Accountability at St. John's

[Bill Marsh]

Sorry but if you think Calhoun/Old Big East fingerprints were totally gone when they won you are mistaken. You can argue how much it influenced their season but it definitely helped them. UConn sucked even before their players got hurt this yr. Ollie is finally left the keys with only his players and what has he done? Nothing. Yes they were in AAC but with BIG EAST players some which Calhoun left. Without Napier no way they win. You know it too.

Yes, he was left with Calhoun's scrubs, bench players like Giffey and won a NC with them.

What has he done? Ollie went to the tournament last year and won a game. Hello.

Without Napier, they don't win. Of course not. Take the best player off any NC and they don't win. So?

Let's be clear. Are you saying that Calhoun deserves credit for the 2014 championship? That UConn simply overwhelmed Kentucky, Florida, Michigan State, and Villanova with superior talent?

BTW, you have homed in on Ollie like a laser, claiming he can't be considered an example of a former NBA player becoming a successful coach at a big time program without prior head coaching experience. But you have ignored the other example, Fred Hoiberg, who is actually a better match for Mullin's background. Are you conceding the point on Hoiberg, that there actually is an example of a successful head coach like Mullin?

You also said that the overwhelming number of former players who have tried this have failed. We know this isn't true at the pro level where Larry Bird, Mark Jackson, Doc Rivers, Avery Johnson, Pat Riley, and others have all been successful head coaches without prior experience. Can you provide examples of former players who have failed at the college level besides Clyde Drexler? Since there are so many, it must be easy to come up with a few.

[BigEast1]

SJHooper, you said "we were expecting night & day differences" with this year's expectations compared to last year. Who is the "we" you are referring to? Redmen? I mean come on, most people weren't expecting St. John's to make leaps and bounds over last year. Yes, there were probably some overly optimistic St. John's fans at the start of the year. Every team has them. But I don't think a majority were thinking anything less than somewhere between 7th and 9th place. If SJU fans weren't, then maybe that's where the problem lies. I've said this before, just about every prediction I read on the Big East had SJU finishing in one of the bottom 3 spots. Did the SJU fans that were thinking "night & day difference" know something that others didn't? I think next season should be your real barometer. Assuming everyone comes back, plus you add the 2 transfers sitting out this year, if they are not at least pulling an NIT bid (anything more would just be gravy) then I'd be worried about the direction of the program.

[SJHooper]

Bill:

So what? You just admitted that without Napier they wouldn't have won and that he was the best player on the team. The reason I say that is because he's a gift from Calhoun! So you already agree that without him they would not have won...that means that without Calhoun's player they would not have won. That's my point. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve ANY credit I'm saying you have to be very careful to attribute all the success to him. Calhoun may not have left much but what he did leave became one of the best guards in the country and literally took the team on his back en route to a ring. I believe he had one of the best performances through the tourney all time among guards if I remember correctly. He was literally unstoppable. If one of Ollie's players was the main reason they won, I'd obviously give more credit. And again, you haven't acknowledged the fact that UConn sucked even at full strength early in the season. Maybe they would have gotten much better during the season but the only time we saw them healthy they were bad. If he gets UConn back to prominence with his own recruits I will give him his due. Yes of course Hoiberg is an example of a successful coach which you can compare to Mullin, but is he the rule or the rare exception? We all know he's the rare exception.

SJHooper, you said "we were expecting night & day differences" with this year's expectations compared to last year. Who is the "we" you are referring to? Redmen? I mean come on, most people weren't expecting St. John's to make leaps and bounds over last year. Yes, there were probably some overly optimistic St. John's fans at the start of the year. Every team has them. But I don't think a majority were thinking anything less than somewhere between 7th and 9th place. If SJU fans weren't, then maybe that's where the problem lies. I've said this before, just about every prediction I read on the Big East had SJU finishing in one of the bottom 3 spots. Did the SJU fans that were thinking "night & day difference" know something that others didn't? I think next season should be your real barometer. Assuming everyone comes back, plus you add the 2 transfers sitting out this year, if they are not at least pulling an NIT bid (anything more would just be gravy) then I'd be worried about the direction of the program.

