Balanced Expectations

Status
Not open for further replies.
Donate To GopherHole
S

scher215

Active member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
6,609
Reaction score
2
Points
38
With all of the talk lately as to what the expectations for Tubby Smith should be, and history, etc. I figured I'd look at some actual numbers on history.

(BTW, I am REALLY excited to see where this thread ends up, should be fun! - Anyone want to set an over/under on how many posts until it is closed?)

Anyways, the premise I have always held was you have to take the history of Tubby Smith as a head coach and compare it to the history of Minnesota basketball and your expectations should be somewhere in the middle. I am going to say, for ease of math, it should be exactly in the middle. This is just saying the impact of having a given basketball team coached by Tubby Smith is equal to the impact of that team representing the University of Minnesota.

I want to be clear, this isn't designed to bash / support Tubby - Just wanted to look at some actual numbers.

I first looked at Tubby Smith's record as a head coach, starting in 91-92 at Tulsa through his last season at UK.

The average Tubby Smith team goes 24.19-9.06 (.727) with a conference record of 11.94-4.56 (.723). The average Tubby Smith team wins 1.81 NCAA tournament games per year.

The average Gopher basketball team, over that time frame is here. I will start by including years the NCAA says did not happen.

The average MN Gophers team goes 18.13-13.38 (.575) with a conference record of 7.63-9.13 (.455) and wins .31 tournamet games per year.

Therefore, I would expect a Gophers basketball team coached by Tubby Smith to go:

21.16-11.22 (.653) with a conference record of 9.78-6.84 (.588) and win 1.06 NCAA tournament games per year, or 5.30 NCAA tournament games over 5 years.

Currently, Tubby Smith has an overall winning percentage at Minnesota of .612 (Below Expectations) and a conference record of .430 (Below Expectation). He has won 0 NCAA tournament games in 5 years (room still this year) - Below Expectations.

Now, I am a firm believer in not counting cheating. I accept it less than I accept mediocrity. When you remove the Gopher seasons with cheating, the average season you'd expect is:

16.3-14.9 overall (.522) with a 6.4-10 (.390) conference record and 0 NCAA tournament wins per season.

That changes your Tubby Smith at Minnesota expectations to:

Overall record of 20.24-11.98 (.628) with a conference record of 9.17-7.28 (.557) with .91 tournament wins per year, or 5.44 per 6 years.

Currently, Tubby's overall winning percentage would be below expectations for overall record (.612 vs .628), below expectations at conference record (.430 Vs. .557) and below expectations in NCAA tournament wins (0 Vs. 4.55)

Just some food for thought! - The main flaw I see is the true weight each history holds (Tubby Vs. Minnesota).
 


Wow this is really good. It is kind of disappointing because 6 years ago the hope was that Tubby would have us competing with Izzo and Bo Ryan once in every few years. Instead we are competing with Tim Miles and Bill Carmody.
 

Interesting perspective and analysis. Thanks for putting that together.

At this point, I really could care less what Tubby did at Kentucky. There is some intrinsic value to the U with his ring, but that value to the U decreases every year. And whatever value that ring brings us, we really haven't seen the ROI on it in the last 3-4 years. The bottom line is Tubby hasn't been to the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament since 2005. Tyus, Rashad and Reid were in 3rd grade.

Go Gophers!!
 

I love the mathematical analysis!! Thanks for the effort.

I do not wish to badmouth The Analysis, but if one were to take it to the next level, they would weight Minnesota Basketball history so that more recent results would be weighted more heavily than longer-ago results. This might help address the question of what's realistic in the current day and age. Now, that would be a hugely sophisticated exercise, so nobody's expecting that. But for all intents and purposes, some of the intuitive exercises people have been doing along similar lines sort of serve that purpose.

To take it to even the next level, you would include the statistical quality of variance to get an idea of not just mean but also standard deviation. When you look at Clem's years, for example, the mean might not look too sexy, but the variance is fairly high, meaning low lows but high highs, namely the long conference losing streak from '87 through '88 coupled with the deep Tournament runs in '89 and '90. Some of the more pessimistic posters here deal in broad generalizations, painting with the broad brush of long-term means, but fail (perhaps on purpose) to consider the embedded details.
 


