship than an offer for all the minutes you want especially for elite kids.

I am not claiming that Tubby has done enough but it Tubby was hired after call he likely has an easier time recruiting.

(08-06-2017 01:00 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 12:37 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  good grief. If we think what our fans have to say affects how potential players view our program, then it logically follows that this haphazard approach to acquiring a PG is making an even worse impression.

You miss the point. It's not so much what you say harming the program, it's that public criticism, making the same negative comments over & over again, with certainty, doesn't help the program. Whatever your criticism of the staff in a public forum when repeated continually about everything the staff does or doesn't do, clearly doesn't help the program. It's one thing to voice concerns, something else entirely to be so predictably critical of every topic Tubby - it doesn't help the program of which you claim to be a fan.

Like you constantly did with Pastner. You are part of the reason why we are in this spot.

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:35 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:29 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  How about higgledy-piggledy then?
hap·haz·ard: lacking any obvious principle of organization.

synonyms: random, unplanned, unsystematic, unmethodical, disorganized, disorderly, irregular, indiscriminate, chaotic, hit-and-miss, arbitrary, aimless, careless, casual, slapdash, slipshod, chance, accidental, higgledy-piggledy

What's the basis for this line of thought?
Clearly the staff is on Lomax, Harris and others.

The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

Whoa, for $3 million you can't have both, impossible.

(08-06-2017 05:59 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:35 PM)450bench Wrote:  What's the basis for this line of thought?
Clearly the staff is on Lomax, Harris and others.

The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

Produced, did he? I suppose that is why so many were so happy to see him go. You included as I recall. But when you have the bias you have professed against our current staff, you can just rewrite reality to fit your narrative I suppose.

Pastner produced some good recruits.

Since you chose to get personal about this, I was very happy when Tubby came to town. Check my post history, if you have any doubts.

I ignored all early criticism about Tubby's inability to recruit, his pension to play golf, his age etc....

Then came last season. Then came the mass exodus of players. And now we are almost drawing to the end of this recruiting season.

It's a mess. Singling out posters and trying to blame them for Tubby's lack of recruiting prowess is illogical. He's always had that baggage to carry around. Now we get to see it play out first hand is all.

(08-06-2017 07:43 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:00 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 12:37 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  good grief. If we think what our fans have to say affects how potential players view our program, then it logically follows that this haphazard approach to acquiring a PG is making an even worse impression.

You miss the point. It's not so much what you say harming the program, it's that public criticism, making the same negative comments over & over again, with certainty, doesn't help the program. Whatever your criticism of the staff in a public forum when repeated continually about everything the staff does or doesn't do, clearly doesn't help the program. It's one thing to voice concerns, something else entirely to be so predictably critical of every topic Tubby - it doesn't help the program of which you claim to be a fan.

Like you constantly did with Pastner. You are part of the reason why we are in this spot.

Your just proving yourself to be as delusional as some others around here. If anything for most of JP's tenure here I had a view very similar to my view of our current coach, that he should be given the opportunity to be successful. I had hoped his early general season success would begin to show in the tourney too. But it didn't & after the Calipari rep wore off, recruiting fell off too & he refused to get help coaching. Then he gave into extortion & it was over really. But even so until his last season I only expressed hope he would grow into the job. And that's the way it was, your claims otherwise are just wrong - , and you know it.

But your comment that somehow I'm part of the reason we're in anything is comical. No one of this forum had any such influence.

(08-06-2017 08:56 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  https://twitter.com/AyoDos_11/status/893967622429192192
Ayo Dosunmu
#32 4*
Kid is from Chicago, offered by Illinois a year ago, has taken two visits there, and Groce has visited with the kid.

So logically, Memphis jumps in this week.

Memphis also then offers #291 Nick Honor, who is being courted by the likes of:
American
Boston University
Dayton
Georgia Southern
James Madison
Massachusetts
Memphis
North Florida
South Alabama
Toledo
Towson
UCF
http://247sports.com/Recruitment/Nick-Ho...tInterests

What a Jeckyl and Hyde method of recruiting.

By my best count, Memphis has now offered 13 PG for 2018.

Best case - the Memphis fan base are the Biblical Job. We're being affected by death and running sores.

Worst case - As Tubby Smith advised, 'Memphis fans need to lower their expectations.'

(08-06-2017 08:50 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 05:59 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

Produced, did he? I suppose that is why so many were so happy to see him go. You included as I recall. But when you have the bias you have professed against our current staff, you can just rewrite reality to fit your narrative I suppose.