We as in the national media, local media, SJ fans, and college hoops fans by in large. I believe it was CBS who had us in a top 10 list of most improved teams. My fear is that next season we still won't play well, will not win more than 15 games and instead of suggesting Mullin is not the answer, fans will point to everything else: i.e. "LoVett and Yakwe left", "Player A or B got injured", "maybe the recruits just aren't good", "wait until we are healthy next year", etc. I've even heard people say "this is really year 1 for Mullin, last year was not year 1" so who is to say that the goal post won't constantly be moved again? With good coaches, as more talent comes in and everyone including the coach gets more experience, you should see a clear and fairly rapid improvement. Many players only have 4 years...we don't have 10 years for kids to develop or for Mullin to develop. If you don't produce after 3 years at all it's time to move on. Sometimes if you don't see improvement it means you have a bad coach and that's it. Many don't want to address the elephant in the room. I root for Mullin more than anyone but I can't just pretend I'm optimistic...if I had to bet my car, I would bet that the experiment does not work out. Sorry. Just based on what I've seen.

[Bill Marsh]

Bill:

So what? You just admitted that without Napier they wouldn't have won and that he was the best player on the team. The reason I say that is because he's a gift from Calhoun! So you already agree that without him they would not have won...that means that without Calhoun's player they would not have won. That's my point. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve ANY credit I'm saying you have to be very careful to attribute all the success to him. Calhoun may not have left much but what he did leave became one of the best guards in the country and literally took the team on his back en route to a ring. I believe he had one of the best performances through the tourney all time among guards if I remember correctly. He was literally unstoppable. If one of Ollie's players was the main reason they won, I'd obviously give more credit. And again, you haven't acknowledged the fact that UConn sucked even at full strength early in the season. Maybe they would have gotten much better during the season but the only time we saw them healthy they were bad. If he gets UConn back to prominence with his own recruits I will give him his due. Yes of course Hoiberg is an example of a successful coach which you can compare to Mullin, but is he the rule or the rare exception? We all know he's the rare exception.

Hooper, Hoiberg is NOT the rare exception. He's the rare case who's even tried it in the modern era. If there are others who've tried and failed, who are they other than Clyde Drexler? He's Exhibit One for a success story.

Exhibit Two is Kevin Ollie. You're desperately trying to prove that he hasn't been successful. Here's his record;

2012-13 - 20 wins, positioned for postseason but on probation due to Calhoun (20-10, 10-8)
2013-14 - National Champions (32-8, 12-6)
2014-15 - rebuilding year (20-15, 10-8, NIT)
2015-16 - NCAA tournament, round of 32 (25-11, 11-7)
2016-17 - To Be Determined (8-11, 3-4)

That looks like a pretty successful start to a coaching career to me.

You call Napier a gift from Calhoun. What did Calhoun accomplish with him when he had him? He was 6th man on the 2011 NC team. That's nice. They brought back 4 starters from that team, moved Napier into Kamba Walker's spot, and added current NBA star Andre Drummond and Ryan Boatright. What did Saint Jim do with that team? Finished 9th in the Big East (8-10) and failed to advance in the tournament (one and done). That team was loaded with championship talent.

Saint Jim's gift to Ollie was the premature departure of 3 NC starters + Drummond, chased away by the prospect of a meaningless season due to ineligibility for any postseason. Napier was prepared to leave as well. Ollie convinced him to stay. So who gets credit for recruiting him? Calhoun for the first time or Ollie for re-recruiting him the second time?

So when Saint Jim had Napier, he was a bench player (albeit an important one) and the point guard on a disappointing team. So what happened between the disappointing 2012 season and the 2014 NC season? Ollie's coaching. Yes, after Saint Jim was stymied without Kamba Walker but better talent than what he left Ollie, Kevin took Calhoun's leftovers and won a NC.

The way I see it, a coach gets credit or blame for what happens on his watch. Calhoun left Ollie some talent, but it was up to Kevin to do something with it - something Jim had been unable to do with the same talent + more. And Ollie did. If Calhoun is to get any credit it's not for coaching the kids on the 2014 team, it's for recruiting them. Is there any doubt that Ollie can recruit? After a top ten class this year and with more to come lined up for next year? He shouldn't be penalized for taking over a good program. Others have tried under the same circumstances and have failed. He's kept it going.

The only reason we're talking about Ollie is whether he's an example of a former NBA player who has been able to achieve success as a college HC without prior head coaching experience. After looking at his record of the past 4 years that I listed above, I don't see how you can say that he hasn't been successful both as a recruiter and as someone who has developed the talent he's had.

