Want Job Security? Apply Within.
05.18.05
My favorite part of the off-season is the coaching changes. Late-season recruiting and early entries are fun, but schools that change coaches are establishing the direction of their basketball squad for the next few years. And it’s an interesting time in the coaching industry, because it’s an employers market right now.
D1 coaching changes
Year Changes Pct. 1997 63 20.6 1998 45 14.5 1999 55 17.3 2000 53 16.7 2001 47 14.6 2002 44 13.5 2003 46 14.1 2004 37 11.3 2005 41 12.4
There has been a steady decrease in vacancies since 1997. It’s not a trend you should expect to continue much longer. Looking at the history of coaching changes, which you can on page 161 of the NCAA Basketball Records Book, there’s a cycle. It’s an employers market today - but within three years it will be a great job market for prospective coaches, or current coaches looking to advance. The last time there was this little turnover in back-to-back years was 1993-94 when only a total of 22.4% of jobs changed hands. In the subsequent off-season of 1995, there were 58 changes (19.2%). A previous lull occurred in 1984 and 1985 with 23.0% turnover. Two years later, 1987, was the biggest single year for job changes - when 66 of 290 coaches either got their pink slip or found greener grass.
So keeping in mind that this was a slow year for coaching changes - both in number and in impact - here are some comments on nine of the 41 selections…
Air Force (Chris Mooney out, Jeff Bzdelik in) - The only job to open that was also open last off-season. A lack of stability is not viewed a positive aspect in any program. But Southern Illinois didn’t have a problem last season responding to consecutive coaching changes, and Kent State has remained strong since losing Stan Heath and Gary Waters to promotions in 2001 and 2002. I’m guessing Air Force follows the Butler/Tulsa model, schools that have fallen off since changes in 2000 and 2001. Hiring someone to run the Princeton scheme with no prior experience raises a lot of questions.
Florida Atlantic (Sidney Green out, Matt Doherty in) - Blackballed by the major conferences, Doherty swallowed his allegedly enormous ego, and accepted a position with the Owls of the Atlantic Sun, who won 25 games over the last three seasons. The over/under on Doherty’s tenure is 1.5 years. Given the expected flurry of activity coming soon, a decent season or two at FAU will get Doherty some interest from a medium or high profile program.
Howard (Frankie Allen out, ?? in) - Allen joins the thrice-fired/resigned club. Does he get an all-expense paid dinner with Pat Kennedy?
Purdue (Gene Keady out, Matt Painter in) - I was at my local bookstore the other day because it’s a suprisingly rich source of technical basketball books written by coaches. I was unable to find Keady’s "How to Parlay Tepid Interest from the University of San Francisco Into a Houseful of Expensive Retirement Gifts." I’m not normally a fan of picking a coach without a serious national search, but Purdue had no choice here. Actually, Purdue was fortunate to have someone that had some head coaching experience at a top 25 program willing to spend a year on the bench before taking their job. Painter may work out, but every time this happens I can’t help but think "Joey Meyer."
Richmond (Jerry Wainwright out, Chris Mooney in) - the city of Richmond is the new cradle of coaches, with the youngest (Jeff Capel at Virginia Commonwealth) and fourth-youngest (Mooney) coaches working in the same town. Is this hiring a sign that the Princeton offense is going mainstream? For the sake of gifted offensive rebounders everywhere, let’s hope not.
Savannah State (Ed Daniels out, Horace Broadnax in) - This is the perfect spot for a once-fired low-major coach. Win six or seven games next season, and Broadnax scores points. With SSU able to legally play up to four non-D1 schools - which they played none of in ‘04-‘05 - there are a few ways to schedule an improvement.
USC (Henry Bibby out, Tim Floyd in) - Still not sure why USC was such a coveted job. Since the Pac-10 expanded in 1979, the Trojans have a 217-269 (.447) conference record. The only schools worse are Oregon and Washington State.
Virginia (Pete Gillen out, Dave Leitao in) - This set in motion a four school chain reaction - Virginia/DePaul/Richmond/Air Force. The most fascinating part of coaching changes is the chain of events that one move can make. It’s the butterfly effect of college hoops. Pete Gillen flaps his wings and before you know it you have Richmond running the Princeton offense, and Air Force possibly bidding adieu to its winning ways. If UVa plays January through March like they played November and December, none of this happens.
VMI (Bart Bellairs out, Duggar Baucom in) - I just like the name Duggar Baucom. But I question his sanity, because he has a good resume and VMI is the dead-end job of dead-end jobs. The Keydets had some glory in the ‘70s - they were one game away from the Final Four in 1976 and made the sweet sixteen in ‘77. But their aggregate conference record since 1979 is 126-289, with three winning seasons. The dream scenario is that Baucom flees VMI in a couple of years for ESPN, giving us the euphonic gold of Duggar and Digger in the studio.
State of the Game
05.02.05
Tracking 330 teams is the maddening part of following college basketball, but the strength of the sheer volume of teams is that, when taken as a whole, you get a great idea of how the game is played in general. There is a tremendous variety of decisions being made by 330 coaches and their players, some good, some bad. But they all think they are making the right decisions. After all, this isn't a simulation they are playing, each coach has his livelihood on the line. So in the end you have a well-developed consensus on how the game should be played, given the talent pool, the current set of rules, and how the game is called.
