Thoughts about the Season

[GoVU]

I am a true believer in “your record in close games says how good your coach is. 0-5 in “close” games says a lot.

Hmm. I disagree. I think "your record in close games" reflects the maturity of your team, not the planning of the coach. That's why senior led teams tend to excel at that.

Maturity is a factor, but a good coach sets the plan of attack at the end, exploits the mismatches, finds the other teams weaknesses and makes the necessary adjustments on the fly. How many times in the past five years were we leading or even and then after several halftime adjustments by a good coach, did we fall way behind.

[Jason94]

I am a true believer in “your record in close games says how good your coach is. 0-5 in “close” games says a lot.

Hmm. I disagree. I think "your record in close games" reflects the maturity of your team, not the planning of the coach. That's why senior led teams tend to excel at that.

Maturity is a factor, but a good coach sets the plan of attack at the end, exploits the mismatches, finds the other teams weaknesses and makes the necessary adjustments on the fly. How many times in the past five years were we leading or even and then after several halftime adjustments by a good coach, did we fall way behind.

I don't know the answer to that question, but I sure don't think that was the problem this year. I cannot remember many games where we jumped out to large leads only to see them evaporate in the second half. I think it might have happened maybe once this season. If that is the case, why are you downgrading CJS based on something that just isn't true?

My question to you is, in which games where we had more talent that our opponents did we lose this season?

BTW, close (2 possession games or less) games are generally 50/50 propositions over time. A coach might do well one season and poorly the next season, but over the long haul will generally win around as many as he loses. The ability to win games in blowout fashion is what separates good teams from bad ones. Based on that metric CJS took a historically bad Vandy team from year one (and in CBD's last season) to a team that was around as good as the 2013 team. The difference in record is this team had only a handful of pre-conference games and the conference this season was the 3rd best going into the tournament compared to the 7th best in 2013.

[GoVU]

Hmm. I disagree. I think "your record in close games" reflects the maturity of your team, not the planning of the coach. That's why senior led teams tend to excel at that.

Maturity is a factor, but a good coach sets the plan of attack at the end, exploits the mismatches, finds the other teams weaknesses and makes the necessary adjustments on the fly. How many times in the past five years were we leading or even and then after several halftime adjustments by a good coach, did we fall way behind.

I don't know the answer to that question, but I sure don't think that was the problem this year. I cannot remember many games where we jumped out to large leads only to see them evaporate in the second half. I think it might have happened maybe once this season. If that is the case, why are you downgrading CJS based on something that just isn't true?

My question to you is, in which games where we had more talent that our opponents did we lose this season?

BTW, close (2 possession games or less) games are generally 50/50 propositions over time. A coach might do well one season and poorly the next season, but over the long haul will generally win around as many as he loses. The ability to win games in blowout fashion is what separates good teams from bad ones. Based on that metric CJS took a historically bad Vandy team from year one (and in CBD's last season) to a team that was around as good as the 2013 team. The difference in record is this team had only a handful of pre-conference games and the conference this season was the 3rd best going into the tournament compared to the 7th best in 2013.

Great points and there are many factors overall. I just remember sitting in Memorial Gym during the Fogler years thinking if it was a 4 point game with less than 3 minutes to go, we were going to win. I Remember thinking the same thing during the Skinner years, the latter C.M. Newton years and most of the Stalling years. I haven’t had that feeling in the last five years. I hope Stack can get there, but 0-5 this year in close games . . .

[mathguy]

BTW, close (2 possession games or less) games are generally 50/50 propositions over time. A coach might do well one season and poorly the next season, but over the long haul will generally win around as many as he loses. The ability to win games in blowout fashion is what separates good teams from bad ones. Based on that metric CJS took a historically bad Vandy team from year one (and in CBD's last season) to a team that was around as good as the 2013 team. The difference in record is this team had only a handful of pre-conference games and the conference this season was the 3rd best going into the tournament compared to the 7th best in 2013.

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Maybe it was just that Foster and Byars had ice in their veins that our later teams never replicated.

Or maybe it was a reflection of the general decline in CKS' coaching as we approached the end of his tenure.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

In any event, I'd like to think we'll do better on those close games next year.

