How I Judge a Coach

[arc76]

I have had the luck to know all of the Siena Coaches through the Division I years. Based on this experience some traits, skills and characteristics seem to be consistent among the successful coaches at Siena and I thought I would share them for the Board's comments and reflections. One statistic recently posted here was very revealing, Griffin, Deane, Hewitt, Orr and McCaffery never had a losing season while Beyer, Lanier and Buonaguro's combined records are 1 winning season and 8 losing seasons.

Here are my observations:
1) This is the most important! When the good coaches tell you something about the team, you see it on the floor. A seemingly small thing, but a great example was when we still had the Coach's Club lunches Paul told the group that he had been working with the team on multiple ways to keep the upcoming game against Fairfield up tempo including first half full court passes by Scott Knapp even at the high risk of turnovers. Sure enough Scott attempts three first half long passes that all lend to turnovers and many negative comments from fans around me. But as Paul had predicted with five minutes to go Fairfield's legs were heavy, shots came up short and we sprinted to a win. Be wary of off-season visits to Billy Donovan to learn a fast break offense and a season full of 50 point games.
2) Quality of the Assistant Coaches, Matt Kilcullen, Howie Tucker, Tim Capstraw, Robert Burke, Ciiff Warren, Bob Beyer, Mitch Buonaguro, you see the pattern, enough said.
3) The team spreads the floor, creates space and can shoot the ball. Some how when the successful coaches have their offense in cynic it appears to even a casual fan that the other team only has four defenders. One other point, to have those special "up" wins a mid-major most often shoots the ball well and plays with conviction to its style, usually based on pressing and running.
4) When the coach is quoted in the press, the comments make sense, no excuses, no moral victories, no requests for patience. (L Orr being an exception).
5) There is at least one recruit, in his first class that has the "Wow" factor even to a casual fan; Corey Easley, Marc Brown, Scott Knapp (and don't forget the one year contributions of Kolin Weaver), Kenny Hasbrouck. Obviously to be good the first class needs to be followed with at least one impact player per year.
6) Their teams are in shape and play a style where you can expect to see 70+ points most nights.
There are more, but these six were present in all our successful coaches.

[Tony]

Good 1st post... and I agree 100%

[BigChiefDeane]

Well said sir.

[sky]

A sincere "welcome aboard"

[CellarRat]

Good post. With regard to statement number 5 how do you think Mitch has done?

I think the recruits look good. I am also impressed with the quality of our walk on guard. I think Mitch's first year was an adjustment. His second year he made some major changes and did very well... Dare I say Fran could not have done better. Third year is here and I want to remain hopeful. This guy has a lot of experience and I have heard he is an X's and O's guy. I just don't see it. Do you. Is their hope?




Sent from my iPhone using ProBoards app

[arc76]

Mitch has had a bit of bad luck with injuries, players being ruled ineligible and suspensions which have greatly impacted practice. That said, even Mitch has stated he has four good players (Evan, Rak, O D and Rob). The rest are clearly very raw talents. This team needs at least one of the young wing players to be a real threat to score double figures on a given night. The player in my judgement that is our wild card is Rob Poole. He has to get both his head and shot together for this team to be successful. But to answer your question, the group of players' talents do not seem to match the current style of play. Very tough to be successful winning games in the 50's when your starting backcourt is very small (and quick).

[arc76]

Nov 21, 2012 20:53:40 GMT -5 BigChiefDeane said:

Well said sir.

[arc76]

I have only posted one time to this Board and it was out of frustration over what I believed at the time the ill-advised selection of Mitch Buonaguro. (soon to be followed up by a more difficult to understand hiring) I wanted to repost this because I feel it is relevant today, but happily in a positive light this time. Having the opportunity to see this coaching staff and its players occasionally in practice and on the road plus at home as a season ticket holder, I believe we have a coach and staff that will be very successful at Siena. Interestingly our new coach puts a check mark in every box (except the last part of point #6,"...expect to see 70+ points most nights..." ). The 70+ points is not possible this year and will probably haunt us if we get to a post season tournament but even that part will probably happen as soon as next year. If you are a mid-major and aspire to some "up" wins you need to be able to score, especially in today's game. I would also like to add three more observations that have developed as part of today's game:

1) There is too much data available to teams at every level to not embrace its use as part of your coaching style and preparation for your team. Playing hard is not enough anymore.
2) The game has changed dramatically in the last 5-7 years. A younger coach may be more apt to incorporation new strategies that will utilize today's players more effectively and lead to better results on the recruiting trail.
3) Today's players are better, they just are, accept that as fact. So once you realize the players are better we have every right to expect the coaches we hire to be better, yes even better than our successful coaches of year's past. When I say "better" I don't mean wins, I mean better at understanding today's players, new strategies, better use of data to provide detailed scouting reports and new ideas (like assistant coaches assigned to be in charge of the offense and another to be in charge of the defense).

Finally, I am very hopeful that the powers to be at Siena have finally given up on the search for a coach that will stay 10-20 years. What makes Siena Basketball so compelling is our ability to attract top young coaching talent on its way to the top tier of the game. Our players may never play in the NBA (except for Edwin) but many of our coaches have made the highest level.

Enjoy every game that Coach Christian is here because he has "it."

[glen]

I agree. Xavier should be the model we're going for, not Gonzaga.

