Pathetic NCAA Tournament Statistic thanks to Bruce Mid-Major
Illinois has won one NCAA tournament game since its appearance in the 2005 national title game. Since 2006, 44 teams have won at least two games. 26 teams have won one game, including such dynamic programs as Winthrop, Bucknell, Cleveland State, Montana, and George Washington.
Bruce Weber has won exactly ZERO NCAA tournament games with a team consisting of solely players who he recruited.
Bruce Weber has won exactly ZERO NCAA tournament games with a team consisting of solely players who he recruited.
posted by Fire Ron Guenther at 11:12 AM
28 Comments:
Pure and simple, you are a RETARD!
Anyone can go out and pick one statistic, restrict the population/time frame that you analyze and come up with a negative conclusion about any coach or AD.
This would be similar to me looking at one case that a lawyer lost when the evidence was in his favor and concluding that he was incompetent. Of course if this happens frequently....
81-126-2. 5 bowl games in 19 years. Try polishing that turd, Mr. Ohio White Trash.
"81-126-2. 5 bowl games in 19 years. Try polishing that turd, Mr. Ohio White Trash."
Nice, you didn't hand select some irrelevant statistic over some insignificant time frame.
Now, I've got two for you. 164-62, Bruce Weber's record at Illinois. Or, 393-167 which is the record of the basketball program during Guenther's tenure.
So explain to me, dip shit, why your number is relevant and mine isn't?????
Great, he beats SIU-Edwardsville every year, how about when it comes to tournament time. It's a relevant statistic, he does well in the regular season but melts in the playoffs. If people can rip Norv Turner for this, why can't people rip Bruce for his ineptitude?
"Great, he beats SIU-Edwardsville every year, how about when it comes to tournament time. It's a relevant statistic, he does well in the regular season but melts in the playoffs. If people can rip Norv Turner for this, why can't people rip Bruce for his ineptitude?"
Weber is 10-7 in the NCAA tournament during his career. Is it OK to rip you for ineptitude in posting erroneous info?
What's his record with his own players?
Records in the NCAA tournament are meaningless without context. North Carolina could go 2-1 every year (.666) for 10 years and they would be utterly miserable. Coppin State could go 2-10 (.166) over a 10 year period and they would be utterly thrilled.
Using expectations as a baseline, here is how I would rate Bruce Weber in the NCAAs at Illinois:
2004: rational expectation was a Sweet Sixteen. They got there, met expectations.
2005: rational expectation was a Final Four. They exceeded expectations by one game.
2006: rational expectation was a Sweet Sixteen. They fell one game short.
2007: rational expectation at the time of the tourney was to lose in the first round, and they did. However, fan expectations prior to the season certainly have been to win one game in the tournament.
2008: didn't even make the tournament. Failed postseason expectations.
2009: rational expectation was to make the second round (as a 5 seed). Were upset in round one, missed expectations by one game.
On the aggregate, Weber is clearly below what the rational fan expects postseason-wise. Going off raw seeding as made by the committee, Weber's Illini are -1. Using fan expectations, he's probably lower than that.
"Kevin said...
Records in the NCAA tournament are meaningless without context. North Carolina could go 2-1 every year (.666) for 10 years and they would be utterly miserable. Coppin State could go 2-10 (.166) over a 10 year period and they would be utterly thrilled.
Using expectations as a baseline, here is how I would rate Bruce Weber in the NCAAs at Illinois:
2004: rational expectation was a Sweet Sixteen. They got there, met expectations.
2005: rational expectation was a Final Four. They exceeded expectations by one game.
2006: rational expectation was a Sweet Sixteen. They fell one game short.
2007: rational expectation at the time of the tourney was to lose in the first round, and they did. However, fan expectations prior to the season certainly have been to win one game in the tournament.
2008: didn't even make the tournament. Failed postseason expectations.
2009: rational expectation was to make the second round (as a 5 seed). Were upset in round one, missed expectations by one game.
