Jump to content

Analytical Breakdown of Random Coach vs. Tim Miles

aphilso1

By aphilso1
in The Haymarket Hardwood

 Share

Recommended Posts

aphilso1

aphilso1

Posted
Posted

I see three main aspects of coaching success: recruiting, in-game coaching, & development.  Each of these can also be viewed using both a short-term (next season) and long-term (18/19 season and beyond) lens.  That makes six total criteria.  I’m assuming we don’t get a “wow” big name hire; given Nebraska’s current situation and resources, would you rather have a random/average coach or Tim Miles?

 

Short-term Recruiting: Advantage Random Coach

Miles’ hands are tied.  Eichorst didn’t give him an extension last year, and it’s hard to see him giving Tim an extension now.  But even if Miles did get an extension, there’s clearly blood in the water and recruiting is a game played among sharks. 

 

Long-term Recruiting: Advantage Tim Miles

This roster is set up to make the Dance in the next two years.  And I’d even say we’ve got better odds at making it twice in the next two years than getting shut out twice.  I’ll put the over/under of Tournament appearances in the next couple years at 1.25.  If we have that kind of success, then whoever is the coach will get a recruiting boost.  Miles is an excellent recruiter, he just needs to get his on-court mojo back to keep success on the recruiting trails.

 

Short-term In-game Coaching: Advantage Random Coach

Not much to say.  It appears game management, play calling, etc. is not Tim’s strength. 

 

Long-term In-game Coaching: Advantage Random Coach

Ditto.

 

Short-term Development: Advantage Random Coach

We’ve seen transfers make a big jump after redshirting.  What we haven’t seen a lot of is four-year players making big jumps in year two, and only limited examples of guys making big jumps in year three.  Then there’s the whole revolving door/attrition aspect that impacts everyone in college basketball, but seems to affect us more than most. 

 

Long-term Development: Advantage Tim Miles

Every year we have a senior leader that appears impossible to replace.  And then the next year a different senior elevates his game drastically, to the point that we can’t see how he could ever be replaced.  This coaching staff does some exemplary long-term development for guys that are willing to put in the work over four seasons.  No reason to think this batch of frosh/sophs couldn’t be special by the time they graduate.

 

Totals: Random Coach 4, Tim Miles 2.  And that makes me sad.

MichHusker

MichHusker

Posted
Posted

In hopeful eyes, I'm now starting to see Coach Miles as a "stepping stone" coach. What I mean by that is he is the coach that at least recruiting and perception-wise, gets us out of the gutters and makes us a (mostly) competitive team with talent. Now the next coach would hopefully be the guy that develops the talent here, continues to recruit well, and turn what Miles brought here into a winning program. As I said, hopefully thinking...

twinswingohuskers

twinswingohuskers

Posted
Posted

That would be if, and that's a big if we don't lose some players to transfers.  I think Nana would be gone as well as 2 or 3 of our current roster, if there is a change.  All you have to do is look at last years women's team vs. this years women's team.  Last year the women lost their best outside shooter as well as 2 incoming recruits with the change in coaches.

So would we be back to looking at what we will have in 3-4 more years.   I don't know the answer to this, but I think we need to consider it.

uneblinstu

uneblinstu

Posted
Posted

You always run that risk when you make a coaching change. Anecdotally, I don't think mass exoduses happen that often. I'm sure there will be some losses off the roster, but, as long as you don't protract a search, I don't think you'll see players abandoning ship. And Nana's signed a LOI. They might release him from it, but it's not a guarantee. There are a lot of things that *could* happen, including Miles returning.

aphilso1

aphilso1

Posted
  • Author
Posted

There's a risk of transfers either way.  We've had more than our fair share of early departures during Miles' tenure.  There also appears to be a lack of effort recently, which implies that the coaching staff may be starting to lose the locker room.  There isn't enough publicly available information to say whether we'd lose more players by retaining or firing the staff, and I don't have any insider info. 

hhcmatt

hhcmatt

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

Totals: Random Coach 4, Tim Miles 2.  And that makes me sad.

 

3 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

Long-term Recruiting: Advantage Tim Miles

Long-term Development: Advantage Tim Miles

 

Are we playing a short term or long term game here?