If you align time periods and remove any records not recognized by the NCAA (due to sanctions), you're left with 10 seasons from 1991-92 through 2006-07.

In that time, we are, on average:
16.3-14.9 (.522)
6.4-10.0 in conference (.390)
with zero NCAA wins.

The medians:
17.0-14.5
6.5-10.5

Standard deviation in total wins is 4.2, in conference wins is 2.7.

If you extend it back to the beginning of Clem's tenure - the 1986-87 season - and still remove any unrecognized records, we're left with, on average:
15.7-14.9 (.514)
6.3-10.6 in conference (.374)
0.33 NCAA wins per year

The medians:
16.0-15.0
5.0-11.0

Standard deviation in total wins is 4.8, in conference wins is 2.9.

Since Tubby took over in 2007-08 (and lets just say they lose to Purdue tomorrow so I can round out the conference numbers):
20.5-13.2 (.609)
7.7-10.3 (.426)
0 NCAA wins

The medians:
20.5-14.0
8.0-10.0

Standard deviation in total wins is 2.1, in conference wins is 1.4.
 

scher215 said:
With all of the talk lately as to what the expectations for Tubby Smith should be, and history, etc. I figured I'd look at some actual numbers on history.

(BTW, I am REALLY excited to see where this thread ends up, should be fun! - Anyone want to set an over/under on how many posts until it is closed?)

Anyways, the premise I have always held was you have to take the history of Tubby Smith as a head coach and compare it to the history of Minnesota basketball and your expectations should be somewhere in the middle. I am going to say, for ease of math, it should be exactly in the middle. This is just saying the impact of having a given basketball team coached by Tubby Smith is equal to the impact of that team representing the University of Minnesota.

I want to be clear, this isn't designed to bash / support Tubby - Just wanted to look at some actual numbers.

I first looked at Tubby Smith's record as a head coach, starting in 91-92 at Tulsa through his last season at UK.

The average Tubby Smith team goes 24.19-9.06 (.727) with a conference record of 11.94-4.56 (.723). The average Tubby Smith team wins 1.81 NCAA tournament games per year.

The average Gopher basketball team, over that time frame is here. I will start by including years the NCAA says did not happen.

The average MN Gophers team goes 18.13-13.38 (.575) with a conference record of 7.63-9.13 (.455) and wins .31 tournamet games per year.

Therefore, I would expect a Gophers basketball team coached by Tubby Smith to go:

21.16-11.22 (.653) with a conference record of 9.78-6.84 (.588) and win 1.06 NCAA tournament games per year, or 5.30 NCAA tournament games over 5 years.

Currently, Tubby Smith has an overall winning percentage at Minnesota of .612 (Below Expectations) and a conference record of .430 (Below Expectation). He has won 0 NCAA tournament games in 5 years (room still this year) - Below Expectations.

Now, I am a firm believer in not counting cheating. I accept it less than I accept mediocrity. When you remove the Gopher seasons with cheating, the average season you'd expect is:

16.3-14.9 overall (.522) with a 6.4-10 (.390) conference record and 0 NCAA tournament wins per season.

That changes your Tubby Smith at Minnesota expectations to:

Overall record of 20.24-11.98 (.628) with a conference record of 9.17-7.28 (.557) with .91 tournament wins per year, or 5.44 per 6 years.

Currently, Tubby's overall winning percentage would be below expectations for overall record (.612 vs .628), below expectations at conference record (.430 Vs. .557) and below expectations in NCAA tournament wins (0 Vs. 4.55)

Just some food for thought! - The main flaw I see is the true weight each history holds (Tubby Vs. Minnesota).
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting. Its certainly makes for an interesting topic and threads. The way I read your analysis is that Tubby has underperformed versus his history prior to arriving at Minnesota. However, his performance versus historical minnesota results are favorable in terms of overall record and almost on par in terms of conference record, with below historical for NCAA results. This improves a lot when excluding Minnesota cheating years..where he compares more favorable across board.