[Jason94]

BTW, close (2 possession games or less) games are generally 50/50 propositions over time. A coach might do well one season and poorly the next season, but over the long haul will generally win around as many as he loses. The ability to win games in blowout fashion is what separates good teams from bad ones. Based on that metric CJS took a historically bad Vandy team from year one (and in CBD's last season) to a team that was around as good as the 2013 team. The difference in record is this team had only a handful of pre-conference games and the conference this season was the 3rd best going into the tournament compared to the 7th best in 2013.

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Maybe it was just that Foster and Byars had ice in their veins that our later teams never replicated.

Or maybe it was a reflection of the general decline in CKS' coaching as we approached the end of his tenure.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

In any event, I'd like to think we'll do better on those close games next year.

This isn't a phenomenon isolated to basketball - it has similarly been studied in baseball to show that the best and worst teams generally win around 50% of their 1 run games but the best teams have fantastic records in 4+ run games while the reverse is true for the really bad teams. And that is a sport where coaches have the most time to think through decisions and make the most adjustments depending upon the situation, plus a ton of games to remove the small sample bias.

[AuricGoldfinger]

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Maybe it was just that Foster and Byars had ice in their veins that our later teams never replicated.

Or maybe it was a reflection of the general decline in CKS' coaching as we approached the end of his tenure.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

I've actually tracked this since Stallings became coach. In CKS' first 11 seasons he was a strong 54-30 (.643) in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT.* He had only one season during that stretch when he was below .500 in close games, the woeful 2002-2003 season. But then beginning in 2010-11, his average in those games plummeted and he was only 17-39 (.304) for the rest of his career at VU.

Since Stallings left Vandy, we haven't been much better. Collectively, Drew and Stackhouse have gone 14-24 (.368) over the last 5 seasons and haven't been better than .500 in a single season (2017-18). And since Stallings' fortunes began to wane starting in 2010-11, Vandy is a combined 31-63 (.330) in games decided by 5 points or less.



* Yes, this is a completely arbitrary measure, but I selected it as a metric of close games for this reason. Games decided in OT or by 1, 2, or 3 points are self-explanatory as close games. I included games decided by 4 or 5 points hypothesizing a situation where a team is down 2 or 3 points and attempts a game-tying or game-winning shot that misses, only to then foul the opponent after the miss and have them make 1 or 2 FTs to establish the final score.

[BooMax]

I'm not saying fire Stackhouse nor saying Drew is the answer..... I have been simply saying he was treated unfairly and not provided a fair and equitable chance to implement his system with his players like other coaches are being provided, especially including Stephanie White who seems off limits for criticism because she is gay.

Like noted, we need a really good college coach to help implement a college system if not able to recruit to the current system. look at UM, a 1seed but has a great assistant "College" experienced assistant and that is golden for their success. really is simple as that

[Jason94]

I'm not saying fire Stackhouse nor saying Drew is the answer..... I have been simply saying he was treated unfairly and not provided a fair and equitable chance to implement his system with his players like other coaches are being provided, especially including Stephanie White who seems off limits for criticism because she is gay.

Like noted, we need a really good college coach to help implement a college system if not able to recruit to the current system. look at UM, a 1seed but has a great assistant "College" experienced assistant and that is golden for their success. really is simple as that

It is unclear to me how he was treated unfairly - the 2020 season was destined to be a disaster (it was guaranteed to be the least talented of CBD coached teams at Vanderbilt)- with the roster depleted a basement finish was all but ensured, so then you would be looking at three consecutive losing seasons and hoping that 2021 was going to be better? Or do you fire him then in 2020 and start the rebuild then? CBD went from a team that was pretty good and made it to the tournament to a team that was bad, just finishing outside of the basement to horrible, going winless in the SEC. Any reasonable observer would have concluded that it was likely to get no better in 2020, so what is the endgame here? What was the realistic scenario that CBD was going to turn things around by 2021?

