Here is a look at the chart they came up with. It's really fuzzy, but click on the link to see the real deal. The red line is the shots per game on average from each game. The x-axis represents the distance from the hoop. The blue line represents the percentage each shot is made from each distance.
As Ken Pomeroy points out, coaches guarding the three point line religiously and forcing players to shoot the mid-range is likely a very good strategy. It forces players to shoot in an area they aren't all that comfortable with.
For my three loyal readers, you know that I'm an advocate that the Gauchos should allow the horrible three point shooting teams they play to huck up the three with reckless abandon. However, after reading Ken Pomeroy's piece and seeing the data, TGM is in the process of reconsidering that position.
The problem with the Gauchos, though, isn't their defense. In fact, their defense has a 26.9% turnover percentage, which is phenomenal. According to kenpom.com, that puts the Gauchos at #2 in the nation. Turnover percentage equalizes teams who play faster pace with slower paces. As a result, it's an objective measure that determines how good you really are on defense.
So, while this chart is awesome, the problem that needs to be fixed is the Gauchos offense. How do we do that? Well, my suggestion is to go back through this blog and see what you think. Hint: it involves shooting the three, driving to the basket for close range shots and getting to the free throw line.
There goes an old saying that goes like this: an excuse is like an @**hole, everyone has one and they all stink. Too many excuses have been made for the Gauchos poor performance on Friday night. To those who make excuses TGM says bullshit!
Those who say the game doesn't or didn't matter must have been or are smoking crack (or some other variation). Sure, the game can be considered an out of conference "distraction" because the team is fighting for a Big West seed. Of course, these people haven't taken their rose tinted glasses off long enough to realize that the UCSB has been dusted each time it's played a tournament worthy foe, save UNLV. This game did matter, why? For starters, UCSB is playing a horrendously weak schedule this year (TGM concedes that it is difficult to determine who will be "good" a year or two in advance). A victory over Utah State may not have made their RPI jump into the stratosphere, however, it would have given the Gauchos some ammo and belief that they can run with a tournament worthy foe. Second, what better motivation heading into the Big West final lap than a beatdown of Utah State? A victory like that provides confidence going into your next fight. Third, of all the Big West teams to play over the weekend, only UCSB and LBSU got beat around by their opponent. That, my friends, is a serious downer.
Then there are those who say that the Gauchos played 4 games in 9 days. To that, TGM says, poor Gauchos. Last time TGM checked, the team consisted of 18-25 year old athletes in prime condition. They play a sport that requires them to run a lot of distance. If they got tired they should go try out for the baseball team; I hear they don't do much running. This excuse is an even bigger crock of shit than the game didn't matter. If you're making excuses for the Gauchos now, what are you going to be saying when it's Big West tourney time?
There are multitudes of other excuses that have emerged from the woodwork over the course of the season, but for time reasons, TGM can't go into all of them. Silly reasoning can also be lumped into this category. One of the most absurd reasons is the one that some people throw out by saying that Bob Williams is just the man to lead us out of our despair. How many seasons of mediocrity must we endure before these people have had enough? Just because he's led the Gauchos to the NCAA Tourney exactly once in his ten year career proves nothing. If you play the odds long enough, you're going to hit the jackpot once in a while (except for the lottery).
Obviously this is more of a venting post. Some people may think the reasons above are perfectly valid excuses. Some may agree with TGM. You're each entitled to your own opinion and TGM respects that (although TGM thinks you're an idiot if you don't agree with TGM).
TGM spaced out on Friday thinking the BracketBuster game was on Saturday. However, when TGM hit up the gym Friday night, he was shocked to see that the game was taking place in front of his very eyes.
Needless to say, it was a disappointing loss with the Gauchos going down in flames 72-59 to Utah State. The Gauchos always seem to play their worst on the "national" stage. Don't believe me? See Stanford, UNC and now Utah State. When I say "national," I mean games on television or against a well-known opponent. Three of the Gauchos three worst offensive efficiency rated games have come against said three opponents. Either the boys need to grow balls and turn into men or our coaches need to learn the definition of "big game."
From an efficiency standpoint, the Gauchos registered an 89.6. Utah State managed a 109.3, good for seventh best on the season against the Gauchos. To digress slightly, at least the Gauchos are consistent. The Gauchos have allowed 9 opponents to register 100 or higher on the efficiency scale. 7 of those 9 worst defensive performances have resulted in our losses. For those of you keeping score at home, we have 7 losses on the season.
Let's look at the Four Factors and see how miserable our performance was.
Effective Field Goal Percentage
UCSB: 41.1% USU: 58.3%
UCSB was right around their three point percentage average with a 9-23. Unfortunately, they ran into the EFG% juggernaut that is Utah St. Taking away USU's three pointers (4-10), they shot 22-38 from inside the three. When they weren't busy torching us from inside the arc, they went to the line and killed us with 16-21.
Kudos to Alex Harris and James Powell for being the only dudes who showed up. If it wasn't for those two, an NAIA team (Westmont, anyone?) probably would have kicked our ass. Meanwhile, I'm pretty sure I saw a milk carton with a missing person's ad with Chris Devine's picture. Devine was the epitome of horrible, going 1-8 from the field, no free throw attempts, 1 rebound (not bad for a 6-9 forward) and 3 turnovers in 19 minutes. Seriously, when I saw that line, I thought they had confused Nedim for Chris Devine because there was no way (at least I thought) that he would have a line like that. Not to mention (this is really an assumption because I don't know), his counterpart on the Utah side, Tai Wesley, went 10-14 from the floor, 4-8 from the line, 9 rebounds, and 3 turnovers in 31 minutes. That, my friends, is the type of game where you can insert any AND 1 slogan and it will work. Take notes, son.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 17.7 USU: 43.8
UCSB got back to their normal percentage range on Friday. The problem? The problem was that they went 8-11, while sending Utah St. to the line 21 times. The embarrassing thing is that none of our forwards got to the free throw line once. I believe a couple midgets put in at forward could have gotten to the line at least once. That is about as pathetic a performance as you're going to see from the forwards. Whatever the opposite of mad props is, that's what I'm saying to the forwards tonight.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage
UCSB: 23.0% USU: 29.4%
At first glance this stat isn't that bad. However, consider that Utah St. shot 54.2% from the field and 57.9% from inside the arc. Basically when Utah wasn't owning our defense, they were getting offensive rebounds. Of Utah State's 22 misses, they managed to snag 7 offensive boards, leaving 15 to the Gauchos.
Of UCSB's 41 misses, the Gauchos managed to get 9 offensive rebounds. This was the lone bright spot (kind of like finishing in last place, but still getting a medal) for the forwards.
This is one of the two stats that I've resigned our fate to. The other being free throws. Either the team is completely incapable of getting to the free throw line more than 15 times a game or the coaches don't tell them to get there, hence the players don't care. Same thing for offensive rebounds. Bob Williams needs to go to East Lansing when his season ends in mid-March and beg Tom Izzo to sit in on his practices and watch his players duke it out in rebounding drills. Then Bob needs to acquire some football pads and helmets for his players and make them fight each other for rebounds. Basically, rebounding comes down to how tough you are and how bad you want it. If you're a weakling and don't give a shit, then you're probably not going to grab a board. Want it more than the other guy and most of the time you'll win the battle.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 12.2% USU: 24.3%
Actually, TGM was a little harsh earlier. This was another good spot for the team. They were able to double Utah State's turnover rate, as compared to UCSB's. In fact, the Gauchos only had 8 turnovers, which is quite impressive, compared to the 16 of USU.