My thoughts.. While Tubby makes a lot of money, you cannot realistically expect Tubby to replicate KY success here. But its also fair to expect a lot more than what we have gotten. I do think that if Tubby had more tourney success here, perceptions would be a lot different. I will say that the San Jan tournament win, the Louisville win, the Wisky win and dance and the Indy win and court rush were all more fun than I have had at any time since the Final four fun.. However, if we don't finish, it doesn't really matter.

To me, this analysis shows that Minnesota has not been that great historically, as this board is fed up with Tubby, yet his results mirror or are better than traditional Minnesota records.

Now, there is nothing wrong with expecting more and thats where we probably all can agree. I would like more than what Tubby has done. I expect to make the tourney every year (with a realistic expectation once every 5 years to miss) and a decent run in the tourney every other year. However, if you look at that.. its something that never really has happened here. We have had 3 good seasons under Clem that fit the mold.. and the first Sweet 16 season under clem, we were winless on the road in the Big Ten until the final game of the year (Ohio State). So its not like we were crushing it all year. Then Clem had little success until the final four run 6 years later.

At the end of the day, this is still a good BCS job, not great, but good. Lots of potential with the Twin Cities hoop scene. I think its realistic to expect to be a really good program. I personally hope Tubby makes a run this year, we get rid of his kid on the staff, hire a young recruiter and land a couple of the big names.. give Tubby a couple more good years and then have the next Shaka Smart leap at the chance to take over.. That said, I also realize that we may very well be starting over this year.
 

Based on these numbers, he's slightly better than what we've had but I think - and this is where the disconnect happens - that the expectations were that he'd be a lot better. He certainly hasn't been that.
 

Gopher07, you are indeed the Captain of Awesome.

The standard deviations do bear out the variability under Clem. Most fans are OK with downs as long as there are ups to balance them. When the '91 team failed to make the postseason, fans were not disenchanted, as they knew we had graduated all those stars the year before, Bond got hurt during the season, and they trusted Clem to rebuild. In '92, the fans understood that we had a young, promising team, so the NIT was generally OK with people. In '93 we were disgruntled but mostly because we thought we were screwed by the NCAA, so we took an NIT title with satisfaction. That's how much goodwill back-to-back Sweet 16 and Final 8 runs will buy you. Had Tubby had that one or two years of glory, things would be different now. Had he not let the promising roster he had put together by his second year here get away, things would be different now. Had he even won just one or two of the NCAA games we ended up getting into, things would be slightly different. Monson got fired to an extent because he had hit a low low but also because there wasn't any highs to speak of unless you count that one decent year.

Some people here talk like they think folks are demanding a perennial Final Four contender. Are they even listening to what people are saying? To me it sounds like they're reacting to their distorted perceptions of what they want people to be saying so they can ridicule them and argue with them.
 



Gopher07 said:
Based on these numbers, he's slightly better than what we've had but I think - and this is where the disconnect happens - that the expectations were that he'd be a lot better. He certainly hasn't been that.
Click to expand...

That is definitly the most disappointing thing. When Tubby was hired I think it would have been tough to find many fans that were not excited about the name and what he might do here. Sadly the team for one reason or another has not lived up to what most expected the day he was hired.
 

MNVCGUY said:
That is definitly the most disappointing thing. When Tubby was hired I think it would have been tough to find many fans that were not excited about the name and what he might do here. Sadly the team for one reason or another has not lived up to what most expected the day he was hired.
Click to expand...

Many reasonable people were ignoring the Kentucky situation and instead focusing on what he accomplished at Tulsa and Georgia, which are fair comparisons with here. Had he even come close to matching those successes at Minnesota, we would be like a hog in slop right now.
 

Not to step on any toes but Tubby has had no facilities, and no tradition at MN to build with/on. He has had the most challenging task and should be supported. Each year has been a step forward building a respected program.
 

CollegeBBallFan said:
Not to step on any toes but Tubby has had no facilities, and no tradition at MN to build with/on. He has had the most challenging task and should be supported. Each year has been a step forward building a respected program.
Click to expand...

