Lansing COY

[WuShock16]

McDermott was pretty well DQed in 2013 because of Creighton leaving the conference

No, Chewy was DQ'ed because Creighton was a heavy favorite to win league but waited until last game to finally overtake the predicted fourth-place team. Had said predicted fourth place team not laid a huge egg on its senior night three days prior, Creighton would have had to share the title.

No politics there (although the thought that sCUm would be screwed by politics is humorously ironic)---3G just did one hell of a coaching job that year with the newbies and injuries.

[shockmonster]

Thought this was interesting:

Since the 1997-98 season, all but two of the 17 Coach of the Year winners have coached the winner of the Valley regular season. Of those two, McDermott was pretty well DQed in 2013 because of Creighton leaving the conference, and Dana won in 2002 after Creighton finished a game back to SIU but won Arch Madness.
There's not a lot of mystery to the Coach of the Year award, and it's not going to a fourth place coach.

These are good points and I do think that Creighton leaving the MVC was a factor in who won the COY.

[Rlh04d]

No, Chewy was DQ'ed because Creighton was a heavy favorite to win league but waited until last game to finally overtake the predicted fourth-place team. Had said predicted fourth place team not laid a huge egg on its senior night three days prior, Creighton would have had to share the title.

No politics there (although the thought that sCUm would be screwed by politics is humorously ironic)---3G just did one hell of a coaching job that year with the newbies and injuries.

You certainly wouldn't need to argue to me that Marshall deserved the award over McDermott, easily ... but I do think the history of the Coach of the Year award in the Valley pretty well implies Creighton leaving had a big hand in that.

It's entirely possible that's the one year in the last 17 seasons that the voters put more thought into predicted finish and overcoming injuries (how in the HELL did Creighton not handily win the conference with us down two starters all year, and Hall part of the conference season?), but I don't have that much faith in them. That's the one exception in a 17 year run of laziness.

*EDIT: I did just notice that the COY voting was completed before Arch Madness, though, so obviously that tournament doesn't play a role.

[Dave Stalwart]

I'm sorry but for BigDermott to ever win COY during a time when LittleDermott was on his squad is generally going to be skewed. It has now officially been proven that without Doug, the coaching system doesn't work. The team has train wrecked and there were upper classmen remaining on that roster. That does not imply that coaching was ever where the credit should go. I could be COY if I had Michael Jordan and Butler CC's supporting cast and I wouldn't even need to come to practice.

And this thing about the regular season champion always winning seems two fold. I mean you don't want a moral victory situation where you give it to the coach who was picked last and finished 5th like a boss, but you also don't want to always give it the coach who won the most games....especially when they were predicted to do that. I don't know.

For example, even if we win the regular season again, but Loyola finishes in the top 100 at all or if UNI finds a way to finish just a game behind us while maintaining a top 25 ranking, either of these coaches should get it. For UNI, it doesnt help that they SHOULD be good. They would have to do what they were supposed to do plus give WSU a run for the title to be going above expectations. That's still very possible. With Loyola, they are about 75 right now but come on... They were around 300 last year. 300. That's a COY kind of job at this point. That was out of no where and almost single handedly enough to fix some of the garbage schedule strength coming from this conference. He also gets Coach of the Century for making CU look worse at this exact time in particular, right after they left on their high horse and immediately fell off. Meanwhile the horizon team we were all mad about is now better than them and from a cooler city. I'd like to see Moser get it because its sort of like a welcome party for them.

[Rlh04d]

I'm not arguing that the COY going to the winner of the regular season almost exclusively is right. I'm pointing out that it's fact.

On the other hand, I disagree with the focus on expectations. A coach is responsible for every aspect of the team, which includes recruiting the players on the floor and the expectations he has to deal with. A coach that finishes first in the regular season, regardless of where he was predicted to finish, deserves a tremendous amount of credit for that unless he's new to the team and lucked into the situation, because he built that team. Hell, I don't even take away from McDermott based on Doug -- if anything, he gets more credit for Doug.

