SoCal_Pony wrote:JasonB wrote:I want to play:
1) Winning - my expectations are that a coach will consistently get SMU to the NCAA tournament and compete for the conference title. This year, because of reasons stated below, my expectations were tempered because of the rebuild to be a top 4 finish and an NIT bid.
2) Scheduling - I would like it to be competitive with big names. But not at the expense or risk of item 1. When the team is good enough to play at a high level, I expect a competitive schedule. While this is related to item 1, it isn't as important at item 1. It is a means to an end.
3) promoting - IMHO, what Dykes and LB have shown is that likeability of the coach is a reall yimportant factor for the SMU community. That is clearly something that should be taken into account when we hire a new coach. But I think item 1 takes precedent. There is a relationship of course - promoting improves attendance, which improves the home record, which impacts winning. But again, it is a means to the end.
4) recruiting - obviously a really important factor for item 1, and again is a means to an end. At the end of the day, if we are meeting winning expectations, then I don't care how we get there. BTW I think it is important that we note recruiting started to slip under LB when the sanctions were first rumored and continued the free fall. Our average last year was significantly dragged downwards by Cook.
Year, national rank, conference rank, ave rating
2012, 55, 5, .8524
2013 (LB), 23, 2, .9194
2014 - nothing
2015, 40, 2, .9196
2016, 64, 3, .8758
2017, 61, 3, .8782
2018, 93, 6, .8809
2019, 69, 6, .8661
All of these rankings exclude transfers.
When you look individually at our better players over the past years:
Cunningham: .89
Yannick: .9
Sterling: .93
Moore: .84
Shake: .95
Foster: .86
It would indicate that to compete for championships, you need to recruit at least 5 players at .89 or better and a bench at .86. So your average needs to be up at .88 or so to balance the two. Based on our current roster and rankings, we would have 3 clear starters and two tweeners on a good team, and then a lot of solid bench players.
Current roster:
Davis: .92
Jolly: .88
Band:.87
Mike: N/A
Jasey:.86
Ethan: .88
Hunt: .89
CJ: N/A
Smith: .87
McNeil: .87
McBride: .86
Young: .86
Douglas: .8999
Based on that analysis, the recruiting improved last season, but still isn't where it needs to be to drive true championship contenders. But again, it is a means to an end. Number 1 is what really matters.
Totally misleading as you conveniently excluded our ACC Player of the Year, Semi who we all know was the highest rated of the bunch. Nic Moore got his .84 grade due to his height, but quickly dispelled that during his freshman year prior to transferring to SMU. And Jarrey had his .86 ranking due to injury. He didn’t play his Sr year in HS. It was a flyer but well worth it.
It isn't misleading. I clearly stated that transfers were not taken into account with the rankings.
Foster, Nic Moore, and Ben Moore (who is actually the Moore listed above) are outliers - lower rated players who performed at a higher level.
Sterling, Yannick, Cunningham were the highly rated first crew and you added Nic, Ben, and Gu to that mix.
The great team had Semi, Sterling, Shake as studs with Moore, Foster, and Gu.
So, really you need 3 or 4 highly regarded recruits (.89 and above) paired with a bunch of solid recruits (.86 - .88) some of which you hope turn out better than advertised.
Our current roster has 3 highly rated recruits, and then a whole bunch of very solid recruits. What hurts is that Douglas was such a miss. So from a recruiting perspective, we are missing one high level talent on the roster. From a pure recruiting standpoint, we aren't at a talent level to compete nationally, but at the same time it isn't accurate to depict the cupboards as being completely bare.
Again, that is all a means to an end. What really matters is the winning piece. If Jank can't get to the NIT this year and NCAA next year, there is no way he is coming back after next year, when his contract is much more affordable to buyout.
You are choosing to look at the team from an "I hate Jank" perspective. I look at the team from an "they are young and up and down" perspective. It makes the games crazy, and it kills the stress level. But it is what it is.
At the end of the day, Jank bet on CJ, Young, Band, McBride, and even Jasey as developmental opportunities, and his future at SMU will hang on that balance. You might predict it is going to fail and be skeptical, but we all have to let it play out first for the rest of this year and into the next.
Posted: Tue Feb 25, 2020 1:42 pm