That's all for the game analysis. Basically, we can sum the game performance up in two words: we sucked. Sometimes the truth hurts, but you gotta learn sooner rather than later. However, not all is doom and gloom for the Gauchos as they are still fighting for their lives in the Big West with three games to go. Get a #2 seed and they may have a chance at making the NCAA Tournament. Operative word is may.
20 wins. This is a nice accomplishment for the Gauchos. However, this 20 win season will be discounted in the eyes of many if the Gauchos fail to make the NCAA Tournament.
Last night was an impressive win. In case you failed to read TGM's preview (below), we weren't too confident that UCSB would pull out with a victory. TGM enjoyed a nice serving of humble pie today.
Last night's victory was important for multiple reasons. First, this victory put the Gauchos in sole possession of third place. With a match-up against Northridge, the Gauchos have a chance to help themselves in the standings if they take care of business. Second, while the final score was close, the Gauchos were able to keep a commanding lead for a majority of the game. Third, the Gauchos offensive output was not good. Despite that, they persevered and came out with a victory.
As said above, the Gauchos 98.8 efficiency rating on offense and held Pacific to 87.2. Regardless, they salvaged victory with a convincing win.
Effective Field Goal %
UCSB: 53.4% Pacific: 45.8%
The Gauchos didn't spend much time hucking up the three last night. Instead, the focused on attacking the hoop inside the arc. Everyone was very efficient if you look at their total field goal percentages.
On defense, the Gauchos were aided by a 1-10 performance from Steffan Johnson. Most of the other Tigers were efficient.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 45.5 Pacific: 39.6
TGM is really proud of this line (sort of). The Gauchos got to the line 20 times. TGM is now slightly worried because UCSB shot 65% from the line again. No one was atrocious, but they need to get back to their solid FT shooting ways.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage
UCSB: 28.6% Pacific: 43.8%
Again, one of the Gauchos biggest weaknesses was exploited again last night. Pacific gathered 14 offensive boards, while UCSB had 8. It's probably too late to change this nasty habit, but they really need to focus on it, if possible.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 24.7% Pacific: 29.6%
The Gauchos did a good job of forcing turnovers last night. Unfortunately, the committed a couple turnovers themselves.
Interestingly, the Gauchos played at a pace of 60 last night, which is about 5 possessions slower than Pacific wants to play (according to conference numbers). While they weren't at the 100+ efficiency mark, I'll take this victory.
Next up is a tough match-up with Utah State in the Bracket Buster dealy-o.
UCSB Gauchos (19-6, 8-4) at Pacific Tigers (17-8, 8-4) February 20, 2008, 7:00 p.m. (PST)
TV: Channelsurfing.net says that they will have the game.
The Gauchos are on the home stretch of the Big West regular season play. UCSB has four Big West games (including tonight's match-up), plus a Bracket Buster game on Saturday against Utah St. These final four games will go a long way to determine how many games the Gauchos get to play before their inevitable semi-final elimination (that occurs every year).
Effective Field Goal Percentage
UCSB: 52.6% Pacific: 55.9%
Believe it or not, but Pacific is the 6th rated team (kenpom.com) when it comes to effective field goal percentage. What does this mean? UCSB will have to do a stellar job on the offensive end. Last time we met up with the Tigers, the Gauchos let the Tigers have an efficient day, registering a 111.6.
UCSB, on the other hand, had an inefficient day, coming up with a 91.2. That's not going to cut it tonight. Pacific has lost two in a row and they had their worst defensive performance of the year on Saturday by letting CSUF register a 126.3. Two things can happen after a performance like that; continue with their third crappy defensive performance or turn the intensity and mess the Gauchos up. Let's hope it's #1 because I don't have much faith in a Bob run team to overcome #2.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 24.9 Pacific: 32.4
This is Pacific's second biggest strength, as they are 13th in Division I. UCSB is going to have to keep the Tigers off the line, while increasing their chances at the line. Last game, against Davis, the Gauchos did a great job getting to the line. They were unable to convert, but I think that's an anomaly.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage
UCSB: 29.0% Pacific: 32.2%
UCSB has to keep the Tigers off the board and work on getting their own offensive boards. This is UCSB's biggest weakness. They are a bad offensive rebounding team and allow their opponents to get a lot of offensive boards. If they can channel their inner Dennis Rodman, the Gauchos have a good opportunity to pull off the victory.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 21.3% Pacific: 23.6%
Finally, an area where the Gauchos have a statistical advantage! Neither the Gauchos nor the Tigers are particularly good at keeping their turnovers down. The flip side of this is the Gauchos 4th ranked defense in this category. If they can take advantage of the Tigers propensity to turn the ball over, they can push the ball and get some easy buckets.
Tonight, I want a Gaucho win (like everyone else). However, TGM is feeling very skeptical today because this is the same type of situation that Bob's teams in the past have let us down. The Gauchos have an opportunity to lay claim to sole possession of third place since I don't even know when. I don't want to get my hopes up if the let-down occurs. Therefore, there will be no prediction, but I think this will be a tough game for the Gauchos to come out with a victory. If they can emerge with a win, they should feel good about themselves and where they stand in Big West.
This poll has turned into nothing more than a mockery in the eyes of TGM (can a blog have eyes?). It's such a silly poll that makes so little sense, I humor myself every Monday when it comes out. If nothing, it gives me a good laugh to see how ridiculous the poll is.
UCSB rose in the rankings to #17, up from #20. CSUN, the Big West first place squad, moved up six spots to #12. Fullerton finally moved into the rankings at #18, right behind the Gauchos. Pacific fell out of the MM25 this week.
UCSB improved on to 8-4 in conference play with last night's 77-73 victory over the Aggies from Davis. Although this score was close, UCSB made this game much closer than it had to be. The Gauchos played some uncharacteristic ball last night by shooting poorly from the three point line (it's gonna happen sometimes) and some poor free throw shooting. Below is the game flow chart, courtesy of statsheet.com. From the looks of the chart, you'll notice that UCSB never relinquished their lead, which is nice to see from the team at this point in the season.
NOTE: I had to delete the Chart, as it was abnormally humongous and taking up a huge part of the site. You can head over to statsheet.com to check out the game flow chart.
From an efficiency standpoint, the Gauchos had their fourth most efficient game of the season with a rating of 118.2. Defensively, the Gauchos had their third worst performance with a rating of 112.0. While the offensive performance is clearly something to get excited about, the defensive performance should have you worried. I'm willing to chalk up the performance to one bad game, however, anytime you let an inefficient Davis rack up a 112.0 on you, you should be worried. For reference, it was Davis' sixth highest offensive output of the season, putting us up there with LaVerne (Who?), Presbyterian (Who?), Portland St. (Who?), Irvine (Who?, Just kidding) and Pacific.
Effective Field Goal Percentage
UCSB: 56.4% Davis: 60.5%
Believe it or not, but this was our seventh highest effective field goal percentage performance of the season. This is cause for celebration because the Gauchos shot 4-15 from the arc. All this means that the Gauchos headed to the hoop and got them some two pointers like they were going out of style.