Not when you can't articulate a coherent sentence and the players have appeared to quit on you at multiple points in the season
 



CollegeBBallFan said:
Not to step on any toes but Tubby has had no facilities, and no tradition at MN to build with/on. He has had the most challenging task and should be supported. Each year has been a step forward building a respected program.
Click to expand...

I am not sure I agree with the bolded part. Tubby's second year team was 9-9 and one and done, his third year team stagnated at 9-9 and one and done, years four and five fell off to 6-12 and missed the tournament. This year, we are looking at 9-9 IF we can beat Purdue on the road (and we are 1-7 on the road in conference with two road losses to teams worse than Purdue). I think the tournament is Tubby's last chance to make the round of 32 and lay some claim to improvement over his best year.
 

THE ONLY WAY, crunching numbers like this is in any way relevant, is if all things are the same, every year.

What do I mean?!

If the average # of Big Ten teams getting ranked among the Top 25 in the country in the years prior to Tubby coming to Minnesota was 2.5 or 3.0, and the average # of Big Ten teams getting ranked among the Top 25 in the country in the years Tubby has been here is 4.5, well, if you don't get what I'm trying to say, the only explanations could be that you hate Tubby and don't want to acknowledge any evidence or facts that would make him look better, or you are just plain stupid.


And I am NOT a big fan of Tubby's. I just can't stand it when people go out of their way to MAKE SH1T UP to make a guy look worse than he is. It's not that he's a great coach, or an incredible recruiter, but whatever the reasons are, the team has done BETTER than any other Gopher team ever has in the past over a 6 year period of time, with the exception of Clem's teams in his first 6 years, but Clem didn't have to deal with as many injuries as Tubby has. Take Bobby Jackson off of the 89 and 90 teams half way through each season, and how do you think they would have finished off?!



Thing is, Tubby has flaws, REAL, CONCRETE, PROVABLE flaws. If the anti-Tubby crowd would just concentrate on Tubby's REAL flaws, and avoid spending so much time trying to convince people of sh1t they WANT to believe, because it would help their argument, they'd find a lot more non-anti Tubby people willing to read what they had to write.



If you compare Tubby's OOC games, vs other UMn seasons ooc games, Tubby's improved on our past, BIG TIME.

If you compare Tubby's CONF games, vs other UMn seasons conf games, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT not what place they finished in the conf, but how many places they finished out of THE RANKINGS, I suspect that Tubby compares favorably.

Now if you compare Tubby's NCAA success vs other UMn seasons, THIS is the one area where he's coming up short, but not by much, for he's only coming up behind Clem's 2 trips in 89 and 90, 2 seasons where Clem didn't have MAJOR season ending injuries to battle with. The 72 & 82 teams COMBINED only won ONE single NCAA tourney game, by 1 pt vs a unranked Tenn-Chattanooga team.
 

#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
THE ONLY WAY, crunching numbers like this is in any way relevant, is if all things are the same, every year.

What do I mean?!

If the average # of Big Ten teams getting ranked among the Top 25 in the country in the years prior to Tubby coming to Minnesota was 2.5 or 3.0, and the average # of Big Ten teams getting ranked among the Top 25 in the country in the years Tubby has been here is 4.5, well, if you don't get what I'm trying to say, the only explanations could be that you hate Tubby and don't want to acknowledge any evidence or facts that would make him look better, or you are just plain stupid.


And I am NOT a big fan of Tubby's. I just can't stand it when people go out of their way to MAKE SH1T UP to make a guy look worse than he is. It's not that he's a great coach, or an incredible recruiter, but whatever the reasons are, the team has done BETTER than any other Gopher team ever has in the past over a 6 year period of time, with the exception of Clem's teams in his first 6 years, but Clem didn't have to deal with as many injuries as Tubby has. Take Bobby Jackson off of the 89 and 90 teams half way through each season, and how do you think they would have finished off?!



Thing is, Tubby has flaws, REAL, CONCRETE, PROVABLE flaws. If the anti-Tubby crowd would just concentrate on Tubby's REAL flaws, and avoid spending so much time trying to convince people of sh1t they WANT to believe, because it would help their argument, they'd find a lot more non-anti Tubby people willing to read what they had to write.