[SJHooper]

Bill:

So what? You just admitted that without Napier they wouldn't have won and that he was the best player on the team. The reason I say that is because he's a gift from Calhoun! So you already agree that without him they would not have won...that means that without Calhoun's player they would not have won. That's my point. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve ANY credit I'm saying you have to be very careful to attribute all the success to him. Calhoun may not have left much but what he did leave became one of the best guards in the country and literally took the team on his back en route to a ring. I believe he had one of the best performances through the tourney all time among guards if I remember correctly. He was literally unstoppable. If one of Ollie's players was the main reason they won, I'd obviously give more credit. And again, you haven't acknowledged the fact that UConn sucked even at full strength early in the season. Maybe they would have gotten much better during the season but the only time we saw them healthy they were bad. If he gets UConn back to prominence with his own recruits I will give him his due. Yes of course Hoiberg is an example of a successful coach which you can compare to Mullin, but is he the rule or the rare exception? We all know he's the rare exception.

Hooper, Hoiberg is NOT the rare exception. He's the rare case who's even tried it in the modern era. If there are others who've tried and failed, who are they other than Clyde Drexler? He's Exhibit One for a success story.

Exhibit Two is Kevin Ollie. You're desperately trying to prove that he hasn't been successful. Here's his record;

2012-13 - 20 wins, positioned for postseason but on probation due to Calhoun (20-10, 10-8)
2013-14 - National Champions (32-8, 12-6)
2014-15 - rebuilding year (20-15, 10-8, NIT)
2015-16 - NCAA tournament, round of 32 (25-11, 11-7)
2016-17 - To Be Determined (8-11, 3-4)

That looks like a pretty successful start to a coaching career to me.

You call Napier a gift from Calhoun. What did Calhoun accomplish with him when he had him? He was 6th man on the 2011 NC team. That's nice. They brought back 4 starters from that team, moved Napier into Kamba Walker's spot, and added current NBA star Andre Drummond and Ryan Boatright. What did Saint Jim do with that team? Finished 9th in the Big East (8-10) and failed to advance in the tournament (one and done). That team was loaded with championship talent.

Saint Jim's gift to Ollie was the premature departure of 3 NC starters + Drummond, chased away by the prospect of a meaningless season due to ineligibility for any postseason. Napier was prepared to leave as well. Ollie convinced him to stay. So who gets credit for recruiting him? Calhoun for the first time or Ollie for re-recruiting him the second time?

So when Saint Jim had Napier, he was a bench player (albeit an important one) and the point guard on a disappointing team. So what happened between the disappointing 2012 season and the 2014 NC season? Ollie's coaching. Yes, after Saint Jim was stymied without Kamba Walker but better talent than what he left Ollie, Kevin took Calhoun's leftovers and won a NC.

The way I see it, a coach gets credit or blame for what happens on his watch. Calhoun left Ollie some talent, but it was up to Kevin to do something with it - something Jim had been unable to do with the same talent + more. And Ollie did. If Calhoun is to get any credit it's not for coaching the kids on the 2014 team, it's for recruiting them. Is there any doubt that Ollie can recruit? After a top ten class this year and with more to come lined up for next year? He shouldn't be penalized for taking over a good program. Others have tried under the same circumstances and have failed. He's kept it going.

The only reason we're talking about Ollie is whether he's an example of a former NBA player who has been able to achieve success as a college HC without prior head coaching experience. After looking at his record of the past 4 years that I listed above, I don't see how you can say that he hasn't been successful both as a recruiter and as someone who has developed the talent he's had.

I think you will see that the further UConn gets from their Big East glory days, the more irrelevant they will become and recruiting will fall off gradually. Right now, they still recruit well, because Ollie is the best or because Calhoun helped guide them to what 3 rings in 10 years? Something like that. You act like there's a total reset of programs when a HOF coach leaves. Even if a HOF coach didn't leave players, they most certainly left the program as a very desirable destination due to the prestige and winning culture. The true measure of a good recruiter IMO is to still recruit well even if the program does not have a recent winning culture. Look at SMU when Larry Brown was there. Look at Hurley at URI. I can be the main recruiter for Duke and I will guarantee a top 10 class every year with minimal effort. Why? It sells itself. You totally ignore the foundations set by other coaches...it's not a total reset. When you win 3-4 rings in a short span, it doesn't matter who is coach...they will recruit well. I predict that as they become less relevant in college hoops in the dreadful AAC and stop winning rings every other year, that the recruits will start to choose other schools. For example, I wasn't even born yet in 1985...many people my age don't know who Mullin was unless they were a St. John's fan or Pacers/Warriors fan. To someone born in 1989 like me, I've only known SJ as a mediocre program at best by in large. To someone born in 1965 attending SJ during the glory days, they knew SJ as a top program. So my point is that even though UConn's rings are still very fresh, give it another 5-6+ years in the AAC without any major success and recruits will start to be too young to remember. I enjoy the discussion, but the thread is really about SJ so I want to shift gears and focus on that.

