CJP was coach of the year last year in the AAC . . .

I'm sorry but his tack record of .500 or worse conf record over the past 10 years with a ton of 4-5 game losing streaks during those years . . . just does bode well. Esp for a fan base that wouldn't be happy with just making the tournament, which is what CJP did. I don't mind the people who want to give him a another year, if they haven't seen and heard enough already however bringing up his past is like when a team signs a player who is 40 and expects them to play like they did in their prime when there has been evidence that their career is on the downswing.

(08-07-2017 01:07 AM)EricSigEpTNBeta183 Wrote:  CJP was coach of the year last year in the AAC . . .

I'm sorry but his tack record of .500 or worse conf record over the past 10 years with a ton of 4-5 game losing streaks during those years . . . just does bode well. Esp for a fan base that wouldn't be happy with just making the tournament, which is what CJP did. I don't mind the people who want to give him a another year, if they haven't seen and heard enough already however bringing up his past is like when a team signs a player who is 40 and expects them to play like they did in their prime when there has been evidence that their career is on the downswing.

But this conversation isn't about Josh. And if you'd prefer to buy stock in him, have at it. You'll be one of the few investors that do. I'm sorry but Josh is a quality recruiter who can't coach a lick. With the talent he had, he should have been to sweet 16s and elite 8s and he did neither. He does nothing with talent and has no player personnel ability whatsoever. Bobby Knight said the biggest waste of talent in the country is at the University of Memphis when Josh was here and he was right.

When the market is down, do you sell or buy? Well, I certainly buy and if you do too, what stocks do you prefer? I prefer stocks that have a long history of performing well.

This conversation is one that I personally find to be not very productive. It only promises problems for those who chose to constantly biiiitch and moan. I prefer to take a seat and see what transpires. Be optimistic and hope for the best with a notion of caution.
The months of constant bashing don't do anyone any good and what happens if the team is actually good? Those people look, well, foolish for their continuous criticism which is completely unfounded since the unknown is, well, simply the unknown.

I know it's not about CJP but if you are going to use Tubbys COY award why can't I bring up CJP award to show that it means little. Or at least to me. Figured it would mean a lot to you since you brought it up. I also agree that he should have done more with the players he had but lets be honest, how many coaches his age (when he was here) with their first head coaching job ever, even has done what he did (all the years of making the tournament)? Not many. Also by your logic, he shouldn't have won many games last year (since he has not much talent), he took a team that was projected to win single digits and beat some of the best teams in the country, did he not? Don't misread what I am saying, although CJP is an amazing human being, it was time to move on. My view is that we just moved onto the wrong coach.

To counter your point, it would be like buying a stock that flourished in 1990's and early 2000's but hasn't done well since. if you'd like to buy that stock I'd love to know why you are optimistic of something that hasn't been good in over 10 years? Esp when there is NOTHING in recent history to get excited about. I HIGHLY doubt that you would actually buy that stock.

Btw this is EXACTLY what messages boards are for. If everyone is patting each other on the back and saying how things are rainbows and butterflies, it's just lying and setting yourself up for disappointment. I hope more than anything that the ones who feel like this was the wrong hire are wrong themselves (and I bet they would tell you that too) it means that our school/program is doing well. There is just no evidence to point in that direction, none.

(08-07-2017 03:19 AM)EricSigEpTNBeta183 Wrote:  I know it's not about CJP but if you are going to use Tubbys COY award why can't I bring up CJP award to show that it means little. Or at least to me. Figured it would mean a lot to you since you brought it up. I also agree that he should have done more with the players he had but lets be honest, how many coaches his age (when he was here) with their first head coaching job ever, even has done what he did (all the years of making the tournament)? Not many. Also by your logic, he shouldn't have won many games last year (since he has not much talent), he took a team that was projected to win single digits and beat some of the best teams in the country, did he not? Don't misread what I am saying, although CJP is an amazing human being, it was time to move on. My view is that we just moved onto the wrong coach.

To counter your point, it would be like buying a stock that flourished in 1990's and early 2000's but hasn't done well since. if you'd like to buy that stock I'd love to know why you are optimistic of something that hasn't been good in over 10 years? Esp when there is NOTHING in recent history to get excited about. I HIGHLY doubt that you would actually buy that stock.

Btw this is EXACTLY what messages boards are for. If everyone is patting each other on the back and saying how things are rainbows and butterflies, it's just lying and setting yourself up for disappointment. I hope more than anything that the ones who feel like this was the wrong hire are wrong themselves (and I bet they would tell you that too) it means that our school/program is doing well. There is just no evidence to point in that direction, none.

Not sure why we continue to have comparisons with Pastner. Like you, I thought Pastner was a great person, recruiter, but not a great coach. He could sign them, but couldn't do much with them or keep them on the team. The transfer rate at Memphis has been ridiculous.

