 |
|
It is a decent hire, but it is not a swing for the fences
Posted on: March 20, 2017 at 07:37:29 CT
alwaysright MU
Posts:
52716
Member For:
17.99 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
hire.
If he pulls off the Porters and another kid or two, it puts some frosting on it for the time being, but he would be making the same mistake that Quin made in hiring all of his assistants to land recruits instead of hiring assistants who are good coaches. Over his career as a HC, he has desperately needed a legit tactician to lean on, and he's never done it.
We'll be competitive under Martin. We may make the NCAA about half the time. But we will not become an elite program. Some seem to think he'll turn us into Wisconsin and it's not going to happen.
If you've paid attention, or go back digging, you'll find me to be against the hire. Not that I think it'll be a disaster...and I'm not plssed about it. But, as I have posted a handful of times, I firmly believe in the idea of hiring the hot, young guy and seeing if he hits it big. Yes, the floor could be lower, but the ceiling is higher.
Specific names aside, just for examples...guys like Wade, Keatts, Forbes, Holtmann on a higher level...have a higher ceiling than Martin.
The next Izzo or Pitino or Self is out there, you just have to find him.
Here's how I look at it. You hire a guy like Cuonzo Martin or Tom Crean as many favored, and you have a guy who is a 6-6.5 on his high end. That's fine. You'll win games, you'll have fun. But you'll also be frustrated a lot of the time. But at no time will you be in a reasonable spot to make a change. Just like Arkansas has been the last few years. MA hasn't been good enough but he hasn't been bad enough to fire.
You hire a young up and comer and 3 things might happen.
1. He's an 8-9 and you're a great program.
2. He's a 3 and you fire him in 3-4 years.
3. He's a 6 and you're in the same spot you are with Martin for less money.
If he pulls off the Porters and another kid or two, it puts some frosting on it for the time being, but he would be making the same mistake that Quin made in hiring all of his assistants to land recruits instead of hiring assistants who are good coaches. Over his career as a HC, he has desperately needed a legit tactician to lean on, and he's never done it.
We'll be competitive under Martin. We may make the NCAA about half the time. But we will not become an elite program. Some seem to think he'll turn us into Wisconsin and it's not going to happen.
If you've paid attention, or go back digging, you'll find me to be against the hire. Not that I think it'll be a disaster...and I'm not plssed about it. But, as I have posted a handful of times, I firmly believe in the idea of hiring the hot, young guy and seeing if he hits it big. Yes, the floor could be lower, but the ceiling is higher.
Specific names aside, just for examples...guys like Wade, Keatts, Forbes, Holtmann on a higher level...have a higher ceiling than Martin.
The next Izzo or Pitino or Self is out there, you just have to find him.
Here's how I look at it. You hire a guy like Cuonzo Martin or Tom Crean as many favored, and you have a guy who is a 6-6.5 on his high end. That's fine. You'll win games, you'll have fun. But you'll also be frustrated a lot of the time. But at no time will you be in a reasonable spot to make a change. Just like Arkansas has been the last few years. MA hasn't been good enough but he hasn't been bad enough to fire.
You hire a young up and comer and 3 things might happen.
1. He's an 8-9 and you're a great program.
2. He's a 3 and you fire him in 3-4 years.
3. He's a 6 and you're in the same spot you are with Martin for less money.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
It is a decent hire, but it is not a swing for the fences - alwaysright MU - 3/20 07:37:29
-