On the aggregate, Weber is clearly below what the rational fan expects postseason-wise. Going off raw seeding as made by the committee, Weber's Illini are -1. Using fan expectations, he's probably lower than that."
Your premise is, that fan expectations are rational and Weber should be judged based on those? Then you provide NCAA seedings that suggest something different. Doesn't this suggest to you that fans expectations aren't realistic?
You mention that they didn't make the NCAA in 2008 and that failed to meet fan expectations? I don't know any realistic fans that thought that team was going to make the NCAAs. Once again, this brings into question why you would use fan expectations to measure Weber.
Finally, you conclude that over the six years of his Illinois career Weber comes up ONE win short of what his team's seeding would suggest. You do recall that prior to last year's first round game the team lost their starting point guard and MVP?
I think you're helping me make my points more than proving that Weber is not a good coach.
"Your premise is, that fan expectations are rational and Weber should be judged based on those? Then you provide NCAA seedings that suggest something different. Doesn't this suggest to you that fans expectations aren't realistic?"
Wrong, my dear sophist. Rational expectations = what the NCAA seeding committee expected from Illinois.
Fan expectations = what the fans at the University expected from Illinois.
Under rational expectations, he's -1 (which shows he's an average tournament coach, not a good one, right?). Under fan expectations, I would argue he would be lower than that.
"I don't know any realistic fans that thought that team was going to make the NCAAs."
That would be revisionist history at its finest. The 07-08 team was generally projected to make the NCAA tournament. CBS picked us 5th in the Big Ten (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/10439626) Numerous other media sources picked Illinois to make the tournament (http://www.bracketography.com/pre-conference-tournaments/2007-08-big-ten-preview/, http://www.bigten-fans.com/2007-basketball-preview/illinois-preview.html, http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/421711/mens_college_hoops_big_10_preview_200708.html?cat=14)
That would be pretty strong evidence the expectations were for Illinois to finish 5th Big Ten and make the NCAA tournament.
"You do recall that prior to last year's first round game the team lost their starting point guard and MVP?"
That's basketball.
"I think you're helping me make my points more than proving that Weber is not a good coach."
Why don't you tell us why Weber is a good coach using something other than raw, unanalyzed data such as a record?
"Under rational expectations, he's -1 (which shows he's an average tournament coach, not a good one, right?). Under fan expectations, I would argue he would be lower than that."
You really are presenting a moving target, aren't you? Now he isn't a good "tournament" coach which wasn't the subject of this thread or any other that I've seen here. That's a comparison of the top 64 teams and their coaches. Previous discussions were that he wasn't among the better B10 coaches. Totally different population of interest.
And if you think one game below expectations over 18 games leads to a conclusion that is significant you don't know the proper use of statistics.
I'm going to continue to ignore your use of fan's expectation as some standard to judge him against. That's just an absurd standard that no statistician would seriously consider using.
As for your criticism of my choice of the program's won-loss record to analyze Weber's performance. Winning is the ultimate measure of any coach's performance and the several hundred games in his record are a far more significant sample size than his NCAA record.
Also, this provides a relevant comparison with the number that frg provides in regard to Zook.
So today's points of brilliance from Hudson, OH are:
1. It's absurd to factor in rational preseason expectations of a team in the year-end evaluation of the team.
2. This post/thread wasn't about NCAA performance.
3. You shouldn't consider something unless it's statistically significant.
That's so brilliant you should be editing for Loren Tate.
jujhytioGot me on #2 as I lost track of which thread this was- the one in regard to Weber being a below average B10 coach or his NCAA performance. I can admit when I'm wrong, unlike you who just ignore it when I show the fallacy of your arguments.
On points 1 and 3, if you are going to pretend that this is an objective analysis (your claim) then I stand by my points!
