Will Cuonzo Get Fired If He Misses the Tourney?

Discussion in 'Keith Hatfield Memorial Vols Hoops' started by kidbourbon, Jan 27, 2014.

  1. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    that's an overly simplistic way of viewing it with little regard for context
     
  2. MettaWorldPeace

    MettaWorldPeace Contributor

    I see no reason to fire Cuonzo, if you're just going to take a chance on an unknown. This isn't SEC football, so this hire won't be under the spotlight. SEC basketball is an utter joke, so as long as you're going to reach for a hire, you may as well keep Cuonzo and be a perennial bubble team. It would be smarter than paying for an Cuonzo's buyout and then hiring another coach that isn't proven, who will also eventually flame out.
     
  3. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    I am not trying to argue that Cuonzo is a good coach, just that success at the mid-major level does not always equal success at the major conference level
     
  4. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    but it's also possible that the unproven coach you hire ends up being fantastic
     
  5. MettaWorldPeace

    MettaWorldPeace Contributor

    With the current people in charge, I'm not willing to bet on it.
     
  6. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

    is being a perennial bubble team really materially better as a fan than completely sucking? personally i'd say no.
     
  7. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    they'll likely take one from the usual annual mid-major candidate pool. some of them work out, more of them don't. if they do pick a good one, it certainly won't be due to their superior insight and recognition ability.
     
  8. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    I'd say yes, there's always a little hope and that might put a few more butts in seats. Completely sucking is hopeless.
     
  9. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

    exactly. Mike Garrett hired Pete Carroll. i'd hardly say that was because of garrett's ability to pick coaching talent.
     
  10. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

    well i'm adding to that the possibility that the AD might luck into a good hire. personally I find the thought of knowing my team will never win anything of note more disconcerting than rolling the dice that the team might get worse and unwatchable.
     
  11. MettaWorldPeace

    MettaWorldPeace Contributor

    I was being a bit sarcastic on my opinion of keeping Cuonzo. I'm not sure he survives past this year, but I'm almost positive Dave Hart and company won't hire a competent replacement, so I'm not getting my hopes up either way.
     
  12. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    1. Yes, it's very simplistic. Hence the name of the approach.
    2. I'm pretty confident it would have hired us a better coach than Cuonzo.

    Moreover, I don't know what context you're referring to. Cuonzo improved at Mizzou State only because he sucked his first year.

    Hinson went 22-9, 22-11, 17-6 his last three years. The 17-16 season got him fired.
    Cuonzo went 11-20, 24-12, 26-9. He exceeded expectations only by lowering them first.

    A simple "dummy" approach would have zero'd in on another coach.
     
  13. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    but you could also look at it as inheriting a dumpster fire and improving it. that's what I mean by context.
     
  14. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Are actually being serious?

    We've got two options and three possible results:

    Option 1: keep Cuonzo.
    Result: Remain perennial bubble team. Interest in basketball program decreases.

    Option 2: Hire a new coach.
    Result(a): The new coach is better than Zo and generates interested in the basketball program.
    Result(b): The new coach is worse than or equivalent to Zo. Interest in basketball program decreases.


    Now I'm no John Forbes Nash Jr.*, but I'm looking at the above from a game theory perspective, and it's a pretty easy call.

    _____________________________________
    *Though we did go to the same High School
     
  15. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    I'm not sure next year isn't an out and out disaster if he stays, even if he gets in and makes a final 4 run.
     
  16. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I feel like you're missing my point completely. Putting aside the fact that inheriting a 17-16 team and then going 11-20 looks much more like inheriting this* and turning it into this**, I'm not sure why you're even bringing up the word "context" in response to my posts about a super-simply dummy approach to hiring. My point is that you can make a good hire without having to think about context. You can give a 14 year old a free Saturday and an internet connection, and he can make you a hire that has a good chance of succeeding.





    *
    [​IMG]


    **
    [​IMG]
     
  17. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

    well the same guy hired the one people consider mediocre so going by that you have a reasonable chance of hiring someone just as mediocre. the question is what is the chance of the better guy and what is the chance of the worse guy.
     
  18. hatvol96

    hatvol96 Well-Known Member

    Dave Hart didn't hire Cuonzo Martin.
     
  19. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Calcio correspondent

    Nice pictures. I just don't think it's that simple. EDIT: when you're talking about unproven mid-major type guys. Go out and spend some money on an obvious winner in a major conference, then we're talking.
     
  20. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

    nevermind
     

Share This Page