On the other hand, UCSB allowed Davis to get a higher percentage on the floor. This was likely the effect of the Aggies' three point shooting. All told, the Aggies shot 8-22 from beyond the arc.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 43.6 Davis: 55.8
This stat really surprised me for two reasons. First, it was nice to see the Gauchos get to the line 24 times. I'm sure they've been to the charity stripe that many times in a couple of games, but I can't recollect any games in recent memory. Secondly, I was surprised because the Gauchos shot an uncharacteristically poor percentage from the line, going 15-24. I consider this a one game aberration and believe they'll get back on track this week.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage
UCSB: 43.6% Davis: 28.6%
For once, the tables are turned! Maybe Bob Williams lit a fire under their ass. Maybe the players drank some crunk juice. I don't know, but whatever the players did (and Davis didn't), the Gauchos need to keep up the good work.
I know Davis didn't have Michael Boone in the middle, but I still believe the Gauchos have the power to rebound like madmen. Most importantly, they kept Davis off the offensive glass.
The Gauchos gave themselves a lot of second chances in the game which is always nice to see. If anyone out there has a second chance point stat, I'd love to see it. You can leave me a comment.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 18.4% Davis: 26.1%
Davis committed 17 turnovers, as compared to the Gauchos 12. Not exactly a whopper of a differential, but if you consider the fact that 12 of the Aggies 17 turnovers came from UCSB steals, you have to be impressed.
Our guards were a little high on the turnover side again, but the overall performance of the Gauchos was a pretty good game.
In wrapping up tonight's review, I wanted to point out a couple of other things. For the past couple weeks, we've been harping on the Gauchos inability to control the pace. The Davis game presented an interesting case study because they play at such a slow speed. While UCSB wasn't exactly playing lights out, they seemingly pushed the pace because they ended with a pace of 65. Not bad considering their last game was played at a 53.
One thing of concern is the lack of minutes that the bench is receiving. TGM has always been a big proponent of playing as many players as you can to create depth. It's our opinion that you do so by playing guys an average of about 10+ minutes a game. The Gauchos have been getting seven or eight guys 10+ minutes a game over the course of the season. The problem with this strategy will surface during the Big West Tournament (Mark my words). If the Gauchos end up playing back-t0-back-to-back games, they could experience some extreme fatigue. The other problem with this is foul trouble. When someone gets into foul trouble, who can Bob turn to? As stupid as it sounds, the players who get these minutes won't have the confidence and Bob won't have it in them. That's enough for tonight.
If you recall from a post earlier this week, Davis is going to try and walk the ball up the court if their opponent lets them. What does that mean tomorrow's game will bring? Davis and UCSB will be walking the ball up the court. Bob has shown an aversion to a fast pace when his opponent plays a slow pace (I really hope he surprises me one game). Look for the game to be closer to a 59/60 than to 69/70.
Defensively, UCSB has been a top 60 squad in almost all categories. They're ranked third in turnover percentage, while Davis is one of the worst Division I teams at handling the ball. Seriously, I don't know if you can find any more solid evidence to show Bob Williams that the Gauchos need to run in Saturday's game.
The one weakness is UCSB's game is Offensive Rebounding %. They ranked as the 301st team in Division I. This isn't a big deal in a game with a lot of possessions because, over the long run, the more efficient team will have the extra possessions to get a bigger lead. However, if the Gauchos hold true to form they could be in for a world of trouble tomorrow in a slow, close game. Their saving grace? Davis is the 333rd worst offensive rebounding team in the country.
The last match-up with Davis was a solid victory for the Gauchos and look for them to continue that dominance on Saturday night.
Last night, another unspectacular, but solid performance by the Gauchos in beating Cal Poly 60-47. The Gauchos played a pace of 63 and were less than 100 on the efficiency scale at 95.1. However, their defense is what carried the day, as they held Poly to a 74.5 efficiency rating.
We're going to change up the four factors we look at. Instead of looking at the straight stats, we're going to use the more mathematical versions from kenpom.com and from Basketball On Paper.
Effective Field Goal Percentage: This stat is just like regular free throw percentage, except it gives 50% more credit to a three point shot. The formula looks like this (.5*3 point made + Field Goals Made)/Field Goal Attempts. Obviously, the better you shoot the three (like UCSB), the higher your effective field goal percentage.
UCSB: 50 Cal Poly: 40.2
Cal Poly shot their characteristically crappy three point percentage, going 5-21. Almost half their shots were three pointers. From Bob William's post-game quotes it looks like he might have been a little too concerned about the Mustangs' three point ability. Hopefully he encouraged them to fire away.
Turnover Percentage: This is a pace-dependent measure of ball security. The formula is determined by Turnovers/Possessions.
UCSB: 17.4 Cal Poly: 38.0
From a turnover standpoint, this was our best performance of the year. The Gauchos were able to force the Mustangs into 24 turnovers. That is pretty amazing especially since 16 of them came off steals.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage: This is a measure of the possible rebounds that the offense is actually able to get. The formula looks like this Offensive Rebounds / (Offensive Rebounds + Defensive Rebounds of Opponent). This state tells us how efficient an offense is at pulling in their missed shots, hence, giving themselves second, third, etc... chance opportunities.
UCSB: 9.3% Cal Poly: 42.6%
No surprise here folks. UCSB doesn't have the big men who want to bang down low. We consistently get out-rebounded by our opponent almost every game. On the other hand, when you're shooting so many threes (and why not? They're making a high percentage), your rebounders are out on the perimeter.
Regardless, we can all make excuses (you know the old saying, an excuse is like an asshole, everyone has one and they all stink), but this was still a very poor performance. The Gauchos had 3 offensive rebounds to Cal Poly's 15. This game would have been even more of a blowout had the Gauchos gathered a few more offensive or defensive rebounds.
Free Throw Rate: This stat captures a team's ability to score from the free throw line. It is determined by dividing Free Throws Made by Field Goal Attempts.
UCSB: 31.9 Cal Poly: 37.0
This is one beef that I suppose I'll always have with the Gaucho Coaches. They don't get to the line nearly enough. UCSB got to the line only 15 times. Granted, they made 13 of those shots. However, they need to take the ball to the basket on a regular basis if they aren't shooting the three.
UCSB Gauchos (17-6, 6-4) vs. Cal Poly Mustangs (9-13, 4-6) February 14, 2008, 7:00 p.m. (PST)
Note: This game was supposed to be on CSTV, but it doesn't appear to be on anymore.
After a disappointing loss to UCI on Saturday (and on TV, nonetheless), UCSB hopes to get back on track and beat the Mustangs for the second time this season.
As detailed yesterday (and in the link below), TGM looked over the Gauchos in conference games to test the theory that the Gauchos actually play to their opponents' pace. The results are below if you want to view them, but the simple answer is a resounding yes. Therefore, in tonight's match-up, look for the pace to be in the mid-60's, since Cal Poly is a middle-of-the-road pace team.
UCSB: 15/game; opponents 18.1/game Cal Poly: 13/game; opponents 15.7/game
If you recall the last game against Cal Poly, Bob Williams seemed to imply that his team was focused on not getting beat by the Mustangs' three point ability. The problem, the Mustangs were shooting a very poor percentage at that point in the season. Tonight, the Mustangs three point shooting ability is a measly 29.7%. They shoot the three more than UCSB and make it less than UCSB.