A wise/winning coach once said...."you are what your are"...ie. "you are what your record is". Plain and simple, Bruce Weber has won ZERO NCAA tournament games with a team/players that he has recruited. Zero. That is the fact. And there really isn't anything to argue about that. In order to be a successful college head coach you need to both RECRUIT and coach up those recruits to be successful college head coach. And in this day and time, the meaning of successfull in college basketball = wins in NCAA Tournament, NOT Big Ten wins, not wins over Tennessee Tech (oh wait, Weber's team lost to them!), NOT Big Ten Tourney wins, etc. So the facts are pretty black and white....Weber has NOT won an NCAA game with his own players. Period. End of argument.
So Eric Gordon, a wise/winning coach once said, "...you are what you are...," huh? Which coach are you talking about? Charlie Weis? I remember Bob Dylan said that many years ago, and he was stoned.
"Eric Gordon said...
A wise/winning coach once said...."you are what your are"...ie. "you are what your record is". Plain and simple, Bruce Weber has won ZERO NCAA tournament games with a team/players that he has recruited. Zero. That is the fact. And there really isn't anything to argue about that. In order to be a successful college head coach you need to both RECRUIT and coach up those recruits to be successful college head coach. And in this day and time, the meaning of successfull in college basketball = wins in NCAA Tournament, NOT Big Ten wins, not wins over Tennessee Tech (oh wait, Weber's team lost to them!), NOT Big Ten Tourney wins, etc. So the facts are pretty black and white....Weber has NOT won an NCAA game with his own players. Period. End of argument."
This is just typical of the ignorant, agenda driven posters that are here. Your very first line is that Bruce Weber is what his record is- 68-36 in the B10 and 164-62 overall. Wow, that's a great record!
Doesn't fit the agenda, so here comes the contingencies. Only NCAA wins count. OK, he's 10-7 against the 64 best teams in the country. That's a very good record!
Doesn't fit the agenda, so here comes another contingency. It only counts when the team consists of only his recruits.
WTF, I thought you said the only thing that matters is what his record is and the VERY NEXT line you turn around and say something else. Do you read this shit before you hit the publish button!
" Eric Gordon said...
A wise/winning coach once said...."you are what your are"...ie. "you are what your record is". Plain and simple, Bruce Weber has won ZERO NCAA tournament games with a team/players that he has recruited. Zero. That is the fact. And there really isn't anything to argue about that. In order to be a successful college head coach you need to both RECRUIT and coach up those recruits to be successful college head coach. And in this day and time, the meaning of successfull in college basketball = wins in NCAA Tournament, NOT Big Ten wins, not wins over Tennessee Tech (oh wait, Weber's team lost to them!), NOT Big Ten Tourney wins, etc. So the facts are pretty black and white....Weber has NOT won an NCAA game with his own players. Period. End of argument."
The guy who typed this has to be dumb as a box of rocks.
"This would be similar to me looking at one case that a lawyer lost when the evidence was in his favor and concluding that he was incompetent. Of course if this happens frequently...."
I'm waiting for frg's clever comeback on this one. I'm sure he's avoiding that as he knows which losing lawyer I'm talking about. FRG, YOU ARE AN IDIOT!
"I lost track of which thread this was"
Not surprising since you still think it's 2005.
"This is just typical of the ignorant, agenda driven posters that are here."
The only "agenda" I, Detlef, Andrew, or anyone else who comments here has is excellence for Illinois athletics. I would presume your agenda is to defend the current people in the AD's office.
"That would be revisionist history at its finest. The 07-08 team was generally projected to make the NCAA tournament. CBS picked us 5th in the Big Ten (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/10439626) Numerous other media sources picked Illinois to make the tournament (http://www.bracketography.com/pre-conference-tournaments/2007-08-big-ten-preview/, http://www.bigten-fans.com/2007-basketball-preview/illinois-preview.html, http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/421711/mens_college_hoops_big_10_preview_200708.html?cat=14)"
You're not seriously using CBS sports as experts in providing preseason expectations for the Illinois BB team?