Another trait that our best coaches had was that their family was fairly involved. Not so much in Deeane's case I don't think but Hewitt's fam, Fran & Maggie and now JC and his wife welcome the boys into their home. There are probably 100 reasons why that works so well. The coaches that treated the job like an office gig and left work at work (Beyer, Mitch, Jimmy) didn't work out so well. They are molding these boys into young men...you can't do that in a few hours a day at practice.

[gorvy]

Glad to see some new posters come back. What I look for a coach is pretty simple and objective:

1). Did the coach win conference championships? Essential for making the ncaas in the maac. Some good coaches freeze in a tourney scenario, others rise above.

2). Does the coach win regular season titles? That’s how you make the nit, and a stronger indicator of overall success as non conference games can be loaded with buys.

3). Does the coach do the above without cheating?


If a coach does those three things you usually have a winner. And when they don’t, well you know...

[Deleted]

Feb 11, 2019 7:30:59 GMT -5 glen said:

I agree. Xavier should be the model we're going for, not Gonzaga.

Another trait that our best coaches had was that their family was fairly involved. Not so much in Deeane's case I don't think but Hewitt's fam, Fran & Maggie and now JC and his wife welcome the boys into their home. There are probably 100 reasons why that works so well. The coaches that treated the job like an office gig and left work at work (Beyer, Mitch, Jimmy) didn't work out so well. They are molding these boys into young men...you can't do that in a few hours a day at practice.

You and I share this philosophy. I really can’t stress how important I think “family feel” is. Look at how it’s playing out this year.

[hockeyguy]

Not exactly related, but somewhat and tied to what I played. Boston College started their D1 hockey program in 1932 (before there even was a Siena). Their first coach was John "Snooks" Kelly. Since that season 87 years ago, BC has had EXACTLY 3 head coaches. When Snooks gave up the reins, he turned the program over to Lenny Ceglarski who was the head coach at Clarkson when I got there in 1970. Lenny was one of the finest men I have ever met. He also told me I wasn't good enough to make the team. His assistant coach was Jerry York, also a BC alum and former Olympian like Lenny. Jerry is in his 23rd year as head coach at BC this year. 3 coaches in 87 years. I was fortunate enough to know 2 of them while at Clarkson. BC has been national champions in that time, sent numerous players to the pro's. In my humble opinion, that is "doing it right", and it is not a chump school to get into. I would point to how the Jesuits do it over in Boston.

[glen]

Hockey - while I don't disagree that turnover hurts, it is also not a reasonable goal for Siena hoop. A Mark Few / Gonzaga situation in a mid-major conference just doesn't happen much. Actually, I can't think of another mid-major with a high degree of success that hasn't lost their coach. There are 2 reasons:
1. Generally, the odds of winning a national title as a mid are super slim. The really awesome coaches want their shot.
2. Mids generally have a MUCH smaller budget than the BCS schools. I think Pitino was making $6M a year when UL canned him. Siena was (reportedly) willing to go to $750K or so to keep Fran but a $1.3+M x 4 contract at a Big 10 school was too much to turn down.

Siena needs to look at schools with turnover (Xavier) that have maintained excellence. I think we're on the right track. The formula of getting proven low-major coaches with the right mix of skills and attitude works. Mitch had experience but he was a failed coach. That didn't change it turns out. Jimmy, I think could have been good but got lazy. He clearly was doing as little as possible to stay just above water...until he drowned. He also performed about on par with his record so again, no surprise. We just have to avoid another bad hire.

[MTS]

Feb 11, 2019 14:25:45 GMT -5 glen said:

Hockey - while I don't disagree that turnover hurts, it is also not a reasonable goal for Siena hoop. A Mark Few / Gonzaga situation in a mid-major conference just doesn't happen much. Actually, I can't think of another mid-major with a high degree of success that hasn't lost their coach. There are 2 reasons:
1. Generally, the odds of winning a national title as a mid are super slim. The really awesome coaches want their shot.
2. Mids generally have a MUCH smaller budget than the BCS schools. I think Pitino was making $6M a year when UL canned him. Siena was (reportedly) willing to go to $750K or so to keep Fran but a $1.3+M x 4 contract at a Big 10 school was too much to turn down.

Siena needs to look at schools with turnover (Xavier) that have maintained excellence. I think we're on the right track. The formula of getting proven low-major coaches with the right mix of skills and attitude works. Mitch had experience but he was a failed coach. That didn't change it turns out. Jimmy, I think could have been good but got lazy. He clearly was doing as little as possible to stay just above water...until he drowned. He also performed about on par with his record so again, no surprise. We just have to avoid another bad hire.

I agree. I once hoped that when Fran was here he could be a Mark Few or Bob McKillop but those guys are extremely rare. I think that was part of the reason Siena hired Mitch and Jimmy hoping they'd win and stay. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. The life of a Siena coach is 5 years. If he wins he'll move up. If he loses he'll be let go. I would be thrilled if Jamion gives us 4 or 5 great years and then moves on. Then it's up to the admin to pick another good coach whether it's outside of the program or grooming an assistant such as Carm.

It can be done not only Butler, VCU, Xavier have done it so has Vermont and Iona and many others.

[IndianSaint]

Feb 10, 2019 23:42:29 GMT -5 arc76 said:

Nov 21, 2012 20:53:40 GMT -5 BigChiefDeane said:

Well said sir.

Big Chief hasn’t posted in years. That alternate identity appears to have sailed.