How much does coaching matter really?

83Cat_rivals79182

All-Conference
Mar 31, 2009
6,277
1,776
65
Okay, hear me out. The bottom line in sports is that the teams with the best players usually win. No one could have saved us Tuesday night. Duke's players were better than ours. No amount of adjusting could have helped. Duke has the top three picks in the NBA Draft and Kentucky does not.

Now, it does matter to an extent but more along the lines of if your team is capable of doing what the coach wants. Adjustments matter when you have players that can fulfill what you ask. On Tuesday, we had no one that could handle Duke's big three. The answer to that could be different in March. I hope it is. But right now, in November what can Cal do? He's won a lot of games here and the past tells me we'll be playing real good ball this Spring. And the Cal "haters" will slowly disappear.

Nick Saban isn't winning a title with a roster full of 2 stars. Bill Belichick isn't winning a Super Bowl with Nathan Peterman as his QB. A coach is only as good as his players.
I think that it is 90% daily preparation by the coaches, 10% game calling with the exception of some really outstanding late game calls here and there that in reality could go either way. Just my opinion from years of experience (on this board).
 

RipThru

All-American
Jan 11, 2010
4,739
5,969
0
We can't, because after coaching future pros like Shelvin Mack and Gordon Hayward, he went to the NBA where he's continued to improve as a coach as the Celtics have added star young talent to the roster.

As a UK fan I don’t think I want to use future NBA stars as a measuring stick for success.
 

gwjenning

All-American
Mar 6, 2017
3,735
7,670
0
I think coaching can be the most important factor if you can recognize the type of roster you have and adapt to that. I believe too many coaches force rosters and particular type of players to adapt to trying to be like previous rosters and players they have had.
Brad Stevens is the best I have seen at adapting his coaching style to the current roster and players he has.
 

GonzoCat90

Heisman
Mar 30, 2009
32,377
34,559
0
Ok....seemed to me like you were using Gordon Heyward and Shelvin Mack as a way to downplay Stevens' success as a coach. But maybe I did miss your point.

I was saying he had more success with great players. Shelvin Mack, Gordon Hayward and Matt Howard at a school like Butler is going to be the most talented team on the floor most nights.

His success with the Celtics has increased as their roster has improved. He's a better coach with Kyrie, Horford, Tatum, Brown, etc than he was without those guys or when they were developing.

Basically, you'll never find a coach who won a lot with bad players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RipThru

Elliott Tim

All-American
Dec 10, 2005
10,122
6,290
0
Okay, hear me out. The bottom line in sports is that the teams with the best players usually win. No one could have saved us Tuesday night. Duke's players were better than ours. No amount of adjusting could have helped. Duke has the top three picks in the NBA Draft and Kentucky does not.

Now, it does matter to an extent but more along the lines of if your team is capable of doing what the coach wants. Adjustments matter when you have players that can fulfill what you ask. On Tuesday, we had no one that could handle Duke's big three. The answer to that could be different in March. I hope it is. But right now, in November what can Cal do? He's won a lot of games here and the past tells me we'll be playing real good ball this Spring. And the Cal "haters" will slowly disappear.

Nick Saban isn't winning a title with a roster full of 2 stars. Bill Belichick isn't winning a Super Bowl with Nathan Peterman as his QB. A coach is only as good as his players.
Chicago didn't win till Jackson, N.E. didn't win till Belichick, G.St. on!y won once before Kerr, Steelers didn't win before Noll.
You do need talent to win, but you also need a good coach to mix the batter. JMO
I left two names out that have won 5 & 3 NCAA titles because their teams get way too much coverage here..
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyFaninNC

carbonlib23

Junior
Mar 25, 2015
510
214
0

 

mjj_2K

All-American
Jul 11, 2010
12,439
7,007
0


yea....coaching matters
Yes, it does, but this is a laughable example.

The USA national teams, particularly the 04 Olympic team, were horrendously constructed, and the whole system was broken.

Krzyzewski was part of fixing that, but a much bigger part was getting a commitment from the best players, and then having them show up and actually care about winning.
 
Last edited:

Nooneputsbabyinacorner

All-Conference
Aug 19, 2013
2,849
1,008
0
DC,

While this is probably true, it's also the case that Spellman only played one year, DiVincenzo only played two years, etc., and every player drafted from 'Nova this year had at least one year of eligibility left. It's incorrect to say that Jay keeps his players, or makes them stay around. He hasn't had any true OADs because the NBA hasn't been high on his players. They all come back because they're being told they won't be drafted.

I think your point remains, but I am pretty sure that Spellman and DiVincenzo (this one I'm 100% certain) redshirted. Which would mean they were coached for two and three years, respectively.
 

billCgmx

All-American
Apr 9, 2015
3,060
6,725
0
Yes, it does, but this is a laughable example.

The USA national teams, particularly the 04 Olympic team, were horrendously constructed, and the whole system was broken.

Krzyzewski was part of fixing that, but a much bigger part was getting a commitment from the best players, and then having them show up and actually care about winning.



yea....coaching matters

Here's Coach K head coaching record with Team USA before the Dream Team.

1987 University Games: 7-1 Silver Medal
1990 Goodwill Games: 3-2 Silver Medal
1990 World Championship: 6-2 Bronze Medal
 
  • Like
Reactions: RipThru

billCgmx

All-American
Apr 9, 2015
3,060
6,725
0
Yes, it does, but this is a laughable example.

The USA national teams, particularly the 04 Olympic team, were horrendously constructed, and the whole system was broken.

Krzyzewski was part of fixing that, but a much bigger part was getting a commitment from the best players, and then having them show up and actually care about winning.

People forget that after the 2004 debacle, Coach K's 2006 team also failed to bring home gold after getting upset by Greece and settling for a bronze medal that year.

http://www.espn.com/olympics/wbc2006/news/story?id=2568543

Was that coaching?
 

ZaytovenCat

All-American
Apr 25, 2013
23,901
8,456
97
That Duke game was lost in the week leading up to the game. The team was prepared and it showed. That’s coaching. A lot of our mistakes in the NCAA tournament games that end up being losses are due to poor coaching.

You mentioned the Patriots. They never have the most talent. Plus they are notorious for cutting some of the better players in the off seasons and bringing in players less talented and they suddenly start playing better than they ever had. Same applies to the Spurs.

How much it matters is based on the sport and the team. In CBB it matters a lot. Especially when your team is always freshmen and sophomores. Elite coaching is the difference between us having 1 title in the last 9 years compared to 2 or 3.
 

baboo

Freshman
Jul 11, 2001
225
92
0
I think your point remains, but I am pretty sure that Spellman and DiVincenzo (this one I'm 100% certain) redshirted. Which would mean they were coached for two and three years, respectively.

Nopbiac,

Right. I never said they weren't experienced. Spellman's redshirt year is why Wright still has never had an OAD. But Spellman's redshirt, in particular, was forced by the NCAA and DiVincenzo was genuinely injured. My point is that Jay was not purposely elongating their college careers. They went pro as soon as the NBA paid attention to them, and for Spellman that was in his only year on the court.