If I was Bob (which I'm not), I would encourage them to shoot the three tonight. They haven't proved that they can make the three point shot. Pack it in and let them shoot. If you don't believe me, look at the chart below. They're miserable at the three.
As for the other aspects of the game, the Gauchos defense has been decent of late. As for offense, they need to improve their off-the-ball movement. If they stand around and let players take their defenders one-on-one, they're going to be in for another tough game.
One more thing. The Gauchos need to try and impose their tempo on the game. Push the ball up the court. Shoot the three. Drive to the basket. Get to the free throw line. A good example of team following this strategy to a tee last night was Memphis. They got to the free throw line some 25+ times, as compared to Houston's less than 10 attempts. Memphis won by 8, I believe, so those free throws really help out.
While watching the UCSB-UCI game Saturday night, I was thinking about the successful models the Gaucho hoops team (Men) could follow to ensure a successful program for years to come. I don't know why I hadn't thought of this before, but the exact model that needs to be replicated is the Lady Gauchos. Kudos to the announcer for popping this seemingly obvious thought into my head.
If Bob Williams needs any ideas on how to run a successful program, he need go no further than down the hall to talk to the man with the plan (below), Mark French.
Under French, the Lady Gauchos have been to the NCAA Tournament 11 times since the 1991-1992 season. Under Bob Williams, the Men's team has been to the NCAA Tournament once in his 10 years as head coach.
If Bob comes out lacking ideas from his meeting with Coach French, he needs to go to the other successful coach in the building, Tim Vom Steeg, the Men's soccer coach. TVS has led the soccer team to multiple NCAA Tournaments since 2002, including a National Championship in 2006.
There you have it Bob. Two coaches with a track record of success. All you have to do is borrow their formula, copy and see the results pay off.
One more thing that is pretty impressive. The Indianapolis Star put together a database of NCAA reporting schools finances for each athletic department. It's from the school year 2004-2005. Here is the link:
The only sortable sports are football and basketball, so we can't use soccer from the report. However, during the year on those forms, the Lady Gauchos sold $136,478 worth of tickets as compared to the Men's $62,713. That is damn impressive! Say what you want, but, in reality Men's Basketball has always been more popular than Women's Basketball at most schools. That's just the nature of the beast, regardless, Coach French and his ladies managed to double up the Men's team.
Also impressive is the fact that the Women receive less monetary support from the University than the men. In the end, the Men out-revenued the Women. However, this is mainly a result of the fact that the Men have a sports camp that puts money into their revenue stream while the women have no such thing under their revenue.
The last figure that really stands out to me is the promotion expense. The men's team had about $4,500 to work with, while the women had a little more than $20,000. I don't know about the budgetary workings of the athletic department, but it seems that Coach French has this down right. All in all, the women's team has put up some impressive numbers, both financially and record-wise. I hope one day that the Men's team will suck up to the Women and learn how to right this ship, otherwise, history is doomed to repeat itself.
As promised yesterday, TGM is going to rip off a couple posts today in honor of Wednesday. Over the last couple weeks, TGM has noticed a trend that the Gauchos play to the pace of their opponents. I'm going to toot the TGM horn a little bit and point out that no one (that I've heard of) has made this observation. It's a first.
We've analyzed the Big West Conference numbers (from kenpom.com) to see how pace is played by each team. We've compared the Gauchos to the rest of the Big West in an effort to see if they really mirror their opponent's style.
Average Pace/Game (ranked by pace, highest to lowest): All games are 10 games, unless noted
Next, we took UCSB's game-by-game conference performance to see how they stacked up pace-wise. In parenthesis is the average pace that their opponent likes to play (from above).
The problem with the pace numbers is that 7 of the 9 teams are very close. As a result, we can't say with certainty that UCSB is deviating from their average pace and playing that style imposed by their opponent. Obviously, when the season is over, we'll have a much better comparison because we can compare the pace from the first game to the pace of the second game.
You'll have to take my word for it because I'm going to go through and post the numbers on here, but UCSB has the widest deviations of pace than any other team in the Big West.
What I did do, was go through each team and count out how many games they've played according close to pace. Again, the problem with this stat is that the numbers probably aren't going to vary widely because 7 of the 9 teams play a very similar pace. However, this should give us an accurate reflection.
CSUN (72.7): 8 of their 10 games have been played at a pace of 71 or higher. Clearly, they want to run and get as many possessions as possible. In their only two "below" games, UCR (65) and Pacific (66), they were still able to push them over their conference pace average. Clearly, the Matadors impose their style of play on their opponent more so than any other team in the Big West. Consequently, that's probably why they're tied for first.
CSUF (71.4 (11 games)): 6 of their 11 games were above 70. Their other 5 games, interestingly, have all been played at a pace of 67, which is still pretty close to the pace they want to play. They've still managed to make each opponent play above their normal pace which means they're imposing their style on the other team.
Pacific (65.4): They've played two games at a pace above 70 and you can guess who those two games were against. However, they've played no game at a pace in the 50s. All their games have been played in a range of 60-68.
LBSU (65.1 (11 games)): Two of their games have been above 70, do you know who they were against? CSUN and CSUF. Again, no games in the 50s, all in the 60s.
Cal Poly (64.9): They've played one game in the 70s against Northridge. Rest of their games have all been in the 60s.
UCSB (64.7): Two games have been in the 70s against CSUN and CSUF. They've had two games in the 50s against Davis and Irvine (Who, arguably, would be playing a much slower pace if they could (or had the personnel to)). Davis and Irvine are two of the three slowest teams in the Conference. The remaining 6 games have been in the 60s. They played Riverside, the third of the three slowest teams, at 60. The faster the team plays on this list, the faster UCSB has played. The Pacific game is the anomaly on the list with a pace of 63.
Davis (63.3): Two games in the 70s. Two games in the 50s. The rest of their games in the 60s. However, Davis has played a pace in those games of 61, 62, 60, 64 and 62. Looks like Davis is trying to walk the ball up the court, which is pretty much what they do.
UCR (63 (9 games)): One game in the 70s against CSUF. Two games in the 50s against Davis and Irvine. The rest of their games in the 60s come in at 62, 65, 61, 67, 60, 62. These guys just want to play slow as well.
Irvine (62.3): Two games in the 70s against CSUN and CSUF. Two games in the 50s. Rest of their 60 games are 60, 66, 62, 60, 60, 60. Looks like these guys have an aversion to playing fast.
NOW, FOR THE GRAND CONCLUSION!!!!
As you can see, the numbers aren't as clear cut. However, one trend emerges. UCSB plays the pace of their opponents. Their two fastest games have come against the two fastest opponents in the league. The Gauchos have played the three slowest teams, UCR, UCI and UCD, four times thus far, and they've played their 4 slowest games of the season (60, 53, 60 and 58). Obviously, the numbers confirm the fact that UCSB takes on the tempo of their opponent. Ultimately, this is not a good thing because UCSB can't take advantage of their biggest strengths on a consistent basis.
Maybe Bob Williams will read this and do something about it. Chances are, he won't.
After a week that saw the Gauchos lose to UCI for the second straight time this season, UCSB dropped like a stone from #13 in the MM25 to #20. Pacific made a nice leap from #23 to #16 and CSUN dropped from #17 to #18.