Malcolm Turner pretty much sucked as an AD, but he made one correct move which was letting go of CBD when he did. The argument that CBD needed more time is not a particularly compelling one since a scenario that resulted in a turnaround of the program under his watch in a reasonable time period is very difficult to envision given where we were at the end of the 2019 season. I agree that it hasn't been determined if CJS is the answer (and I would argue if he cannot keep Pippen and Disu around for another season and get a reasonable post player in for next season that he is not the answer), but it seems very clear to me that CBD was not a good fit for us moving forward.

[VandyPhile]

What I saw with CBD was that he lost his linchpin player early in the season and never seemed to adjust to another plan that didn’t rely on that player.

[UltimateVUFan]

What I saw with CBD was that he lost his linchpin player early in the season and never seemed to adjust to another plan that didn’t rely on that player.

This. And that was despite having future NBA players Saben Lee, Aaron Nesmith, and Simi Shittu at his disposal. And he posted the first winless SEC team in 65 years with all that talent. Why some people continue to bring him up and defend him is utterly beyond me. Yet here we are...

[mathguy]

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

I've actually tracked this since Stallings became coach. In CKS' first 11 seasons he was a strong 54-30 (.643) in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT.* He had only one season during that stretch when he was below .500 in close games, the woeful 2002-2003 season. But then beginning in 2010-11, his average in those games plummeted and he was only 17-39 (.304) for the rest of his career at VU. ... And since Stallings' fortunes began to wane starting in 2010-11, Vandy is a combined 31-63 (.330) in games decided by 5 points or less.

Hmmm. So since Stallings was hired in ... what was it? 1999? ... we are 85-93 in close games (a hair under 48%). Pretty close to .500

What was that Jason and I were saying about the Law of Large numbers?

[AuricGoldfinger]

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

I've actually tracked this since Stallings became coach. In CKS' first 11 seasons he was a strong 54-30 (.643) in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT.* He had only one season during that stretch when he was below .500 in close games, the woeful 2002-2003 season. But then beginning in 2010-11, his average in those games plummeted and he was only 17-39 (.304) for the rest of his career at VU. ... And since Stallings' fortunes began to wane starting in 2010-11, Vandy is a combined 31-63 (.330) in games decided by 5 points or less.

Hmmm. So since Stallings was hired in ... what was it? 1999? ... we are 85-93 in close games (a hair under 48%). Pretty close to .500

What was that Jason and I were saying about the Law of Large numbers?

Indeed. Doesn't this mean, though, that we're about to enter another golden age of winning close games?

[Jason94]

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

I've actually tracked this since Stallings became coach. In CKS' first 11 seasons he was a strong 54-30 (.643) in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT.* He had only one season during that stretch when he was below .500 in close games, the woeful 2002-2003 season. But then beginning in 2010-11, his average in those games plummeted and he was only 17-39 (.304) for the rest of his career at VU. ... And since Stallings' fortunes began to wane starting in 2010-11, Vandy is a combined 31-63 (.330) in games decided by 5 points or less.

Hmmm. So since Stallings was hired in ... what was it? 1999? ... we are 85-93 in close games (a hair under 48%). Pretty close to .500

What was that Jason and I were saying about the Law of Large numbers?

And CKS himself was 71-69 - one game away from exactly 50/50.

[4timenatlchamps]

I do remember that there was a point in his tenure when CKS seemed to always have the magic of his great coaching and in-bounds plays and we always seemed to win close games ... until there came a point in his tenure when we simply didn't.

Or maybe it's just that pesky Law of Large Numbers catching up to us.

I've actually tracked this since Stallings became coach. In CKS' first 11 seasons he was a strong 54-30 (.643) in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT.* He had only one season during that stretch when he was below .500 in close games, the woeful 2002-2003 season. But then beginning in 2010-11, his average in those games plummeted and he was only 17-39 (.304) for the rest of his career at VU. ... And since Stallings' fortunes began to wane starting in 2010-11, Vandy is a combined 31-63 (.330) in games decided by 5 points or less.

Hmmm. So since Stallings was hired in ... what was it? 1999? ... we are 85-93 in close games (a hair under 48%). Pretty close to .500

What was that Jason and I were saying about the Law of Large numbers?

