Coach of the Year

[bleach]

I don't think there is much debate that Marshall is the best coach. That is not what the award if for though. If you return 5 guys that have started at some time, are picked unanimously (Muller doesn't count) to win, and look more vulnerable than the previous year, it wouldn't scream your case.

Ben is doing a great job this year and has really improved his team from last year. He does have a Senior laden team that was picked high though.

Lansing and Moser both have teams overperforming from what was expected and Loyola is insanely overperforming.

My vote is for Lusk.....he realy needs something to go his way this year.

[rlh04d]

I don't think there is much debate that Marshall is the best coach. That is not what the award if for though.

The award isn't for awarding the best coach?

That's an odd way to determine Coach of the Year. "Coach that Overperformed The Most Relative to Expectations" doesn't quite roll off the tongue.

I still don't think Lansing is in that category -- that's clearly Moser. Unless you're counting expectations after Lansing had coached his team into a terrible 4-8 hole, because the expectations prior to the season weren't bad.

[PantherSigEp]

I don't think there is much debate that Marshall is the best coach. That is not what the award if for though.

The award isn't for awarding the best coach?

That's an odd way to determine Coach of the Year. "Coach that Overperformed The Most Relative to Expectations" doesn't quite roll off the tongue.

I still don't think Lansing is in that category -- that's clearly Moser. Unless you're counting expectations after Lansing had coached his team into a terrible 4-8 hole, because the expectations prior to the season weren't bad.

The point he's making is that if you just looked at coaching ability rather than results why would anyone besides Coach K or Roy Williams ever win COY in the ACC?

I kinda see the case for Lansing but how do you go 4-8 in the non-con and someone get considered for he award? Sure they needed time to "gel" but c'mon.

[rlh04d]

I don't think there is much debate that Marshall is the best coach. That is not what the award if for though.

The award isn't for awarding the best coach?

That's an odd way to determine Coach of the Year. "Coach that Overperformed The Most Relative to Expectations" doesn't quite roll off the tongue.

I still don't think Lansing is in that category -- that's clearly Moser. Unless you're counting expectations after Lansing had coached his team into a terrible 4-8 hole, because the expectations prior to the season weren't bad.

The point he's making is that if you just looked at coaching ability rather than results why would anyone besides Coach K or Roy Williams ever win COY in the ACC?

I kinda see the case for Lansing but how do you go 4-8 in the non-con and someone get considered for he award? Sure they needed time to "gel" but c'mon.

I understand, but once you're up to the level of Hall of Famer, you pretty much stop winning those kind of awards. Would you believe Coach K hasn't won the ACC Coach of the Year award since 2000? It's also worth noting that the ACC Coach of the Year award pretty much exclusively goes to the coach that finishes first in the conference regular season or wins the tournament, as long as that coach isn't at Duke.

As for the Valley specifically, the point he's making is wrong ... the Coach of the Year is not treated as a "relative to expectations" award in the Valley. Since 1997-98, no coach has won the award finishing worse than second in the Valley regular season, and that has only happened twice: Dana at Creighton in 2002 (1 GB), and Marshall in 2013 (1 GB). Dana's Creighton team won Arch Madness that year, while Marshall's WSU team lost to Creighton in the finals -- personally, I doubt Marshall would have won that award over McDermott if Creighton wasn't leaving. It was more common to be more "rewarding" with the award in the past ... Tates Locke won the award in 91 with a 5th place team, Rudy Washington did the same in 93, and Eldon Miller won with a 4th place team in 97.

So based on the last 17 Coach of the Year awards, the award doesn't go to anyone further back than one game behind the conference winner. Which would pretty well limit this year to Marshall or Jacobson. Basically, the award tends to just default to the regular season winner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_V ... f_the_Year

[bleach]

If Marshall had to replace 4 or 5 starters and was doing what he is this year that would be a great coaching job THIS YEAR. The award is for who did the most impressive job of coaching THIS YEAR. As is, His team would be a failure THIS YEAR if they do any less than win the conference title going away. Marshall is in my opinion the best coach in the league by a LOT (I think a lot of Jacobson). The award is not for the best coach but for who did the most impressive job. Marshall could still win it this year if they play great and no one else does a superior job. I would say to this point what Moser has done is more impressive than what Marshall has done THIS YEAR. I wouldn't think of hiring Porter over Gregg though.

[bleach]

So based on the last 17 Coach of the Year awards, the award doesn't go to anyone further back than one game behind the conference winner. Which would pretty well limit this year to Marshall or Jacobson. Basically, the award tends to just default to the regular season winner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_V ... f_the_Year

Most years the coach that did the best job that year would be the coach that got first or second. I would think that IF a team that was picked as a dead lock for the playin round finished 3rd or 4th they would be hard to keep from the award.

[PantherSigEp]

I would love to look back on some threads from last year about Loyola. If I remember correctly Porter Moser was quite the punching bag. I'm still not sold on him. But the turnaround the Ramblers have made is fairly impressive.