In all honesty, I don't even know why I post the Mid-Major Top 25 because it is a fairly ridiculous poll that makes little sense. As Exhibit A, I point to Gonzaga. The 'Zags, no doubt, are good. However, up until last week, they were ranked #1, while Butler was ranked #2. Does that make any sense to you? How is a team in the AP Top 25 ranked below a team in the ORV category of the Top 25? Seriously, who knows?
Exhibit B is CSUN and CSUF. Their records aren't superior by any means, however, CSUF hasn't even received a vote in this poll. Secondly, CSUN, despite being first or tied for first during the entire Big West Conference play has never been ranked as the highest Big West team.
Maybe these coaches know what they're doing, but I seriously question the wisdom of any poll after looking at Exhibit A.
Anyway, check back tomorrow because TGM is looking to do a double post tomorrow. Some more observations from this past week's shitstorm and some, hopefully, insightful analysis.
It's not like the Gauchos need another three point shooter, but I say sign him up. Now is the time for a good analogy. I'm a San Francisco Giants fan. This off-season, the Giants had lots of needs. Center Fielder was not one of them. However, Brian Sabean felt that adding a 6th Center Fielder to the Giants would make our team superior. I think that the Gauchos should really contemplate adding Dan to the squad.
At least if we signed Dan up, we could be the #1 team in the country at something. That #1, ladies and gents, would be three point shooting.
As I said on one of my most recent entries, Coach Williams gave me plenty of fodder for my upcoming columns. This idea comes courtesy of Terrell Owens.
Once upon a time, Terrell Owens was asked if Jeff Garcia was gay. His response was, "Like my boy tells me: If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat, by golly, it is a rat." Of course, Jeff Garcia is not gay.For proof, all one needs to do is look at this picture:
Wow. Jeff Garcia is living proof that hard work pays off in more than one way.
Getting back to my point. What does TO's quote have to do with Bob Williams? Quite simple, actually. For the last 10 seasons, Bob has coached the Gauchos to mediocre season after mediocre season. Yet, us Gaucho fans are eternal optimists. We want to believe that Bob will change his ways, put out a winning squad and churn out NCAA berth after NCAA berth.
The problem with this viewpoint is just what I said. Bob has had 10 years to prove himself and he's confirmed over and over again that he is a mediocre coach. There's not many jobs in America (that I can think of) where 10 years of mediocre performance gets you a contract extension and job security. However, I want you to repeat the Terrell Owens mantra (if you believe that Bob is still the answer), "If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat, by golly, it is a rat."
For those of you unconvinced by my verbal reasoning, let me try a numerical reasoning. Below is Bob's record at UCSB over his career.
Averaged out, Bob "averages" a 15.7 win season and 12.8 losses per season. We'll be generous and round up. Bob goes for 16-13, on average, every season. If .500 is the definition of mediocre, I'd say he's been pretty mediocre.
For those of you who like charts, there is a chart below, courtesy of statsheet.com.
So, what's been the point of this discussion? The point is that Bob Williams isn't going to change or have some career revolution at this point. If anything, he's shown us that he's basically a career .500 coach. Of course, there are going to be anomaly's once in a while when Bob is fortunate enough to feast on an easy schedule.
For those of you who still believe in Bob, more power to you. I still root for the Gauchos, but I know with Bob at the helm, we're destined to make the NIT once every five years. For a superior academic institution, we should not accept mediocrity. After all, we don't accept mediocre students, so why keep a mediocre coach around? Unfortunately, we have to live in misery for two more seasons, then hope that our new AD (whomever he or she may be) will have a set of balls to send Bob packin'. Until then, I hope the Gauchos can get the next two NCAA berths (this season and next). In the meantime, I'm going to start looking for available coaching candidates. Is Ben Howland available?
Wow. Where do I start? In the interest of keeping this short (and because Bob gave me so many good ideas last night), I'm going to summarize our performance in each half with one word each: decent, WTF?.
For anyone who played Mortal Kombat as a kid and watched the game last night, I think you'll have a pretty good idea what I'm trying to convey if you watch the first 10 seconds of the clip.
For those of you who didn't watch the game, UCSB lost 65-59 last night to the Anteaters. Here are the four ordinary statistical categories that we normally focus on.
Clearly, this battle was lost on both the free throw line and our abysmal second half shooting performance. UCI made us pay when we sent them to line. It didn't hurt that they shot lights out in the second half from two point land. UCSB was ice cold in the second half. They shot 17 three pointers in the second half and made four.
Al Harris and James Powell showed a shooter's mentality out there by firing up the three. I have no problem with that. I'm of the opinion that our three point shooting is so good (In fact, top 5 in that nation before last night's game) that we should keep firing up shots. However, I'm also of the belief that at some point you gotta be smart enough to realize that if your shot isn't falling, you have to go for the easier baskets.
Of course, this is where it gets tricky and I get a bit smarmy. I'm convinced that UCSB does not have an offense. I'm completely serious. Show me a playbook and I'll show a tape where no one moves around on offense and everyone tries to take their man one-on-one. This is part of the reason why we shot so many threes last night. When no one sets a pick for anyone else, you have to dribble around the perimeter. Since we're playing D-1, we've got a shot clock and we kept shooting silly three pointers.
The flip side of this is even more ridiculous. This team is one of the best free throw shooting teams in the nation, yet we got to the line 11 times. 11 TIMES!!! Does Bob or anyone on this team understand that they should drive to the basket, pump fake, get a foul, get to line and get in the bonus early? I know, it's complicated stuff. Lucky for me, I've got a degree from UCSB so I can put two plus two together. If I was coaching this team, there would be two shots they would be allowed to take: a lay-up in which they must pump fake at least once or a three pointer. You have to know your strengths and it seems ridiculous that after 20+ games, Bob still can't figure out what his teams strengths are.
Getting back to our lack of offense. It pisses me off when I see three or four of our players standing around for 25 seconds before moving around. If you don't believe me, watch the off ball players next game and you'll be amazed at the lack of movement.
One more gripe I have is with Nedim Pajevic. Nedim, I'm sure you're a great guy, and we'd probably get along if we ever drank beers together. However, I have some constructive criticism for you. You try to do much more than you're capable of. You played 17 minutes last night and the boxscore attribute two turnovers to you. Unfortunately, I was keeping track and you were directly responsible for 5. You averaged a turnover every three minutes. In other words, you had one more turnover than points you scored in the game. We call that uneffective. Next game, don't make crazy passes into the post. You're a big man, play like it.
The last gripe of this rant is our offense again. This again falls back to Bob. Do you know what 58 is? It's the number of possessions we had last night. Do you know why I'm pointing this out? Of course you do. It's because our team has become the greatest chameleon act in Division I basketball. Again, we proved we're incapable of playing our own pace or imposing our pace on the other team. We played down to Irvine's pace, which is about 62 possessions a game. The game before, when we played CSUF, we had 67 possessions, about 4 less than Fullerton averages. Against Riverside, we had 60 possessions, about 3 less than Riverside averages.
The point of this is that we don't know what kind of team we have because Bob Williams allows his opponent to dictate the pace. A crazy friend of mine once said, "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face"(OK, Mike Tyson really isn't my friend). I don't know if the Gauchos have a plan, but they abandon it once the game starts. How about Bob surprises his opponent next game and forces his team to press and push the pace the entire game. If he does, I bet we get to the line a lot and shoot the three pretty well, and win. Wouldn't you believe it that that type of style plays into our two biggest strengths? Well, you should.