Tubby's conference records were from low end teams at some of the best conferences. We were great in C-USA, but have struggled since. And we certainly aren't playing near the quality of teams that are in the Big 12 or Big 10. Making the tourney at TT or Minnesota isn't easy. People say Bobby Knight did it, which is true, but he is a HOF'er. Little Pitino made the tourney this year at Minn. He's certainly got pedigree and may become an excellent coach in time.

But if you look back, Minnesota has one NCAA tourney win in the last 20 years, and that was Tubby. He took 3 years to get an awful TT team to the tourney. I think it's fair to expect the same here. We all thought he overachieved last year until the end. Did the Lawson's quit? Was it fatigue? My guess is probably both, but when your best two players quit, it just didn't leave us anything to fall back on. I agree Tubby should have worked harder when first hired to shore up the lineup. He signed 3 players, and none of them helped much. If he would have worked as hard as he did when our team imploded this year, we might have had some depth. That criticism is warranted and I agree with it.

But, if you look at things rationally, you'll see that things changed during Pastner's last few years. His recruiting, which was his forte here, started to slip. When he had to hire Keelon to get local players, you knew it was getting bad. With all of the local transfers, word got out to local kids to avoid Memphis. Nationally, we've lost much of the brand that Cal built. Recruits don't remember the last time we made a splash. Attendance is suffering. Things have changed. That's not to say that they can't and won't turn around, but that's where we are now. Tubby inherited a volatile situation and is now in full rebuild, which to be honest, I think is a good thing. Time will tell...

(08-06-2017 10:28 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:09 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:02 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  We need a PG in 2018 & it's obvious the MBB staff is attempting to address the need. Isn't that a good thing?

Absolutely.

Can some find fault with a $100 bill? Absolutely.

Not that, it's wasting time at this point in the game trying to "get in" with a 4* who, by all accounts, is a Illinois lock or by getting desperate and offering a 300 ranked kid because he plays on the same team as another (non-PG) target.

With only three current scholarships open, it seems odd to offer package deals.

Unless something unusual is happening, Memphis shouldn't be [b]offering[/i] any more 2018's. You either have done the work to be in on them or you are spinning your wheels trying to cram in work to get a commit in two months.

The only "WORK" he does, is trying to lower his handicap.....that, and trying to lower our expectations .

(08-07-2017 08:02 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:28 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:09 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 10:02 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  We need a PG in 2018 & it's obvious the MBB staff is attempting to address the need. Isn't that a good thing?

Absolutely.

Can some find fault with a $100 bill? Absolutely.

Not that, it's wasting time at this point in the game trying to "get in" with a 4* who, by all accounts, is a Illinois lock or by getting desperate and offering a 300 ranked kid because he plays on the same team as another (non-PG) target.

With only three current scholarships open, it seems odd to offer package deals.

Unless something unusual is happening, Memphis shouldn't be [b]offering[/i] any more 2018's. You either have done the work to be in on them or you are spinning your wheels trying to cram in work to get a commit in two months.

The only "WORK" he does, is trying to lower his handicap.....that, and trying to lower our expectations .

Original, constructive post!

Tubby might take us to the Sweet 16. But if he did, I can guarantee you it would be the least exciting Sweet 16 in Tiger history. The guy is just wallpaper.

(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.

Insurance companies don't "know" how a brand new 16-year old driver will do, since that kid has never driven, but they set rates based on past performance of similarly situated drivers.

Trying to bring Tubby into that analogy (as it pertained to recruits yet to play at the D1 level and how their performance can be predicted) is misplaced.

(08-07-2017 08:59 AM)Claw Wrote:  Tubby might take us to the Sweet 16. But if he did, I can guarantee you it would be the least exciting Sweet 16 in Tiger history. The guy is just wallpaper.

Winning is exciting, I don't care how it's done. If we win every game 21-19 I'm all good with that.

(08-07-2017 08:59 AM)Claw Wrote:  Tubby might take us to the Sweet 16. But if he did, I can guarantee you it would be the least exciting Sweet 16 in Tiger history. The guy is just wallpaper.

Disagree
We haven't sniffed the sweet 16 in 8 years and it might be close to a decade before we do. Folks will be excited!

(08-07-2017 08:59 AM)Claw Wrote:  Tubby might take us to the Sweet 16. But if he did, I can guarantee you it would be the least exciting Sweet 16 in Tiger history. The guy is just wallpaper.

You do need help.

(08-07-2017 09:06 AM)salukiblue 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.

Insurance companies don't "know" how a brand new 16-year old driver will do, since that kid has never driven, but they set rates based on past performance of similarly situated drivers.

Trying to bring Tubby into that analogy (as it pertained to recruits yet to play at the D1 level and how their performance can be predicted) is misplaced.

And therefore all 16 year old drivers are placed as high risk. Doesn't matter who they are. Grades help, but all are high risk. There is no history with them, therefore they aren't credible in terms of actuarial tables.

Tubby has a very long history of success, whether you like that or not, actuarially he would be a good risk for any carrier. His age benefits him, as it would any long term successful coach, if you're comparing to any underwriting equation.