If you compare Tubby's OOC games, vs other UMn seasons ooc games, Tubby's improved on our past, BIG TIME.

If you compare Tubby's CONF games, vs other UMn seasons conf games, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT not what place they finished in the conf, but how many places they finished out of THE RANKINGS, I suspect that Tubby compares favorably.

Now if you compare Tubby's NCAA success vs other UMn seasons, THIS is the one area where he's coming up short, but not by much, for he's only coming up behind Clem's 2 trips in 89 and 90, 2 seasons where Clem didn't have MAJOR season ending injuries to battle with. The 72 & 82 teams COMBINED only won ONE single NCAA tourney game, by 1 pt vs a unranked Tenn-Chattanooga team.
Click to expand...

Bobby Jackson on the 89-90- team?

Lake City Lakers revisited......
 

#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
THE ONLY WAY, crunching numbers like this is in any way relevant, is if all things are the same, every year.

What do I mean?!

If the average # of Big Ten teams getting ranked among the Top 25 in the country in the years prior to Tubby coming to Minnesota was 2.5 or 3.0, and the average # of Big Ten teams getting ranked among the Top 25 in the country in the years Tubby has been here is 4.5, well, if you don't get what I'm trying to say, the only explanations could be that you hate Tubby and don't want to acknowledge any evidence or facts that would make him look better, or you are just plain stupid.


And I am NOT a big fan of Tubby's. I just can't stand it when people go out of their way to MAKE SH1T UP to make a guy look worse than he is. It's not that he's a great coach, or an incredible recruiter, but whatever the reasons are, the team has done BETTER than any other Gopher team ever has in the past over a 6 year period of time, with the exception of Clem's teams in his first 6 years, but Clem didn't have to deal with as many injuries as Tubby has. Take Bobby Jackson off of the 89 and 90 teams half way through each season, and how do you think they would have finished off?!



Thing is, Tubby has flaws, REAL, CONCRETE, PROVABLE flaws. If the anti-Tubby crowd would just concentrate on Tubby's REAL flaws, and avoid spending so much time trying to convince people of sh1t they WANT to believe, because it would help their argument, they'd find a lot more non-anti Tubby people willing to read what they had to write.



If you compare Tubby's OOC games, vs other UMn seasons ooc games, Tubby's improved on our past, BIG TIME.

If you compare Tubby's CONF games, vs other UMn seasons conf games, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT not what place they finished in the conf, but how many places they finished out of THE RANKINGS, I suspect that Tubby compares favorably.

Now if you compare Tubby's NCAA success vs other UMn seasons, THIS is the one area where he's coming up short, but not by much, for he's only coming up behind Clem's 2 trips in 89 and 90, 2 seasons where Clem didn't have MAJOR season ending injuries to battle with. The 72 & 82 teams COMBINED only won ONE single NCAA tourney game, by 1 pt vs a unranked Tenn-Chattanooga team.
Click to expand...

We're doomed to the ghosts of history. Lifetime extension for Tubby, with (de-facto practice coach) Saul as coach in waiting!!
 

jamalo said:
We're doomed to the ghosts of history. Lifetime extension for Tubby, with (de-facto practice coach) Saul as coach in waiting!!
Click to expand...

Yes everyone that defends Tubby wants him to have a lifetime contract.
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
Yes everyone that defends Tubby wants him to have a lifetime contract.
Click to expand...

I'm open to suggestions. The Tubby defenders don't appear to have any minimum performance criteria, so I'd be curious to hear.
 



We're doomed to the ghosts of history. Lifetime extension for Tubby, with (de-facto practice coach) Saul as coach in waiting!!
Click to expand...



jamalo --

Where do you get that conclusion from what I posted?! are you a MORON??? Mentally disabled or something?
 

Debat, suck it up and just say "My bad". Your name calling isn't winning any debates for you.

What I've taken from this thread is that a person can crunch numbers to show what you wish to show. In the end it's not what you did for me in the past, it's what have you done for me lately. What I know is that this years team was supposed to be the very best team that Tubby had produced and this team is landing in the middle of the conference race. We'll be in the NCAA tournament, but we'll be a low seed and it will be a struggle to win one game let alone two games in the tourney. However, since it's a tournament, we could get lucky and the kids could start knocking down the shots that they've been bricking over the past month and we end up with an amazing run.