Pastner produced some good recruits.

Since you chose to get personal about this, I was very happy when Tubby came to town. Check my post history, if you have any doubts.

I ignored all early criticism about Tubby's inability to recruit, his pension to play golf, his age etc....

Then came last season. Then came the mass exodus of players. And now we are almost drawing to the end of this recruiting season.

It's a mess. Singling out posters and trying to blame them for Tubby's lack of recruiting prowess is illogical. He's always had that baggage to carry around. Now we get to see it play out first hand is all.

BTW, just so you'll know, last I heard the entire AAC had only two hard commits through this recruiting season which is just the early period. So take a deep breath on that idea, not time to panic yet.

(08-06-2017 08:50 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 05:59 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:36 PM)Dylan Wrote:  The point is, why offer such a wide range of point guards if you truly are in with Lomax, Harris, and others? Why place an offer do you aren't taking a commitment?

Even you have to admit 13 pg offers for one spot is a bit much.

I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

Produced, did he? I suppose that is why so many were so happy to see him go. You included as I recall. But when you have the bias you have professed against our current staff, you can just rewrite reality to fit your narrative I suppose.

Pastner produced some good recruits.

Since you chose to get personal about this, I was very happy when Tubby came to town. Check my post history, if you have any doubts.

I ignored all early criticism about Tubby's inability to recruit, his pension to play golf, his age etc....

Then came last season. Then came the mass exodus of players. And now we are almost drawing to the end of this recruiting season.

It's a mess. Singling out posters and trying to blame them for Tubby's lack of recruiting prowess is illogical. He's always had that baggage to carry around. Now we get to see it play out first hand is all.

To me, it's illogical to constantly, continuously, every day, all the time, 24/7 bash, with certainty, any coach 1 season into a job without even seeing what the second season even looks like. What are we, 3 months out?
We've beaten the hell out of this year's recruits and now we're beating the hell out of kids who may or may not even have an interest in coming to Memphis. Some have said the staff doesn't recruit enough, now, to some they recruit too much.

The "illogical" may be a bit misplaced. But, hey, that's just me.

Well yeah...there's a lot of illogical floating around.

Some people got more illogical than others, though.

It's not illogical to predict the most likely future based on stats. To borrow Saluki's example, Insurance Companies use those parameters.

(08-06-2017 10:41 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 08:50 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 05:59 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 04:11 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 03:49 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  I seem to remember someone thinking JP had 95 active offers out at some early point in his tenure & how the general view here was what a hustler he was.

I have no idea about the mechanics of his recruiting prowess, because Pastner produced, so we rarely put him under the magnifier for recruiting. His deal was coaching. But I do know that Pastner was in on the kids earlier, made them feel special and identified talent earlier. He didn't wait till the last sec and start flailing around offering kids.

Maybe our Pastner staff kept it on the down low, but they did not offer D2 players, nor were they seen parked on the benches at JUCO tournaments. This is not a good look for us, not to mention the fact that Aki and Damon were never pictured grabbing their crotches, as a technique to land players.

But, the biggest diff of all is, Pastner and his assistants actually landed good recruits--prolly even one too many, the year of the 4 Kings. lol.

Why can't we have both....? A staff that can land 'em so Tubby doesn't have to coach them up so far.

Produced, did he? I suppose that is why so many were so happy to see him go. You included as I recall. But when you have the bias you have professed against our current staff, you can just rewrite reality to fit your narrative I suppose.

Pastner produced some good recruits.

Since you chose to get personal about this, I was very happy when Tubby came to town. Check my post history, if you have any doubts.

I ignored all early criticism about Tubby's inability to recruit, his pension to play golf, his age etc....

Then came last season. Then came the mass exodus of players. And now we are almost drawing to the end of this recruiting season.

It's a mess. Singling out posters and trying to blame them for Tubby's lack of recruiting prowess is illogical. He's always had that baggage to carry around. Now we get to see it play out first hand is all.

To me, it's illogical to constantly, continuously, every day, all the time, 24/7 bash, with certainty, any coach 1 season into a job without even seeing what the second season even looks like. What are we, 3 months out?
We've beaten the hell out of this year's recruits and now we're beating the hell out of kids who may or may not even have an interest in coming to Memphis. Some have said the staff doesn't recruit enough, now, to some they recruit too much.

The "illogical" may be a bit misplaced. But, hey, that's just me.

At this point, Penny ain't walking through that door.

I hope he does.