Tubby has won one NCAA Tourney game in ten years (soon to be 11). He will have to improve because that will not cut it at Memphis.

The insurance analogy was mainly for the JUCO recruits we are bringing in.
The stats of how JUCOs perform in a D1 venue gives us a strong idea of what we can expect.

When Vegas analyzes our team this year, you can bet they take those numbers into consideration.

(08-07-2017 12:19 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Tubby has won one NCAA Tourney game in ten years (soon to be 11). He will have to improve because that will not cut it at Memphis.

Absolutely. And we'll see how that goes. That's part of the intrigue, at least for me.

(08-07-2017 12:23 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  The insurance analogy was mainly for the JUCO recruits we are bringing in.
The stats of how JUCOs perform in a D1 venue gives us a strong idea of what we can expect.

When Vegas analyzes our team this year, you can bet they take those numbers into consideration.

I'm sorry but they are an unknown regardless of whether they are high schoolers or juco players. At the end of the day, they have no D1 history.

Vegas will soft pedal anything Memphis until there is some evidence of how the team plays. Ask your bookie, lol.

The only known entity with any form of history is Tubby and his value in the insurance analogy, would be based on his history, which is strong.

In football, if a team has highly skilled skill position guys but not much of an offensive line, where do coaches turn to get recruits who can come in and contribute immediately? They go the juco route.
Sure basketball is different, but it may be advantageous to fill gaps with those guys. Clearly we'll find out in a few months.

(08-07-2017 12:39 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:23 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  The insurance analogy was mainly for the JUCO recruits we are bringing in.
The stats of how JUCOs perform in a D1 venue gives us a strong idea of what we can expect.

When Vegas analyzes our team this year, you can bet they take those numbers into consideration.

I'm sorry but they are an unknown regardless of whether they are high schoolers or juco players. At the end of the day, they have no D1 history.

Vegas will soft pedal anything Memphis until there is some evidence of how the team plays. Ask your bookie, lol.

The only known entity with any form of history is Tubby and his value in the insurance analogy, would be based on his history, which is strong.

In football, if a team has highly skilled skill position guys but not much of an offensive line, where do coaches turn to get recruits who can come in and contribute immediately? They go the juco route.
Sure basketball is different, but it may be advantageous to fill gaps with those guys. Clearly we'll find out in a few months.

Excellent answer. I am looking forward to seeing the team play. This will be a fascinating season.

(08-07-2017 12:00 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 09:06 AM)salukiblue 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.

Insurance companies don't "know" how a brand new 16-year old driver will do, since that kid has never driven, but they set rates based on past performance of similarly situated drivers.

Trying to bring Tubby into that analogy (as it pertained to recruits yet to play at the D1 level and how their performance can be predicted) is misplaced.

And therefore all 16 year old drivers are placed as high risk. Doesn't matter who they are. Grades help, but all are high risk. There is no history with them, therefore they aren't credible in terms of actuarial tables.

Tubby has a very long history of success, whether you like that or not, actuarially he would be a good risk for any carrier. His age benefits him, as it would any long term successful coach, if you're comparing to any underwriting equation.

Again, bolded.

(08-07-2017 12:39 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 12:23 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  The insurance analogy was mainly for the JUCO recruits we are bringing in.
The stats of how JUCOs perform in a D1 venue gives us a strong idea of what we can expect.

When Vegas analyzes our team this year, you can bet they take those numbers into consideration.

I'm sorry but they are an unknown regardless of whether they are high schoolers or juco players. At the end of the day, they have no D1 history.

Vegas will soft pedal anything Memphis until there is some evidence of how the team plays. Ask your bookie, lol.

The only known entity with any form of history is Tubby and his value in the insurance analogy, would be based on his history, which is strong.

In football, if a team has highly skilled skill position guys but not much of an offensive line, where do coaches turn to get recruits who can come in and contribute immediately? They go the juco route.
Sure basketball is different, but it may be advantageous to fill gaps with those guys. Clearly we'll find out in a few months.

And that is where you are just stubbornly wrong.

Derrick Rose was a D1 "unknown" but it was certainly expected for him to be one of the best players in the nation before he ever set foot on campus. Based on high school and AAU play and rankings.

Guys ranked in the 50's in recruiting rankings, over several year's samples, produce a consistent amount to give one an idea of what to expect.

Same of kids in the 120's.

Same for JUCO's.

Of course it is only logical speculation, but fact based nonetheless.

You can keep putting your hands over your ears and say "lalalalalalalalalalala" and fall back on "just wait tip they play" to avoid reasonable discussions about expectations, but some of us recognize that part of message-boarding is speculation.

It's just whether you want to be evidenced based or hope based.

(08-07-2017 11:04 AM)2tigers Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 08:59 AM)Claw Wrote:  Tubby might take us to the Sweet 16. But if he did, I can guarantee you it would be the least exciting Sweet 16 in Tiger history. The guy is just wallpaper.

You do need help.

Maybe football season will help.