In the end, Woody has some decision making to do regarding the basketball program. What does he believe we need in order to jump to the upper tier of the conference? Do we simply need a SOA practice facility and that changes everything or do we need a new voice to direct the basketball team as well?

We'll find that out after the season is done. Until then, I would enjoy seeing the Gophers win a game on the road against the "little engine that couldn't!"
 



Default








Quote Originally Posted by #1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat View Post

Barnburner -- I could say FU, but I won't, you aren't worth the time, simple brain fart, meant Willie Burton.
Still waiting for you to admit your error and apologize.....
Click to expand...




Apologize? For what?


For making a VERY understandable error? I might have, but....

For not believing something I read from a poster at an internet discussion board?! LOL don't hold your breath.

I suppose I should believe that you are a French model or something?! It must be true if I read it on an internet discussion board, right?!




Had no one implied that I was a liar or an idiot, maybe I'd feel embarrassed about it? THEN maybe I'd have gone back and made an effort to admit error. Maybe we could all laugh about it? But instead I feel quite differently.


I wouldn't give a homeless bum money because he demanded it from me. I'd probably take him out to eat if he asked nicely or showed me respect.



We're all human, and ALL humans make mistakes sometimes, acting like you are perfect and ridiculing someone for making an understandable mistake disqualifies you from being owed anything, much less an apology.
 

Quote Originally Posted by BarnBurner View Post

Still waiting for you to admit your error and apologize.....
He doesn't make errors. Everything he says is backed up by facts.
Click to expand...




afurry --

I make plenty of mistakes, and admit to making them when they are pointed out to me in a respectful manner.

Had I been treated in a respectful manner in that situation, the mistake would have been admitted long ago. Instead people chose to ridicule me and imply that I was a liar. Neither is a good way to get anything from someone, other than a negative response.


It's simple, you don't like that I'm longwinded, or you have made FALSE assumptions about my support of Tubby and so you seek out reasons to disrespect me or to prove me wrong about something.

It's called character assassination. It's a tool used by those who do not believe in the strength of their argument.
 

#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
Apologize? For what?


For making a VERY understandable error? I might have, but....

For not believing something I read from a poster at an internet discussion board?! LOL don't hold your breath.

I suppose I should believe that you are a French model or something?! It must be true if I read it on an internet discussion board, right?!




Had no one implied that I was a liar or an idiot, maybe I'd feel embarrassed about it? THEN maybe I'd have gone back and made an effort to admit error. Maybe we could all laugh about it? But instead I feel quite differently.


I wouldn't give a homeless bum money because he demanded it from me. I'd probably take him out to eat if he asked nicely or showed me respect.



We're all human, and ALL humans make mistakes sometimes, acting like you are perfect and ridiculing someone for making an understandable mistake disqualifies you from being owed anything, much less an apology.
Click to expand...

Apologize for being a stubborn jerk. Some folks do know things you dont.
 

#1nHkyCfbBsbDncSolarDebat said:
afurry --

I make plenty of mistakes, and admit to making them when they are pointed out to me in a respectful manner.

Had I been treated in a respectful manner in that situation, the mistake would have been admitted long ago. Instead people chose to ridicule me and imply that I was a liar. Neither is a good way to get anything from someone, other than a negative response.


It's simple, you don't like that I'm longwinded, or you have made FALSE assumptions about my support of Tubby and so you seek out reasons to disrespect me or to prove me wrong about something.

It's called character assassination. It's a tool used by those who do not believe in the strength of their argument.
Click to expand...

B.S.

I very gently told you it was the Tiger, not Lakers.

YOU were so damn sure of yourself, since you were at the tourny game!!!!

I told you I played in the same conf as breuer at the same time.

YOU chose not to beleive me.

YOU were, and are the problem.

YOU didnt admit your mistake when given the opportunity - nicely - multiple times.

Stop making others out to be the problem when in fact you are the problem with respect to this discussion.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.



Top Bottom