Tubby is doing Tubby stuff.

And I hate that ****.

There may be only 2 schools with commits but I bet you most of the school have an idea of the players that are eventually going to commit (at least more than an idea than we have). I think it's fair to say that we have NO CLUE what the class will look like . . . Lomax who many felt was a lock is looking like he's leaving town more and more each day. Also yes Pastner produced on the recruiting trail, that is a fact. The poster wasn't speaking of wins or loses.

(08-06-2017 10:55 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  Well yeah...there's a lot of illogical floating around.

Some people got more illogical than others, though.

It's not illogical to predict the most likely future based on stats. To borrow Saluki's example, Insurance Companies use those parameters.

Insurance companies use parameters based on the claim experience of individuals within a given group. They base their premiums on how those individuals have performed in given tasks or situations, good or bad.
We don't know how these individuals (players) perform in their given task because they have yet to play. Therefore that experience isn't credible yet.
As far as Tubby goes, we are basing said premiums on experience, what he's done over his career, and in this case of past performance, then Tubby would be a preferred risk. Hall of fame credentials, one of 2 coaches to get, what 5 or 6 teams to the ncaa tourney, one year removed from being conference coach of the year at Texas Tech, etc.
If the insurance parameters are used, the wait and see approach makes the most underwriting sense and a preferred risk is a certainty for Tubby.
The naysayers may want to find another method of comparison to bolster their thought process.

(08-07-2017 12:13 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:55 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  Well yeah...there's a lot of illogical floating around.

Some people got more illogical than others, though.

It's not illogical to predict the most likely future based on stats. To borrow Saluki's example, Insurance Companies use those parameters.

Insurance companies use parameters based on the claim experience of individuals within a given group. They base their premiums on how those individuals have performed in given tasks or situations, good or bad.
We don't know how these individuals (players) perform in their given task because they have yet to play. Therefore that experience isn't credible yet.
As far as Tubby goes, we are basing said premiums on experience, what he's done over his career, and in this case of past performance, then Tubby would be a preferred risk. Hall of fame credentials, one of 2 coaches to get, what 5 or 6 teams to the ncaa tourney, one year removed from being conference coach of the year at Texas Tech, etc.
If the insurance parameters are used, the wait and see approach makes the most underwriting sense and a preferred risk is a certainty for Tubby.
The naysayers may want to find another method of comparison to bolster their thought process.

You are not taking into consideration one of the main things that Insurance Companies use. Age.

Plus, we are looking at the stats of recruits...how they performed in JUCO/high school and how that generally translates to D1 based on stats.

(08-07-2017 12:18 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:13 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:55 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  Well yeah...there's a lot of illogical floating around.

Some people got more illogical than others, though.

It's not illogical to predict the most likely future based on stats. To borrow Saluki's example, Insurance Companies use those parameters.

Insurance companies use parameters based on the claim experience of individuals within a given group. They base their premiums on how those individuals have performed in given tasks or situations, good or bad.
We don't know how these individuals (players) perform in their given task because they have yet to play. Therefore that experience isn't credible yet.
As far as Tubby goes, we are basing said premiums on experience, what he's done over his career, and in this case of past performance, then Tubby would be a preferred risk. Hall of fame credentials, one of 2 coaches to get, what 5 or 6 teams to the ncaa tourney, one year removed from being conference coach of the year at Texas Tech, etc.
If the insurance parameters are used, the wait and see approach makes the most underwriting sense and a preferred risk is a certainty for Tubby.
The naysayers may want to find another method of comparison to bolster their thought process.

You are not taking into consideration one of the main things that Insurance Companies use. Age.

Plus, we are looking at the stats of recruits...how they performed in JUCO/high school and how that generally translates to D1 based on stats.

Age is irrelevent in this comparison, see the coach at Duke or Larry Brown or Jim Boeheim. If it has relevance, then it would be favorable. Actuarial tables in this instance would be very happy with Tubby.

The players have no experience at the D1 level, so in insurance terms they have no credibility at this time. Freshman, juco or whatever, they have zero experience at this level so they are a complete unknown.

Underwriters/actuaries use real, tangible facts from past events to predict outcomes of those they are insuring. That bodes very well for Tubby. It also says that a wait and see approach on unknowns is the only way to tangibly apply predictable outcomes. Assumptions based on blind conjecture are not tangible enough to form any model of predictability.

(08-07-2017 12:31 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:18 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:13 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:55 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  Well yeah...there's a lot of illogical floating around.