I'm very concerned about SJ, because I'm not sure how we will be able to convince top recruits to choose us when we are in the Big East basement again. As a recruit, think about how easy it is for other schools with more recent success to say "St. John's hasn't won a tourney game in 17 years...as long as you've been alive. Look at them under Mullin they are a bottom level team...don't you want to win?". As I've said before, it's easier to recruit when you have tons of openings and unlimited PT. Now that we have a roster and haven't shown any real success, it will get much harder. The 1985 era fans are not getting any younger and once they go, how many SJ fans will be left? They make the core of our fanbase. At some point the program is going to have to succeed if it wants fans and top recruits.

[GumbyDamnit!]

Bill:

So what? You just admitted that without Napier they wouldn't have won and that he was the best player on the team. The reason I say that is because he's a gift from Calhoun! So you already agree that without him they would not have won...that means that without Calhoun's player they would not have won. That's my point. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve ANY credit I'm saying you have to be very careful to attribute all the success to him. Calhoun may not have left much but what he did leave became one of the best guards in the country and literally took the team on his back en route to a ring. I believe he had one of the best performances through the tourney all time among guards if I remember correctly. He was literally unstoppable. If one of Ollie's players was the main reason they won, I'd obviously give more credit. And again, you haven't acknowledged the fact that UConn sucked even at full strength early in the season. Maybe they would have gotten much better during the season but the only time we saw them healthy they were bad. If he gets UConn back to prominence with his own recruits I will give him his due. Yes of course Hoiberg is an example of a successful coach which you can compare to Mullin, but is he the rule or the rare exception? We all know he's the rare exception.

Hooper, Hoiberg is NOT the rare exception. He's the rare case who's even tried it in the modern era. If there are others who've tried and failed, who are they other than Clyde Drexler? He's Exhibit One for a success story.

Exhibit Two is Kevin Ollie. You're desperately trying to prove that he hasn't been successful. Here's his record;

2012-13 - 20 wins, positioned for postseason but on probation due to Calhoun (20-10, 10-8)
2013-14 - National Champions (32-8, 12-6)
2014-15 - rebuilding year (20-15, 10-8, NIT)
2015-16 - NCAA tournament, round of 32 (25-11, 11-7)
2016-17 - To Be Determined (8-11, 3-4)

That looks like a pretty successful start to a coaching career to me.

You call Napier a gift from Calhoun. What did Calhoun accomplish with him when he had him? He was 6th man on the 2011 NC team. That's nice. They brought back 4 starters from that team, moved Napier into Kamba Walker's spot, and added current NBA star Andre Drummond and Ryan Boatright. What did Saint Jim do with that team? Finished 9th in the Big East (8-10) and failed to advance in the tournament (one and done). That team was loaded with championship talent.

Saint Jim's gift to Ollie was the premature departure of 3 NC starters + Drummond, chased away by the prospect of a meaningless season due to ineligibility for any postseason. Napier was prepared to leave as well. Ollie convinced him to stay. So who gets credit for recruiting him? Calhoun for the first time or Ollie for re-recruiting him the second time?

So when Saint Jim had Napier, he was a bench player (albeit an important one) and the point guard on a disappointing team. So what happened between the disappointing 2012 season and the 2014 NC season? Ollie's coaching. Yes, after Saint Jim was stymied without Kamba Walker but better talent than what he left Ollie, Kevin took Calhoun's leftovers and won a NC.

The way I see it, a coach gets credit or blame for what happens on his watch. Calhoun left Ollie some talent, but it was up to Kevin to do something with it - something Jim had been unable to do with the same talent + more. And Ollie did. If Calhoun is to get any credit it's not for coaching the kids on the 2014 team, it's for recruiting them. Is there any doubt that Ollie can recruit? After a top ten class this year and with more to come lined up for next year? He shouldn't be penalized for taking over a good program. Others have tried under the same circumstances and have failed. He's kept it going.

The only reason we're talking about Ollie is whether he's an example of a former NBA player who has been able to achieve success as a college HC without prior head coaching experience. After looking at his record of the past 4 years that I listed above, I don't see how you can say that he hasn't been successful both as a recruiter and as someone who has developed the talent he's had.