Have you figured out what the Mortal Kombat clip was? The point is that when we were up 10 points in the second half, we had the opportunity to step on Irvine's throat and finish them off. Unfortunately, we allowed them back in the game and lost. These guys need to get a killer instinct and take a lesson from the animal kingdom. When an animal sees/smells blood or weakness, they finish the other animal off because in their world, only the strongest survive.
UCSB Gauchos (17-5, 6-3) vs. UCI Anteaters (8-13, 4-5) February 9, 2008, 7:00 p.m. (PST)
Note: This game will be on Fox Sports PRIME network. For those of you students who read this blog, get out to the 'Dome tonight, make some noise, tell your buddies and get on TV. We want the 'Dome to be rockin' so that more games will be televised in the future.
Tonight, UCSB looks to extend their three game winning streak against the Anteaters. For those of you who don't recall, UCSB lost 66-63 last time they faced the Anteaters. The Gauchos had one of their five worst defensive efficiency performances in that matchup.
However, on Thursday night, the Gauchos came out with a nice victory. They had their best offensive game, from an efficiency standpoint. Be wary, though, because the Gauchos also had their second worst defensive game from an efficiency standpoint (only UNC was worse). Yet, it's always a good thing when you have a bad defensive night, and pull out with the win.
Don't be fooled by these stats. UCI plays one of the slowest paces in the nation, while UCSB is right around the middle. What does that mean? UCI is probably a better offensive rebounding team and is pretty proficient at getting to the line.
UCSB is going to have get away from their chameleon role that they've taken on this season. They need to impose their tempo and style upon the Anteaters. Clearly, UCI won't be able to hang with the Gauchos if they get to an up-tempo pace.
Irvine wants to shoot the three just like the Gauchos. The Gauchos need to give UCI the three point shot all day long. They need to grab the defensive rebounds and push the ball up the court and find the open shooter in transition.
The key is building on Thursday's performance from an offensive standpoint and improving defensively. I think this game is going to be closer than it should be. If UCSB can get 70 possessions this game, it's a blowout. If they stay close to 60, they pull off the victory by no more than 5 points. Go Gauchos
Last night was a great win, on many fronts, for the Gauchos. In case you missed it, TGM believed that the Gauchos would lose (but hoped that we were wrong). It turns out TGM was wrong (hard to believe, I know) and glad that he was.
This cool widget chart below is brought to you courtesy of statsheet.com. It contains the advanced statistics from last night's game.
Shooting Percentage
UCSB: 50.0% CSUF: 49.2%
Free Throws
UCSB: 21-28, 75.0% CSUF: 12-15, 80.0%
Offensive Rebounding
UCSB: 10 CSUF: 10
Turnovers
UCSB: 11 turnovers CSUF: 11 turnovers
Before we delve into the above stats, the most important line of the night was UCSB's offensive efficiency. This was their most efficient night of the season, according to statsheet.com. UCSB had an efficiency of 123.9. For those of you who don't know what offensive efficiency is, here is a very amateur definition. It describes how many points you would have if you had exactly 100 possessions in the game.
The second impressive stat of the evening was the Gauchos free throws. In their prior competition with CSUF, the FT line was reversed and this time the Gauchos returned the favor. UCSB had a tremendous 28 attempts from the line, while limiting Fullerton to 15. Arguably, the game was won at the charity stripe. Of course, it helps when the referees call 12 fouls against you and 25 against Fullerton.
Next, the Gauchos even surprised me with their rebounding prowess last night. They fought Fullerton to a stalemate on the offensive end and outrebounded them by one on the defensive end. As for three point shooting, it was the same old story for the Gauchos. They didn't shoot as frequently as they normally huck the three up, but they still shot 57.1%.
The one thing that still concerns me is the pace we play at. UCSB is definitely a team that follows the tempo of their opponent. They gladly let the opponent dictate their pace. Last night, Fullerton played fast and forced the Gauchos to keep pace. I would like to see them play that way every game, but it's something they need to look out for.
In other news, CSUN lost to Pacific in Big West play. Pacific and CSUN are tied for first, while Fullerton is third. UCSB is still fourth, however, they are one game out of first place. Right now, UCSB needs to play one game at a time, but they also need to realize that a strong performance to end the season could catapult them into first place and the #1 seed in Big West.
UCSB Gauchos (16-5, 5-3) vs. Cal-State Fullerton (14-6, 7-2) February 7, 2008, 7:00 p.m. (PST)
ChannelSurfing.net says that this game will be on their site tonight. Open up your Internet Explorer at 7:00 and check it out.
The Gauchos look to extend their two game winning streak (yeah, that's right, two games baby!) against CSUF at the 'Dome. Fullerton is currently the second place team in the Big West. More impressive is the fact that they are the only team to beat first place CSUN thus far in conference play.
On January 12, UCSB and Fullerton matched up at Fullerton with the Gauchos getting a 87-72 victory. In that match-up, UCSB shot a phenomenal 64.8% from the field and held the Titans to 33.9%. The two things that worried yours truly about the game was the amount of offensive rebounds CSUF was able to pull down and the free throw discrepancy.
As to the offensive rebounds, UCSB allowed Fullerton to grab 18 offensive boards. If this was any other night where the Gauchos weren't shooting so well, this could be cause for concern. 18 second chance opportunities is far too much to be giving up.
The free throw discrepancy was insane. CSUF went 25-31 from the line, while UCSB was 8-9. There was not a huge fouling discrepancy, so the Gauchos seemed to have lacked some quality defense in this game. This cannot happen again. UCSB has to get to the line more than their opponent and take advantage of their free throw prowess.
If you're like me, you're slightly nervous heading into this match-up. The Titans appear to be doing just about everything, except free throw percentage, a little better than the Gauchos.
The problem with this match-up is that the Titans are virtual statistical twins of the Gauchos. They've shot about 70 more three pointers than the Gauchos this season and hit them at about 40%. They get to the free line more often, although they make less of their attempts (this is negated if they get to the line more often though).
According to kenpom.com, Fullerton plays at the 10th fastest (adjusted) tempo in the land (75.1 possessions/game). UCSB plays at 67.6 possessions per game. Lately, the Gauchos have allowed their opponents to dictate the pace they play at. If the trend continues, look for UCSB to push the ball up the court. If that is the case, this will be Exhibit #1 for why Bob Williams needs to put more depth into the squad.
The last time the Gauchos played Fullerton they played at a pace of 73 possessions. They were also extremely efficient, with an offensive efficiency of 118.0 (one of our best of the season). Fullerton played one of their least efficient games of the season, having an output of 97.6.
Look for the game to be played at Fullerton's pace. The Gauchos need to take care of the ball and shoot the three extremely well. They need to limit Fullerton's offensive rebounding opportunities and prevent them from getting to the line. This is the kind of game that I would like to see UCSB play night in and night out. Tonight, will be a nice experiment to see how the Gauchos perform.
I don't normally predict against the Gauchos, and I'm not sure which way the score is going to go. However, I will say this. If CSUF wins, I think it's going to be a blowout. If UCSB wins, it's going to be a close one. Read into it what you may, but I think I'd favor the Titans slightly in this one. As much as it pains me to say that, I sure hope I'm wrong.