It’s even closer than that to .500 when you factor in the basic fact that we beat Georgetown in the 2007 Sweet 16.

[dore74]

I'm not saying fire Stackhouse nor saying Drew is the answer..... I have been simply saying he was treated unfairly and not provided a fair and equitable chance to implement his system with his players like other coaches are being provided, especially including Stephanie White who seems off limits for criticism because she is gay.

Like noted, we need a really good college coach to help implement a college system if not able to recruit to the current system. look at UM, a 1seed but has a great assistant "College" experienced assistant and that is golden for their success. really is simple as that

It is unclear to me how he was treated unfairly - the 2020 season was destined to be a disaster (it was guaranteed to be the least talented of CBD coached teams at Vanderbilt)- with the roster depleted a basement finish was all but ensured, so then you would be looking at three consecutive losing seasons and hoping that 2021 was going to be better? Or do you fire him then in 2020 and start the rebuild then? CBD went from a team that was pretty good and made it to the tournament to a team that was bad, just finishing outside of the basement to horrible, going winless in the SEC. Any reasonable observer would have concluded that it was likely to get no better in 2020, so what is the endgame here? What was the realistic scenario that CBD was going to turn things around by 2021?

Malcolm Turner pretty much sucked as an AD, but he made one correct move which was letting go of CBD when he did. The argument that CBD needed more time is not a particularly compelling one since a scenario that resulted in a turnaround of the program under his watch in a reasonable time period is very difficult to envision given where we were at the end of the 2019 season. I agree that it hasn't been determined if CJS is the answer (and I would argue if he cannot keep Pippen and Disu around for another season and get a reasonable post player in for next season that he is not the answer), but it seems very clear to me that CBD was not a good fit for us moving forward.

100% spot on, thanks. Your analyses are wonderful to read, agree or disagree, and i mainly agree. appreciate the clear thoughts...now how about signing that Kessler kid...

[mathguy]

I've actually tracked this since Stallings became coach. In CKS' first 11 seasons he was a strong 54-30 (.643) in games decided by 5 points or less or in OT.* He had only one season during that stretch when he was below .500 in close games, the woeful 2002-2003 season. But then beginning in 2010-11, his average in those games plummeted and he was only 17-39 (.304) for the rest of his career at VU. ... And since Stallings' fortunes began to wane starting in 2010-11, Vandy is a combined 31-63 (.330) in games decided by 5 points or less.

Hmmm. So since Stallings was hired in ... what was it? 1999? ... we are 85-93 in close games (a hair under 48%). Pretty close to .500

What was that Jason and I were saying about the Law of Large numbers?

Indeed. Doesn't this mean, though, that we're about to enter another golden age of winning close games?

If only ... sadly it really doesn't work that way...

[mathguy]

I'm not saying fire Stackhouse nor saying Drew is the answer..... I have been simply saying he was treated unfairly and not provided a fair and equitable chance to implement his system with his players like other coaches are being provided, especially including Stephanie White who seems off limits for criticism because she is gay.

Like noted, we need a really good college coach to help implement a college system if not able to recruit to the current system. look at UM, a 1seed but has a great assistant "College" experienced assistant and that is golden for their success. really is simple as that

I don't think Drew was treated unfairly.

There is a reasonable argument to be made that he was the victim of some misfortune with injuries and that he could have turned things around given more time. Maybe it even would have happened.

But in 3 years at Vandy, he had 2 1/2 miserable seasons. The year leading into his firing, he had, among healthy players, a former McDonald's HS All-American (Shittu), a future NBA lottery pick (Nesmith), and a future NBA draft pick (Lee) ... and *STILL* managed to go 0 for the SEC - including THIRTEEN double digit losses, and three by more than TWENTY FIVE points!! We didn't just lose everygame, we were uncompetitive every game, and didn't show any reason to think we were improving at the end of the season (with 6 of our last 8 losses in that double digit zone, including, in our last home game with a chance to avoid the winless season, a 36 point loss to a team that was below .500 in the conference).

The idea that performance that bad led to a coach getting fired is hardly unfair. You can talk yourself into reasons to give a guy another chance ... but I can't say Drew was treated badly.