The only "agenda" I, Detlef, Andrew, or anyone else who comments here has is excellence for Illinois athletics. I would presume your agenda is to defend the current people in the AD's office."
Yeah, Kevin got one right
"Eric Gordon said...
A wise/winning coach once said...."you are what your are"...ie. "you are what your record is"."
Unless the wise/winning coach said..."you are what your record is in the NCAAs when competing with only your own players," you blew this post, big time. Plain and simple!
"You're not seriously using CBS sports as experts in providing preseason expectations for the Illinois BB team?"
Do you have a better objective third-party to provide expectations?
The claim was that no reasonable fan would have expected Illinois to make the NCAA tournament that year. Well, CBS predicted they would finish 5th in the Big Ten and make the tournament. If CBS (one of the top two NCAABB sites in terms of credibility) predicted that, thinking anyone who expected Illinois to finish higher than 7th is unreasonable is a bit silly, don't you think?
You made a claim that was shown to be false. Get over it and move on.
" Kevin said...
"You're not seriously using CBS sports as experts in providing preseason expectations for the Illinois BB team?"
Do you have a better objective third-party to provide expectations?"
I can't think of a worse source.
"The claim was that no reasonable fan would have expected Illinois to make the NCAA tournament that year. Well, CBS predicted they would finish 5th in the Big Ten and make the tournament. If CBS (one of the top two NCAABB sites in terms of credibility) predicted that, thinking anyone who expected Illinois to finish higher than 7th is unreasonable is a bit silly, don't you think?"
Weren't you the one that claimed this site was all about objectivity? And now you pull some number out of your arse about CBS Sports being the second most credible source on BB. Please!
"You made a claim that was shown to be false. Get over it and move on."
As much as you fail to respond to my points and switch subjects, it's pretty obvious that you are incorrect on numerous points. Where's your admission that you are wrong?
"Weren't you the one that claimed this site was all about objectivity? And now you pull some number out of your arse about CBS Sports being the second most credible source on BB. Please!"
I don't believe I've ever made that claim. In terms of online college basketball coverage, CBS and ESPN are the two major sites. I'm sure if CBS had Illinois 5th, ESPN (can't find) had us 5th or 6th since both usually shoot for the national consensus.
How about this: can you find a reputable source that had Illinois picked 7th or lower for 07-08?
If you don't think CBS is a reputable college basketball site, we're going to have to agree to disagree, although I'm sure you'd find them amazing if they wrote a pro-Guenther article.
"Where's your admission that you are wrong?"
Point out something specific, as I have done four times in the last two days.
" Kevin said...
"You're not seriously using CBS sports as experts in providing preseason expectations for the Illinois BB team?"
Do you have a better objective third-party to provide expectations?"
I must be a better source than CBS, because I had no expectations of that team making the NCAA tournament. After all the early recruiting failures that Weber had no RATIONAL and INTELLIGENT fan expected that team to be good.
You, OTOH, probably were clueless.
Kevin, still waiting for you to show me those financial numbers from this blog that shows the AD to be incompetent. You did make the statement that this is an objective blog that provided those. So show me the numbers or fess up to the fact that you are wrong...once again. I await your changing the subject.
""81-126-2. 5 bowl games in 19 years. Try polishing that turd, Mr. Ohio White Trash."
Nice, you didn't hand select some irrelevant statistic over some insignificant time frame.
Now, I've got two for you. 164-62, Bruce Weber's record at Illinois. Or, 393-167 which is the record of the basketball program during Guenther's tenure.
So explain to me, dip shit, why your number is relevant and mine isn't?????"
Still waiting for the white trash lawyer from Joliet to show me his skills in presenting an argument. Or maybe this is the best that a lawyer that loses cases when the evidence is in favor can do?
"You did make the statement that this is an objective blog that provided those. "
Show me a link.
I hope the wanker from Hudson, Ohio watched today's game. Most of the team played soft, just like their coach. Motion offense sucks as bad as Coach Guenther's football record.
Post a Comment
<< Home