Fullbacksympathy

Fullbacksympathy

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't take an average coach over Miles.  I would need it to be a good, proven P5 coach in order to sign off on it.  A person only has so much time in the day, and I think it's fairly obvious that Miles has spent his time heavily on the recruiting end of things, which is a smart decision.  He's changed the culture in that area.  Now that this system is in place, and we're going to see a Fr-Sr roster of impressive talent, I would hope that would give TM the opportunity to really hone in on a sound basketball philosophy and identity and create a culture.  

 

There's no reason to make a lateral move.  Miles is exceptional in some areas and pretty bad in others.  He's also 50, so not terribly young anymore, and I don't know that the old dog can learn new tricks.  All in all, I'd say the job he has done at Nebraska has been average when considering his massive strengths and weaknesses, but the 10 year ceiling is WAY higher than the prior coaches (next to Nee, of course) given the talent in place if he can improve the culture and philosophy.  

 

Literally the only coaching change I can think of as a legitimate possibility with my criterion would be Mark Gottfried.  I'd be fine with that move.  Beyond him, I believe we'd get a bunch of minimally better in-game coaches who can't recruit worth a damn.  Thad Matta is being retained at OSU.  

 

I think we end up keeping Timmy, and I'm fine with that.  

 

 

colhusker

colhusker

Posted
Posted

My gut says we would lose a couple guys IF Miles is let go.

My gut says IF Miles is retained, Horne is elsewhere next year (hope I am wrong on this).

 

Keep in mind I made dinner two nights ago and that could be what all the issues with the gut is.

colhusker

colhusker

Posted
Posted
Just now, hhcdimes said:

 

That'd be a damn shame. I squint at him and see the next Malcolm Hill.

Dimes it is just a guy feeling based on a few twitter comments (is that the right terminology for those things?).  I have no insider information, just have seen frustration at getting pulled quickly for mistakes while others played on after the same mistake.

 

I really hope I am wrong as I think this kids ceiling is high.

FredsSlacks

FredsSlacks

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, MichHusker said:

In hopeful eyes, I'm now starting to see Coach Miles as a "stepping stone" coach. What I mean by that is he is the coach that at least recruiting and perception-wise, gets us out of the gutters and makes us a (mostly) competitive team with talent. Now the next coach would hopefully be the guy that develops the talent here, continues to recruit well, and turn what Miles brought here into a winning program. As I said, hopefully thinking...

the new coach will have to be able to recruit. you can't assume that all of miles players will be here if we hire a new coach. player turnover would be very likely.

Edited by TimSmiles
MichHusker

MichHusker

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TimSmiles said:

the new coach will have to be able to recruit. you can't assume that all of miles players will be here if we hire a new coach. player turnover would be very likely.

Trust me, I don't. I expect turnover, but I don't expect a mass exodus of half the team. IF Miles was to get fired, i would want the new guy to be announced ASAP so he can immediately start recruiting the current roster. If we keep everyone together sans one or two guys( depending on who), I think we would all still be pretty optimistic for next year. 

hhcmatt

hhcmatt

Posted
Posted
Just now, colhusker said:

Dimes it is just a guy feeling based on a few twitter comments (is that the right terminology for those things?).  I have no insider information, just have seen frustration at getting pulled quickly for mistakes while others played on after the same mistake.

 

I really hope I am wrong as I think this kids ceiling is high.

 

I know exactly what you mean.  It's a tough road for the guy because in addition to having to learn our system he's also transforming his body and position (he played a lot more post in HS). He's not quite as physically gifted as some of the other guys so he unfairly (life is rarely) has to put in more right now to get playing time.

 

You can see the scoring, the drive, and the passion in that guy though.  He's playing a lot of minutes if he keeps with it during the offseason next year and that guy is potentially Malcolm Hill when it's all said and done. 

Silverbacked1

Silverbacked1

Posted
Posted

If (or as many think when) Nick moves on, Horne would be my favorite player.  Hope he stays either way, but would not be all surprised if he leaves.  Also just a gut feeling.  Hope his dad taught him like Tai's dad.