I was listening to a college basketball podcast and they were discussing Drake. The podcasters said that Drake has one of the top 10 RPI's in the land right now, but they're not getting the respect they should. For those of you who don't know, the Drake Bulldogs are currently 19-1 and undefeated in conference play.
Who is their only loss? Their first game of the season against St. Mary's, 72-66.
Anyway, getting back to my point. I looked at Drake's schedule and it isn't really that great. Kenpom.com has their SOS at 72. They play in a mid-major conference that is highly regarded. This got me thinking about UCSB.
A lot of people, myself included, felt that the Gauchos had what it takes to dominate the Big West, taking only a loss or two. We also believed (naively now) that UCSB should be able to get out of their non-conference schedule with 2 or 3 losses. Mission accomplished.
This whole Drake thing made me wonder two things. First, what if UCSB was undefeated in Big West right now and/or had only three losses? To answer that question, their two out-of-conference losses do not look bad right now. Both Stanford and UNC are top 15 material. I think if UCSB had only three losses, they'd be at the fringe of the Top 25 right now.
The second thing I thought was, what teams could we schedule to make our out-of-conference better? This is the subject of this post. I thought of our limited means and scheduling realities (sort of) and came up with a "dream schedule."
This dream schedule could accomplish several things. First, it would put more pressure on our team/coaches to play at a consistently higher level. Second, I think it would draw more fans out to the games. Third, we might actually be able to start pulling in better recruits. Make sense, right?
So, here it is, the dream schedule. We get 11 out-of-conference games, plus the Bracket Buster game. We also end up playing a game the next season against the prior year's Bracket Buster opponent. Tournaments count as one game. This is no particular order.
1. Utah State - Bracket Buster opponent
2. Tournament - Stanford's maybe
3. UNLV - Always a good game
4. UNC - We get them next year at home, but I doubt we always get to play them
5. San Diego St. - Instead of USD, why not continually take on a school in SD from a bigger conference?
6. Fresno St. - Gives us a presence in the Valley
7. Bracket Buster opponent - Hopefully, we're playing well so we get a good home match-up
8. St. Mary's - Nice Northern California game against one of the WCC's best teams
9. SJSU/Santa Clara/USF- Another NorCal game so recruits in the Bay Area can come see us
10. Cal/Stanford/USC/UCLA - I know it's hard to convince a big conference team to play us because nothing positive can come out of it for them, but I think we should be able to get one of them a year. If we get Stanford in their tournament, wipe them off this spot and pick from one of the other three teams, preferably USC or UCLA because we need one LA OOC game. You have to play one or two big dogs each year to prove your mettle.
11. BYU/Utah - These teams are usually pretty highly regarded
12. Nevada/New Mexico State - This game can be scheduled in conjunction with the game out to UNLV.
One thing that struck me when writing this out was that the schedule isn't really that ridiculous. Most games would be within California. Some games would require a little bit of travel, but nothing really expensive. A lot of this depends on other teams schedules, so it's not just a one way street. Regardless, I would love to see the Gauchos play a schedule like this. I think this schedule also maximizes their resources. It keeps them close to home, which should limit the wasting of limited resources.
If they were able to take on a schedule like this, I think it would do wonders for them. They would increase their Strength of Schedule and RPI (I hope). Recruits would get a chance to see the Gauchos no matter where they were in California, as we'd be playing close to each major metropolitan area.
For those of you who don't see many Los Angeles area games on tap, it's because I felt that our Big West schedule provides us with plenty of opportunities for the recruits to see us during the season. With games against CSUN, CSUF, UCI, LBSU, and, to a lesser extent UCR we have ample time down in LA.
If you have a moment or two, I'd love to hear what the readers think about this schedule. Post a comment with an opinion on the schedule or make up your own dream schedule. I'll post the good ones in another post sometime in the next week or so.
Over the last couple weeks, we here at TGM have been planning on putting together a Bob Williams resume comparison. Today was the perfect day to unleash such a post. TGM had a job interview today. Today is Super Tuesday where every political candidate is doing his job to carve the resume of his opponent into misleading statements that don't paint the whole picture. One of the best Super Bowl commercials, in our humble opinion, involved a job interview:
Don't worry though, we here at TGM want to give you the truth and nothing but the truth regarding Coach Williams and his resume.
Before we go into the resume talk, I wanted to point out how our highly scientific study worked. As you can see from the charts below, we worked hard on this project and came to some conclusions. However, with 300+ Division I basketball coaches, it was simply too much for us to go through every program and look at each coach's experience. What we did do was try to take a sampling of coaches that we could think of (and who would make a representative sample) in the Division I ranks. Once we selected our coaches, we compared their resume to that of Bob Williams and we've noticed a trend (we think).
In total, we sampled 8 coaches, including Bob Williams. We couldn't help but include his namesakes in the study, Roy Williams and Gary Williams. We included Mark Few because we thought it would be good to get a successful mid-major coach in there. We included Kelvin Sampson because he's a middle of the road coach (but a Hall of Famer at breaking the recruiting rules), his teams are usually good and not horrible. John Beilein is included because he's been around at a couple programs. Finally, Frank Martin and Keno Davis were included because they are first year coaches.
Our conclusion: While the coaches in this list have had varying degrees of success, one point really stood out to us. With the exception of Kelvin Sampson, all of the coaches on this list had a good amount of Division I assistant coaching experience or head coaches at a low-major Division I program before ascending to the throne of Head Coach.
Each coach's experience is documented below for you to take a look at. However, the one thing that really sticks out from Bob's resume is that he has two years of Division I assistant coaching experience, among his many years of coaching. While I'm sure it's not a pre-requisite for success, it certainly appears that spending some time at the Division I level, as an assistant or low-major head coach makes a difference. I am aware that if we went through every Division I coach we could probably find some successful ones with a Bob-type resume.
Roy Williams was an assistant coach (all at UNC) for 10 years before he left to coach Kansas. Gary Williams spent 6 years as an assistant coach (Lafayette and BC), 4 years as a low-major coach at American before moving onto the head coaching position at Boston College. Mark Few spent 1 season as a graduate assistant at Gonzaga and 8 as an assistant coach before getting Gonzaga's Head Coaching position. Kelvin Sampson spent 1 year as Michigan State Graduate Assistant, 5 years at the NAIA level, and 2 seasons as an assistant coach (Washington State) before becoming Washington State's head coach. John Beilein spent 8 seasons at the Division II level, 4 years as a head coach at a low-major (Canisius) and 4 years at a mid-major (Richmond) before becoming West Virginia's Head Coach. Frank Martin spent 7 seasons as an Assistant Coach (Northeastern, Cincinnati, K-State) before becoming Kansas State's Head Coach. Lastly, Keno Davis spent 16 years as a Division I assistant coach (Iowa, Southern Indiana, Southeast Missouri St., and Drake) before becoming the Drake Head Coach.
Just counting graduate assistant and division I assistant coaching years for the sample group, there is a total of 51 years experience for an average of 7.29 years spent as a Division I assistant. Adding Bob's two years gives us 53 years experience for 6.63 years of Division I experience. Clearly, Beilein and Sampson are the exception to the rules here. Yet, one thing remains clear, Bob's 2 years pale in comparison to the average.