Gregg Marshall isn't a lesser coach because WSU has the reigning MVC Player of the Year, a likely first round NBA draft pick, and potentially the best man-on-man defender in college basketball, where anything outside of 18-0 is a disappointment -- he recruited those players, taught them, and sculpted this team. Every achievement this team earns isn't lessened because expectations are higher; he's to credit for those achievements AND the expectations, because they are a reward of tremendous long-term performance as a coach.

And I'm not willing to give Porter Moser tremendous credit for Loyola's turn around this year relative to expectations, when his poor performance for the past three years is a LARGE part of the reason for those poor expectations. His team is doing very well this year, but he's not the best coach in the conference, and he's not the third best, either. Did Moser suddenly become a better coach this year than last year?

I don't particularly believe I should value his coaching performance this year exponentially better simply because his coaching performance last year was absolutely pathetic. That's like saying Kyle Korver should win NBA MVP because he's increased his dunking ability SO MUCH more than Lebron, Harden, Curry, Durant, etc. types. He should be rewarded for his performance against expectations! You know, the expectations that were set based on his prior poor performance. Those other guys should be punished for having higher expectations based on higher long-term performance.

You give me a guy like Porter Moser walking into a school like Loyola and performing tremendously well when the team has been winning 30% under a DIFFERENT coach, and I'm going to value that performance highly, because the difference was the coach. Instead the team turning around the way it has when the coach himself has already proven to not be particularly great seems to be more to the credit of guys like Milton Doyle to me, and, quite frankly, poor competition. If you actually look at Loyola's performance, it's not very strong, and with 0 wins over definite top half teams, they're still clearly fighting with MoSt, Evansville, and Illinois State trying to avoid Thursday night. 3-2 against Evansville, SIU, Bradley, and Drake isn't impressive to me. Three of those teams are locks for Thursday night and Evansville isn't the team their poor noncon SOS made them look to be, and Loyola isn't the team their poor noncon SOS made them look to be, either.

Hell, maybe I am arguing the winner of the regular season should nearly always get it.

Giving awards based on expectations the coach or player is responsible for isn't anything except for "most improved." Give Moser the "Most Improved Coach" award, by all means. But if you're just rewarding people for performing poorly in the past and then performing much better relatively, that's a silly way to give major awards out. And it certainly eliminates guys like FVV, Baker, Tuttle, Doyle, etc. from deserving the Player of the Year award. That's what they get for having high expectations based on their own previous performance.

It's everyone-gets-a-trophy nonsense.

[Dave Stalwart]

I'm not arguing that the COY going to the winner of the regular season almost exclusively is right. I'm pointing out that it's fact.

On the other hand, I disagree with the focus on expectations. A coach is responsible for every aspect of the team, which includes recruiting the players on the floor and the expectations he has to deal with. A coach that finishes first in the regular season, regardless of where he was predicted to finish, deserves a tremendous amount of credit for that unless he's new to the team and lucked into the situation, because he built that team.

Gregg Marshall isn't a lesser coach because WSU has the reigning MVC Player of the Year, a likely first round NBA draft pick, and potentially the best man-on-man defender in college basketball, where anything outside of 18-0 is a disappointment -- he recruited those players, taught them, and sculpted this team. Every achievement this team earns isn't lessened because expectations are higher; he's to credit for those achievements AND the expectations, because they are a reward of tremendous long-term performance as a coach.

And I'm not willing to give Porter Moser tremendous credit for Loyola's turn around this year relative to expectations, when his poor performance for the past three years is a LARGE part of the reason for those poor expectations. His team is doing very well this year, but he's not the best coach in the conference, and he's probably not the third best, either. Did Moser suddenly become a better coach this year than last year?

I don't particularly believe I should value his coaching performance this year expotentially better simply because his coaching performance last year was absolutely pathetic. That's like saying Kyle Korver should win NBA Player of the Year because he's increased his dunking ability SO MUCH more than Lebron, Harden, Curry, Durant, etc. types. He should be rewarded for his performance against expectations! You know, the expectations that were set based on his prior poor performance. Those other guys should be punished for having higher expectations based on higher long-term performance.

Hell, maybe I am arguing the winner of the regular season should nearly always get it.