Dean Smith

Dean Smith

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

I see three main aspects of coaching success: recruiting, in-game coaching, & development.  Each of these can also be viewed using both a short-term (next season) and long-term (18/19 season and beyond) lens.  That makes six total criteria.  I’m assuming we don’t get a “wow” big name hire; given Nebraska’s current situation and resources, would you rather have a random/average coach or Tim Miles?

 

Short-term Recruiting: Advantage Random Coach

Miles’ hands are tied.  Eichorst didn’t give him an extension last year, and it’s hard to see him giving Tim an extension now.  But even if Miles did get an extension, there’s clearly blood in the water and recruiting is a game played among sharks. 

 

Long-term Recruiting: Advantage Tim Miles

This roster is set up to make the Dance in the next two years.  And I’d even say we’ve got better odds at making it twice in the next two years than getting shut out twice.  I’ll put the over/under of Tournament appearances in the next couple years at 1.25.  If we have that kind of success, then whoever is the coach will get a recruiting boost.  Miles is an excellent recruiter, he just needs to get his on-court mojo back to keep success on the recruiting trails.

 

Short-term In-game Coaching: Advantage Random Coach

Not much to say.  It appears game management, play calling, etc. is not Tim’s strength. 

 

Long-term In-game Coaching: Advantage Random Coach

Ditto.

 

Short-term Development: Advantage Random Coach

We’ve seen transfers make a big jump after redshirting.  What we haven’t seen a lot of is four-year players making big jumps in year two, and only limited examples of guys making big jumps in year three.  Then there’s the whole revolving door/attrition aspect that impacts everyone in college basketball, but seems to affect us more than most. 

 

Long-term Development: Advantage Tim Miles

Every year we have a senior leader that appears impossible to replace.  And then the next year a different senior elevates his game drastically, to the point that we can’t see how he could ever be replaced.  This coaching staff does some exemplary long-term development for guys that are willing to put in the work over four seasons.  No reason to think this batch of frosh/sophs couldn’t be special by the time they graduate.

 

Totals: Random Coach 4, Tim Miles 2.  And that makes me sad.

I think your are missing other things that make a coach. The most important is Big Picture, Vision, whatever you want to call it. What I mean by that is what is your team trying to do year after year. Many people will refer to this as knowing your x's and o's. You talk about player development which is the technical, but you also have to have an understanding of what it is you want to accomplish tactically.  And how you teach your technical skills need to fit into the overall tactical vision. You have to have a cohesive offensive and defensive package. There are "styles" of offense and defense that don't fit together or don't fit together as well as others. The need to be fundamentally and structurally sound. I've seen coaches run some things that have a fundamental flaw that will always have a certain weakness or be susceptible to particular countermeasures. 

 

Another thing you missed that I think Miles is good at is game planning. How are you going to take away or reduce the effects of the team's or individual players; strengths. They don't always work but I have seen other teams try to copy his game plan at times. Lots of people tried to play Purdue the way we did.

 

One of the biggest underestimated "must haves" of a successful coach has to be player relations. At this level you also have to be able to create positive relations with the administration and with the public. 

 

Then there are by definition the undefinable intangibles. I could go on but I just think that you oversimplified the measurements of what it takes to be a good coach.

Coaches kid

Coaches kid

Posted
Posted

Horne's offensive potential is very good. In that respect, his ceiling is high. However, he's a major question mark on defense. Exhibit A was his defense on Sunday evening (although outside of Roby, it appeared to me everybody's D was lacking). The question is whether he will get quick enough (or defensively savvy enough) to guard 3's. I don't think he's big enough to guard true 4's. That being said, I hope the young man sticks around. 

Bugeaters1

Bugeaters1

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, twinswingohuskers said:

That would be if, and that's a big if we don't lose some players to transfers.  I think Nana would be gone as well as 2 or 3 of our current roster, if there is a change.  All you have to do is look at last years women's team vs. this years women's team.  Last year the women lost their best outside shooter as well as 2 incoming recruits with the change in coaches.

So would we be back to looking at what we will have in 3-4 more years.   I don't know the answer to this, but I think we need to consider it.

It's a vicious cycle isn't!!!!!!

Bugeaters1

Bugeaters1

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, AuroranHusker said:

 

Is that the online university?

 

Or the offshore school?

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Bugeaters1 said:

It's a vicious cycle isn't!!!!!!

My guess is online.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...