If we add the low-major label into the mix, the experience comes up to 59 total. Using the sample's, that's good for an average of 8.43 years of experience before landing a mid-major or major conference head coaching job. Adding Bob into the mix drops the experience down to 7.38 years of experience before taking over a mid-major/major conference job. Again, Bob's experience is much smaller than the rest of the coaches.
One of the assumptions we made between low-major and mid-major was that there really was primarily major conference and low-conference basketball at Division I during the time that most of these coaches were coming up. Beilein's years at Richmond were clearly considered mid-major.
What does this show? Our scientific study doesn't prove that you need ample Division I experience to succeed as a coach at this level, but I think it suggests that there is at least a correlation.
This isn't Bob's fault. Obviously, if he had better opportunities to coach elsewhere, he probably would have taken them. Coaching is a fraternity, as you can see by the fact that Roy Williams first NCAA job was coaching at UNC, where he played. We realized it's not easy to just send in an application and get hired at a major Division I basketball school. We've been known to give Bob a hard time on this site and we still have our differences with him, but we think this falls solely on the administration and the AD, Gary Cunningham. While they probably did their due diligence, it doesn't appear that they looked to outside programs to see what types of experience a successful head coach has. There are going to be exceptions to every rule, and it's obvious that Bob isn't the exception. When UCSB hires another coach, it appears, in our opinion, that the best candidate for the job is someone with at least 8 years of Division I assistant coaching experience.
Hiring a coach solely on the basis that he had a couple of successful Division II seasons should not be enough (I don't blame Bob for taking the UCSB job). Giving a D2 coach a D1 job solely on his performance at a different level strikes me as irrational. You see it happen every year at the end of basketball season, though; the coach who got his team into the second weekend of the NCAA tournament becomes a hot commodity, whether or not his record warrants it. It looks like UCSB was trying to make a splash without overpaying.
To bring up a useful analogy, think about the Golden State Warriors first round draft pick from a couple years ago, Patrick O'Bryant. He was an unknown commodity until the Bradley Braves upset Pittsburgh in the NCAA Tournament. All of a sudden Patrick O'Bryant was going to be the next big thing. Patrick was no dumb ass, he capitalized on the irrational exuberance and parlayed that into some money. I didn't think any team would be dumb enough to give this guy a guaranteed first round contract solely on his size and NCAA performance, but the Warriors did. Consequently, they wasted a draft pick and their money.
Finally, while writing this, one interesting thought occurred to me. Maybe Bob is using UCSB. Maybe he's waiting for that one tournament run with a couple of victories. He can get out of dodge and leave the damage at UCSB. Maybe UCSB is Bob's experience while he positions himself for a big money job, just maybe. If that's the case, then we're all suckas and Bob is a friggin' genius.
Bob Williams:
1975-1976: San Lorenzo Valley HS, Assistant Coach 1976-1978: Santa Cruz HS, JV Coach 1978-1979: Cabrillo CC, assistant coach 1979-1980: Lincoln HS, Head Coach 1980-1983: Cabrillo CC, Head Coach 1983-1988: Menlo College 1988-1990: Pepperdine, Assistant 1990-1998: UC Davis, Head Coach 1998-Present: UCSB, Head Coach
Roy Williams:
1973-1978: Owens HS 1978-1988: North Carolina, Asst. Coach 1988-2003: KU Head Coach 2003-Present: Head Coach at UNC
Gary Williams:
1969-1970: Woodrow Wilson HS Assistant coach 1970-1972: Woodrow Wilson HS Head coach 1972-1977: Lafayette assistant coach 1977-1978: BC assistant coach 1978-1982: American Head Coach 1982-1986: BC Head Coach 1986-1989: Ohio State 1989-present: Maryland
1979-1980: Michigan State, Grad. Asst. 1980-1981: Montana Tech, Asst. Coach 1981-1985: Montana Tech, HC 1985-1987: Washington State, Asst. Coach 1987-1994: Washington State, HC 1994-2006: Oklahoma, HC 2006-Present: Indiana, HC
John Beilein:
1979-1982: Erie CC, Head Coach 1983: Nazareth, HC 1984-1992: LeMoyne, HC 1993-1997: Canisius, HC 1998-2002: Richmond, HC 2003-2007: West Virginia, HC 2007-Present: Michigan, HC
Frank Martin:
1985-1993: Miami HS, Asst. Coach 1993-1995: North Miami HS, HC 1995-1998: Miami HS, HC 1999-2000: Booker T Washington HS, HC 2000-2004: Northeastern, Asst. Coach 2004-2006: Cincinnati, Asst. Coach 2006-2007: Kansas State, Asst. Coach 2007-Present: Kansas State, HC
ESPN released their Bracket Buster match-ups today. UCSB will face off against familiar foe and Big West expatriate Utah State on Friday, February 22 (Time TBA).
The game will be televised on one of the ESPN Networks. If the Gauchos are going to ball it up in Logan, UT, this game needs to be put onto ESPN2. If the Gauchos are going to have one of these lame-ass Bob Williams performances, put it on ESPNU (or at least classic, so TGM can watch the game from the comfort of the TGM lair).
Utah State is the 1st place team in the WAC currently. As a conference, kenpom.com ranks the WAC 18th RPI-wise, while the Big West is #20.
Utah State does have an RPI of 89 according to kenpom.com, as compared to the Gauchos at #96.
When comparing strength of schedule, the Gauchos have an SOS of 238, compared to Utah State's 194. The Aggies did lose to our friends up the road in SLO, Cal Poly, back on November 15. In a second Big West grudge match, the Anteaters of UCI took them down on November 17. However, the Aggies have turned it on since a 1-3 start to the season. They now sit at 15-6 and 6-1 in conference play. None of their wins really stand out as spectacular (like our victory over UNLV), but they've had several solid victories over middle-of-the-road opponents.
Believe it or not, but Utah State is one of the very teams that shoots from the charity stripe at a higher percentage that the Gauchos. They actually shoot the three about as well as we do.
Without going into a crazy analysis, it looks like the Gauchos got an opponent that can match their two biggest strengths, arguably. However, a good showing (in other words, a win) and a nice second go-round in the Big West and the Gauchos might just steal away that NCAA berth.
UCSB, the Big West's 4th place team, held steady this week coming in at #13 of the Mid-Major Top 25.
CSUN stayed at #17 despite a loss last week at the hands of Fullerton. Fullerton, meanwhile moved into the Top 25 at #24. Also, from the Big West is Pacific at #23. Pacific dropped from #19 as a result of their loss at the hands of the Mighty Mustangs.
Now all four teams in the Big West that have a "shot" at getting the NCAA tournament berth are ranked in the Mid-Major poll. This should make for an interesting final stretch of games. Will the Gauchos turn up the heat or wilt in their all too familiar manner?
Now that UCSB is halfway through Big West Conference play, we thought it was appropriate to release an expectations poll. UCSB was picked to finish in 1st by both the media and the coaches. The result? Those guys are looking like they were tricked by Bob (as Gaucho fans know all too well).
UCSB doesn't play until Thursday when Fullerton comes to the 'Dome. Let us know what your expectations are now that you've had time to digest UCSB's position in Big West.
For everyone's convenience, the Big West Standings are below
As Ken Pomeroy points out, coaches guarding the three point line religiously and forcing players to shoot the mid-range is likely a very good strategy. It forces players to shoot in an area they aren't all that comfortable with.
