Evaluating a coach’s ability is a difficult thing. On either end of the spectrum, sure, it\u2019s not too difficult. Obviously, Mike Krzyzewski is very good at leading a program, and we can find a coach or two in recent years that ran a program with great resources into the ground and assume they were not very good at their job. (Although, often a coach gets a chance at a high-major program because he had success at a school with limited resources.) <\/p>\n
However, the majority of coaches do not fall into such tidy categories. After three seasons at Duke, I\u2019m guessing Coach K was not viewed as one of the planet\u2019s best coaches. At various times in the past decade, Ben Howland and Tubby Smith were thought of as the game\u2019s best coaches, but eventually they were forced out of their jobs. <\/p>\n
The title of this post is misleading because I\u2019m not going to defend Josh Pastner\u2019s coaching ability. It\u2019s really about highlighting the primitive state of coaching evaluation. I\u2019d guess Pastner is a pretty good coach, but Memphis fans don\u2019t really want a pretty good coach. If Pastner had followed Tic Price, they\u2019d accept a pretty good coach, but he didn\u2019t and expectations are higher now. The thing is, pretty good coaches sometimes have great results (see Smith and Howland). Luck and good fortune is all around us and it affects the accomplishments of coaches just like anything else. <\/p>\n
If John Wooden had accepted the job offer at Minnesota in 1948, I\u2019m guessing he would have found it more difficult to recruit great players to the snowy north than to SoCal, and who knows what book Seth Davis would be hocking now. If Pitt\u2019s Gilbert Brown (79 percent shooter) made his second free throw against Butler with a second to go in the 2011 round of 32, would Brad Stevens be coaching the Celtics? We can\u2019t know the answer, but getting to the title game wouldn\u2019t have happened without that event, one that Stevens had no control over. And getting to the consecutive title games boosted Stevens\u2019 reputation to legendary status.<\/p>\n
One of the signature beefs with Pastner is that he can\u2019t beat good teams. Before yesterday\u2019s win over Oklahoma State, he was 0-13 against teams ranked in the AP top 25. It\u2019s true that if you fancy your program a top ten team, you are going to beat top 25 teams on occasion. But very few coaches are going to have a winning record against top 25 teams, because top 25 teams don\u2019t lose often. Furthermore, Memphis has often been at a disadvantage playing these teams.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m going to use my own ratings for this analysis, because it\u2019s easy, and besides, most voters are not trying to rank the 25 best teams in the country. But the results are similar to using the AP – Pastner actually gets one win before yesterday using my system. (A sign that 0-13 was manipulated: It actually required that one use the AP poll specifically, because Memphis beat Saint Mary\u2019s in the NCAA tournament last season when the Gaels were ranked in the coaches\u2019 poll but not by the writers.) Here\u2019s a summary of how Pastner has done against my top 25.<\/p>\n
11\/17\/09 L vs. 2 Kansas 57-55 (N)\n01\/06\/10 L vs. 4 Syracuse 74-57 (A)\n12\/07\/10 L vs. 2 Kansas 81-68 (N)\n03\/18\/11 L vs. 23 Arizona 77-75 (N)\n11\/21\/11 L vs. 23 Michigan 73-61 (N)\n11\/23\/11 L vs. 16 Georgetown 91-88 OT (N)\n12\/17\/11 L vs. 14 Louisville 95-87 (A)\n12\/22\/11 L vs. 16 Georgetown 70-59 (A)\n03\/16\/12 L vs. 17 Saint Louis 61-54 (N)\n11\/22\/12 L vs. 20 VCU 78-65 (N)\n12\/15\/12 L vs. 1 Louisville 87-78 (H)\n03\/21\/13 W vs. 23 St. Mary\u2019s 54-52 (N)\n03\/23\/13 L vs. 9 Mich St. 70-48 (N)\n11\/19\/13 L vs. 5 Ok. State 101-80 (A)\n12\/01\/13 W vs. 5 Ok. State 73-68 (N)\n\n<\/pre>\nThe thing about this list is that all but one of these games is not at home, and that game was against the best team in the nation. I\u2019m not sure how many games you would have expected a team to win with this schedule, but if Memphis had an average of a 33% chance over the 15 games, you\u2019d expect five wins and they had two. <\/p>\n
There is no denying Pastner has underachieved in this regard. But whether it\u2019s because he\u2019s inadequate as a coach or just because stuff happens is impossible to say. The difference between two and five wins isn\u2019t large enough to provide proof that Josh Pastner is doing something wrong against very good teams.<\/p>\n
For all but the top five or ten coaches in the game, their record against top 25 teams in road\/neutral games will not be pretty. But if one is wishing to be critical of Josh Pastner, then you have a damning stat right there for you. And I hope one win won\u2019t change your perception! The pair of games vs. Oklahoma State really illustrates how crazy it is to put a ton of stock in a single game. Two weeks ago, Marcus Smart couldn\u2019t miss. Last night, he was struggling to even hit rim. And while Memphis\u2019s defense may have had something to do with that, it doesn\u2019t explain everything.<\/p>\n