[Wufan]

If Marshall had to replace 4 or 5 starters and was doing what he is this year that would be a great coaching job THIS YEAR. The award is for who did the most impressive job of coaching THIS YEAR. As is, His team would be a failure THIS YEAR if they do any less than win the conference title going away. Marshall is in my opinion the best coach in the league by a LOT (I think a lot of Jacobson). The award is not for the best coach but for who did the most impressive job. Marshall could still win it this year if they play great and no one else does a superior job. I would say to this point what Moser has done is more impressive than what Marshall has done THIS YEAR. I wouldn't think of hiring Porter over Gregg though.

I'm not arguing any of your points, but WSU only returned 5 players and three starters from last year's team. They lost a player that was first team all-con, second team AA, and is now in the NBA. It would be ironic if Fred, Ron, and Tekele (all players Marshall recruited to WSU out of high school) are just SOOOOO good that Marshall doesn't win the award.

[rlh04d]

If Marshall had to replace 4 or 5 starters and was doing what he is this year that would be a great coaching job THIS YEAR. The award is for who did the most impressive job of coaching THIS YEAR. As is, His team would be a failure THIS YEAR if they do any less than win the conference title going away. Marshall is in my opinion the best coach in the league by a LOT (I think a lot of Jacobson). The award is not for the best coach but for who did the most impressive job. Marshall could still win it this year if they play great and no one else does a superior job. I would say to this point what Moser has done is more impressive than what Marshall has done THIS YEAR. I wouldn't think of hiring Porter over Gregg though.

Personally, I think this argument is pretty ridiculous. What you're arguing for is the Most Improved Coach of the Year award.

Right now, Kyle Korver is probably the most improved player in the NBA right now, relative to the expectations that he created for himself. So should he be the front-runner for the NBA MVP?

That's what you're arguing for coaches. You're arguing that a coach's performance in any given year should be judged relative to their expectations, and their expectations are based on their past performance ... thus, the award should only be allowed to go to coaches with past bad performance who then show good performance. That's "Most Improved." And, ultimately, Gregg Marshall has to be DQed from future Coach of the Year awards unless he wins the conference undefeated or by six games, while any other far inferior coach can win by improving their team from Thursday night to 5th place.

As for what Moser has done specifically ... what is that, exactly?

Go 3-1 against Evansville, Drake, Bradley, and SIU? Three of those teams are guaranteed to be playing on Thursday night, and Evansville isn't out of the woods of doing so themselves. Go 8-2 out of conference? Wonderful, they played ~200 SOS out of conference. Have a top 50 RPI at one point? They'll probably be out of the top 100 in another week at their current pace.

Here is where Porter Moser has been successful: They are 8-1 this year (about to be 8-2) against RPI sub-150 teams. Last year they were 5-14 against those same teams. For the last several years Moser's teams have been barely losing to bad teams -- this year they're been able to turn the corner and beat those bad teams. But they're not actually beating GOOD teams. Loyola will most likely finish in the top half of the Valley this year, but they will also most likely not defeat a single other top-half team in the Valley (depending on whether Evansville can stay in the top half). Loyola, BTW, is about to fall to two games out of 5th place, and closer to 7th than 5th.

I don't get this relative-to-expectations thinking with the Coach of the Year award. If that was the thinking we had with the Player of the Year award, who would we actually be looking at this year? It certainly wouldn't be FVV, Baker, Doyle, Balentine, Mock, Tuttle, etc. All of those guys would need to have their performance this year based relative to expectations, not relative to their competition's performance.

Downplaying a coach's success in terms of an award like this because he's expected to be having success is silly. The coach is the REASON his expectations are so high. Gregg Marshall didn't walk into a favorable situation -- he created the current expectations based on being, by far, the best coach in the Valley. And Porter Moser didn't walk into an unfavorable situation -- his expectations for this year were low because he is, ultimately, not a very good coach, as proven by his three previous years at Loyola, and four years of coaching at Illinois State. But Most Improved Coach, sure, I guess? I think his team performing at a level that's an exception to his entire career is likely less about his coaching.

Hell, I think this is the inherent flaw with a Coach of the Year award, anyway. It implies that coaching is something that can be judged on a single year. It's not. The value of a coach is in their ability to create a program, one that can survive long-term, not catch fire at the right moment, or luck into the right transfer, or have a senior-filled team all at once. WSU's team this year isn't a reason of Marshall's coaching this year, it's the result of Marshall's performance for the last decade -- or even for his entire career. The same with UNI's success. Our tendency to look at a coach's performance in terms of single years is what leads to so many bad coaches being given huge contracts and failing miserably. Too many coaches get credit for individual years as outliers against their larger body of work, or get credit for winning with players they didn't recruit, etc. Successful coaches build programs, and the success of a program can't be judged in a single year, so judging a coach on a single year is a fallacy to begin with.

[rlh04d]

And don't get me wrong, I'm ecstatic about Loyola's performance this year. Turning the corner and beating the sub-150 teams is exactly what they had to start doing to be a true positive for the conference this year and moving forward.

But it doesn't suddenly make Porter Moser the Coach of the Year, or even a good coach.