A review of last season's stats shows two trends continue to stand out more than any other. First, the average game in 2005 was slower than it was in 2004, setting a standard for lethargy that hasn't been matched in decades.
Second, for the 18th consecutive season, the three point shot was used more than the previous season.
To steal something from Ryan's playbook, here is a chart of efficiency, tempo, and shooting in the college game since 1948, with key rules changes highlighted:
This is based on data provided by the NCAA. Because they only supply the major statistics, it takes a fair amount of estimating to come up with possessions. So don't take the numbers too literally, especially before 1973. But I think they are in the ballpark and capture the long-term trends accurately. I needed to estimate turnovers, free-throw possessions, and offensive rebounds and there are some details on my assumptions at the end of this post (including a thrilling discussion of the free throw multiplier). In the meantime, some observations.
Efficiency had historically risen before leveling off in the early '80s. Some variation in it has been subject to rules changes over the years. Efficiency was depressed from the general trend in '53 and '54 and from '58 to '72 when free throw rules penalized the offense. And then there was a jump in the last twenty years with the implementation of the three-point line.
Shooting percentage has generally increased over time as well. I used effective field goal percentage since 1987 which accounts for the added value of made three-pointers. Raw field goal percentage has trickled downward since '87, but then again, players are shooting from farther away.
Tempo has seen two separate eras: up to the mid '70s it was amazingly fast by today's standards, averaging between 80 and 90 possessions a game. The progression of field goal percentage explains much of this. Basketball was a chaotic chuck-and-duck brickfest until the game evolved into a more methodical affair in the late '70s and early '80s. The dramatic slow-down during this time prompted the NCAA to experiment with, and eventually add, the shot clock and three-point line. There was an initial increase in tempo in response to the shot clock, but the game has been slowing down since 1994, and reached an all-time low in 2005.
One shouldn't confuse tempo with excitement. The two are loosely related, but in the mid '50s when tempo was through the roof, action was limited with games averaging around 60 free throw attempts. I doubt that too many fans have really noticed the 10% decline in possessions over the past decade. Those paying close attention have noticed more scores in the 50s and 60s than there used to be. And it's pretty clear that just like in the mid '80s, significant rules changes are coming soon to try and halt the tempo and scoring slide. But I've talked about it ad nauseum - the experiments that have been tried in the last two seasons have resulted in an even slower and lower-scoring game.
As defenses have improved, teams are been more willing in recent years to take longer to hold out for a three. At least, that's what I suspect is at the root of deceleration. Here's a plot of the percentage of all field goal attempts taken as three-pointers since the arc was painted for the 1987 season.
I feel fairly confident we will see the three-point line moved back soon, specifically for the 2007 season. Hopefully it will be accompanied by an NBA-like crackdown on perimeter contact. Otherwise, present trends will continue. The three-point shot is the slingshot that slays Goliath, and there are a lot of Davids out there with plenty of slingshots to go around.
-
Here are some sketchy details on the estimates used in the possession computations:
Turnovers, seem to be weakly a function of shooting percentage - as shooting percentage decreases so do turnovers. So a slightly lower turnover rate was assumed for olde tyme basketball. Since I don't know how well people took care of the ball decades ago, I didn't make this relationship very strong. About 22% of possessions ended in turnovers in 2005. For example, in 1948, when less than 30% of field goal attempts were successful, I assumed a turnover rate of 19%.
Offensive rebounds are weakly a function of three point shooting and reboundable free throw misses. Before 1987, there isn't three-point data, so I assumed a slightly lower offensive rebound rate on twos than we see today.
Free-throw possessions are the most difficult thing to estimate and by far took up most of my time in doing the computations. It was somewhat productive in that a chain of events forced me to look at what the modern-day multiplier should be. Throughout my brief stint in computing possession stats, I have used .42 as the free throw multiplier. It splits the difference between the figure used by Dean Oliver (.44) and John Hollinger (.40). I had no reason to pick one over the other, so I compromised. After doing a little work that only scratches the surface of what should be done, it looks like the number for the college game should be .46. This makes sense if you assume that Oliver's number is correct for the NBA. The NBA doesn't have one-and-one opportunities, and every missed front end of the bonus drives the multiplier higher. There are somewhere between two and three of these per game in college, so a nudge up to .46 sits well with me.
Before 1973, when the current rules (save for the double-bonus change in '91) were adopted, free-throw rules are murky. The mid '50s featured an explosion in free throws when they were shot on every foul. Anyone who can enlighten me further will be appreciated. I have read the NCAA Record Book summary of rules changes, so if you have some knowledge beyond that, e-mail me.
It should be noted that the actual efficiency for the 2005 season was 100.5. The estimate from the NCAA data is 102.1. For 2004, the efficiency numbers are 100.3 and 102.0, respectively. Part of this bias stems from the NCAA using data from games against non-D1 teams, whereas I don't. But that difference is a little larger than I am comfortable with.
Page 1 of 1 pages