Some people got more illogical than others, though.

It's not illogical to predict the most likely future based on stats. To borrow Saluki's example, Insurance Companies use those parameters.

Insurance companies use parameters based on the claim experience of individuals within a given group. They base their premiums on how those individuals have performed in given tasks or situations, good or bad.
We don't know how these individuals (players) perform in their given task because they have yet to play. Therefore that experience isn't credible yet.
As far as Tubby goes, we are basing said premiums on experience, what he's done over his career, and in this case of past performance, then Tubby would be a preferred risk. Hall of fame credentials, one of 2 coaches to get, what 5 or 6 teams to the ncaa tourney, one year removed from being conference coach of the year at Texas Tech, etc.
If the insurance parameters are used, the wait and see approach makes the most underwriting sense and a preferred risk is a certainty for Tubby.
The naysayers may want to find another method of comparison to bolster their thought process.

You are not taking into consideration one of the main things that Insurance Companies use. Age.

Plus, we are looking at the stats of recruits...how they performed in JUCO/high school and how that generally translates to D1 based on stats.

Age is irrelevent in this comparison, see the coach at Duke or Larry Brown or Jim Boeheim. If it has relevance, then it would be favorable.

The players have no experience at the D1 level, so in insurance terms they have no credibility at this time. Freshman, juco or whatever, they have zero experience at this level so they are a complete unknown.

Bench - Most of the time in life the saying, "what have you done for me lately?" comes into play . . . you mentioned his past as a reason why he was a good risk. Please explain. Would you buy a stock that has been trending down over the past 10 years? A stock that hasn't even been able to break even. And on top of that, would you pay a premium price for the same stock? When someone brings up his past as being successful, they aren't talking 2 years ago, or 5 years ago, aren't even talking about 8 years ago . . . I prefer to look at his recent past, not 10 plus years ago.

(08-07-2017 12:45 AM)EricSigEpTNBeta183 Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:31 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:18 AM)snowtiger Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:13 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:55 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  Well yeah...there's a lot of illogical floating around.

Some people got more illogical than others, though.

It's not illogical to predict the most likely future based on stats. To borrow Saluki's example, Insurance Companies use those parameters.

Insurance companies use parameters based on the claim experience of individuals within a given group. They base their premiums on how those individuals have performed in given tasks or situations, good or bad.
We don't know how these individuals (players) perform in their given task because they have yet to play. Therefore that experience isn't credible yet.
As far as Tubby goes, we are basing said premiums on experience, what he's done over his career, and in this case of past performance, then Tubby would be a preferred risk. Hall of fame credentials, one of 2 coaches to get, what 5 or 6 teams to the ncaa tourney, one year removed from being conference coach of the year at Texas Tech, etc.
If the insurance parameters are used, the wait and see approach makes the most underwriting sense and a preferred risk is a certainty for Tubby.
The naysayers may want to find another method of comparison to bolster their thought process.

You are not taking into consideration one of the main things that Insurance Companies use. Age.

Plus, we are looking at the stats of recruits...how they performed in JUCO/high school and how that generally translates to D1 based on stats.

Age is irrelevent in this comparison, see the coach at Duke or Larry Brown or Jim Boeheim. If it has relevance, then it would be favorable.

The players have no experience at the D1 level, so in insurance terms they have no credibility at this time. Freshman, juco or whatever, they have zero experience at this level so they are a complete unknown.

Bench - Most of the time in life the saying, "what have you done for me lately?" comes into play . . . you mentioned his past as a reason why he was a good risk. Please explain. Would you buy a stock that has been trending down over the past 10 years? A stock that hasn't even been able to break even. And on top of that, would you pay a premium price for the same stock? When someone brings up his past as being successful, they aren't talking 2 years ago, or 5 years ago, aren't even talking about 8 years ago . . . I prefer to look at his recent past, not 10 plus years ago.

He was coach of the year 2 years ago at Texas Tech. Last year he entered a toxic situation with toxic personalities. We have yet to see how he performs after year 1. After this coming year, we'll have a better idea of whether to buy stock in the guy or not.

To answer your question further, here is why I'd call him a solid risk.

In his 26 years as a head coach, Smith has achieved 24 winning seasons. In 2005, he joined Roy Williams, Nolan Richardson, Denny Crum and Jim Boeheim as the only head coaches to win 365 games in 15 seasons or fewer. With Texas Tech's invitation to the 2016 NCAA Tournament, Smith became only the second coach in history to lead five different teams to the NCAA tournament.