That's pretty compelling though. I guess it just has to be a numbers + eye test. I guess the man who is probably going to get it is Jacobsen because he will have met expectations, improved his team on top of that and achieved a tournament berth.

I think Marshall only gets it if Jacobsen and Moser underachieve the rest of this year because the conference will be hoping to not have the same guy get it each year.... Or if he flat out goes 21-0 again.

One thing is for sure. It's REALLY weird for anyone to be saying Lansing right now.

[Rlh04d]

That's pretty compelling though. I guess it just has to be a numbers + eye test. I guess the man who is probably going to get it is Jacobsen because he will have met expectations, improved his team on top of that and achieved a tournament berth.

I think Marshall only gets it if Jacobsen and Moser underachieve the rest of this year because the conference will be hoping to not have the same guy get it each year.... Or if he flat out goes 21-0 again.

One thing is for sure. It's REALLY weird for anyone to be saying Lansing right now.

I edited in some more about Loyola to my post above, but let's take this seriously regarding Moser's performance this year:

Loyola had three wins against RPI top 200 teams prior to the conference starting, and one of those three was Texas Tech, who are only top 200 based on playing in the Big 12. They had a noncon SOS ~200. In conference, Loyola has only defeated one team of any worth whatsoever, and that team (Evansville) looks to have also been severely overrated based on an intentionally weak noncon SOS. Loyola is 2-1 against guaranteed Thursday night teams Bradley, SIU, and Drake, 1-1 against Evansville, and 3-4 overall in conference. Loyola is by no means out of the Thursday-night-hole-of-suckitude yet, but MoSt losing Marshall will probably guarantee they don't have to worry about it. Still, Loyola's likely a 5th-to-6th place team. That's actually exactly where I expected them to be (however, MoSt and ISUb have flipped from where I expected the two of them to be), and not very impressive to me. It's still a talented team without size and with a rather mediocre coach.

IMO, Moser's coaching performance is being seriously over-rated. Their RPI performance is great, and I love them for that right now ... but let's be real. The difference between Loyola this year and Loyola in past years is that they stopped losing to really bad teams. They're still playing the really bad teams, but now they've been squeaking out wins against them instead of barely losing to them. It's entirely possible that Loyola will finish in the top half of the Valley, and yet not beat a single top-half team ... is that good?

Also, I will be very, very surprised (happily) if Loyola can remain a top 100 RPI team at the end of the season. The Loyola love-fest on here is largely based on them being a top 50 RPI team when we played them recently, but that RPI rating is plummeting fast now.

Where Loyola has truly improved is that this year they're 8-1 against RPI sub-150 teams, whereas last year they were 5-14. Beating sub-150 teams is what you should be doing. Marshall has two losses to sub-150 teams in the past five seasons combined (both vs SIU) -- Moser is about to match that this year with this impending lose to ISUb. And I get that comparing anyone's performance to Marshall is inherently unfair, but if you're up against him in an award race, that's kind of what has to happen.

Anyone saying Lansing is insane, unless you're now judging the award relative to expectations based on terrible nonconference play. Lansing is every bit as much to blame for the 4-8 start as he is to credit for the in-conference start. And, ultimately, ISUb probably still won't finish much above .500 in conference play, once they're swept by WSU and UNI and drop two of their four remaining away games.

Jacobson I have no problem with winning it. Although I don't think he's the guy you turn to if you don't want the same guy getting it each year -- if he wins he'll tie Marshall with three COY awards each.

[shockmonster]

I know that this is baseball but it is somewhat relevant to this discussion but didn't Gene S. lain the COY for a number of years while we were winning the MVC title and then he didn't win for a while even though we were still winning? It got to a point that other teams jealousy was a factor.

[Rlh04d]

I know that this is baseball but it is somewhat relevant to this discussion but didn't Gene S. lain the COY for a number of years while we were winning the MVC title and then he didn't win for a while even though we were still winning? It got to a point that other teams jealousy was a factor.

At some point, there is also an amount of success where you simply stop winning it.

Coach K hasn't won a single ACC Coach of the Year award since 2000.