(01-16-2020 02:06 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 02:00 PM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-16-2020 01:36 PM)Gary Miller Wrote:  Looking at the talent last years W&M team had on it, it’s not a stretch to say they underachieved. I like Shaver but the idea of hiring him doesn’t necessarily excite me. I know most would disagree with me but I’d prefer Byington and Siddle

I can definitely understand your preference of Byington, but I have to disagree on Siddle. The man may end up turning out to be an excellent HC one day and I may be wrong but my preference would put Shaver above him solely due to experience, proven winner (even if slightly inconsistent as pointed out by Hoops above), and familiar with HC in conference. Add in the flavor of he likely has a high desire to obliterate WM at least twice a year and... yes please.

Slightly? What would be Very?

Oh, good my man. I'm glad you asked. How about we take a look at his ENTIRE body of work at WM, instead of just a selection that fits your narrative.

Dating back to 2003-04 when he started at WM, see below all of the regular season finishes. For each season I included just the final year of the season, so for instance the first season listed is "2003-04" and is noted as simply "04".

04 - 8th
05 - 8th
06 - 10th
07 - 7th
08 - 5th
09 - 11th
10 - 3rd (NIT)
11 - 11th
12 - 10th
13 - 8th
14 - 3rd
15 - 1st (tie) (NIT)
16 - 3rd
17 - 4th
18 - 4th
19 - 4th

So yes, that 4 year period in the middle of his tenure was inconsistent, but look at his last six years... all 4th or better. One could argue EASILY that if he's finishing that consistent with a roster that he's restricted to by WM recruiting and funding (go ask around with the WM fans about basketball funding if you don't want to take my word), and I'd say that's pretty good. Sure, some let down seasons but still... overall body of work -- good considering it's WM.