Don't have a dog in this fight but here are my impressions. Not sure if you guys are comparing Ollie to Calhoun or just trying to justify if Ollie is a good coach overall. They are two different things. First, if you are going to compare the two, I think you'll have a hard time justifying Ollie as being on par with Calhoun. In his first 5 years Ollie has a .656 winning %. Calhoun's over his last 10 years was .725 and he played in an absolute grind of a conference in the BE, as opposed to the ACC. Advantage : Calhoun. In those 10 years Calhoun had 2 NC's, 3 FF's and 4 E8's. He missed the tourney twice. You can argue that 3 of Ollie's teams would have made the tourney with one NC. UConn, unless they win their conference tourney, is not making the tourney this year. So two misses in 5 years as opposed to 2 misses in 10 years. Advantage : Calhoun. Both coaches can bring in talent. But for all the talent UConn has had the last couple of years, something is obviously missing. Their best win: Syracuse. Yes, that same Syracuse that lost huge at home vs SJU (among others). 7th in the ACC. Not a good job by Ollie to say the least. So is Ollie a good coach...seems decent; has got a NC that no one can take away from him. So that counts for something. But he's under performed some--at least compared to the UConn program under Calhoun IMO.

[stever20]

where I see a difference comparing coaches is what the status they had entering the program. How was the program....

UConn Calhoun left Ollie with a lot of pieces, regardless of what Marsh said.
Iowa St McDermott left Hoiberg with some pieces. ISU's 1st year with Hoiberg they had 3 guys who played a lot who played with them the year before.

vs
St John's where the program was just a total rebuild(yes, I know SJ had gone to tourney year before but no one was back- it was like the movie Necessary Roughness where everyone was gone).

[Bill Marsh]

Bill:

So what? You just admitted that without Napier they wouldn't have won and that he was the best player on the team. The reason I say that is because he's a gift from Calhoun! So you already agree that without him they would not have won...that means that without Calhoun's player they would not have won. That's my point. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve ANY credit I'm saying you have to be very careful to attribute all the success to him. Calhoun may not have left much but what he did leave became one of the best guards in the country and literally took the team on his back en route to a ring. I believe he had one of the best performances through the tourney all time among guards if I remember correctly. He was literally unstoppable. If one of Ollie's players was the main reason they won, I'd obviously give more credit. And again, you haven't acknowledged the fact that UConn sucked even at full strength early in the season. Maybe they would have gotten much better during the season but the only time we saw them healthy they were bad. If he gets UConn back to prominence with his own recruits I will give him his due. Yes of course Hoiberg is an example of a successful coach which you can compare to Mullin, but is he the rule or the rare exception? We all know he's the rare exception.

Hooper, Hoiberg is NOT the rare exception. He's the rare case who's even tried it in the modern era. If there are others who've tried and failed, who are they other than Clyde Drexler? He's Exhibit One for a success story.

Exhibit Two is Kevin Ollie. You're desperately trying to prove that he hasn't been successful. Here's his record;

2012-13 - 20 wins, positioned for postseason but on probation due to Calhoun (20-10, 10-8)
2013-14 - National Champions (32-8, 12-6)
2014-15 - rebuilding year (20-15, 10-8, NIT)
2015-16 - NCAA tournament, round of 32 (25-11, 11-7)
2016-17 - To Be Determined (8-11, 3-4)

That looks like a pretty successful start to a coaching career to me.

You call Napier a gift from Calhoun. What did Calhoun accomplish with him when he had him? He was 6th man on the 2011 NC team. That's nice. They brought back 4 starters from that team, moved Napier into Kamba Walker's spot, and added current NBA star Andre Drummond and Ryan Boatright. What did Saint Jim do with that team? Finished 9th in the Big East (8-10) and failed to advance in the tournament (one and done). That team was loaded with championship talent.

Saint Jim's gift to Ollie was the premature departure of 3 NC starters + Drummond, chased away by the prospect of a meaningless season due to ineligibility for any postseason. Napier was prepared to leave as well. Ollie convinced him to stay. So who gets credit for recruiting him? Calhoun for the first time or Ollie for re-recruiting him the second time?

So when Saint Jim had Napier, he was a bench player (albeit an important one) and the point guard on a disappointing team. So what happened between the disappointing 2012 season and the 2014 NC season? Ollie's coaching. Yes, after Saint Jim was stymied without Kamba Walker but better talent than what he left Ollie, Kevin took Calhoun's leftovers and won a NC.

The way I see it, a coach gets credit or blame for what happens on his watch. Calhoun left Ollie some talent, but it was up to Kevin to do something with it - something Jim had been unable to do with the same talent + more. And Ollie did. If Calhoun is to get any credit it's not for coaching the kids on the 2014 team, it's for recruiting them. Is there any doubt that Ollie can recruit? After a top ten class this year and with more to come lined up for next year? He shouldn't be penalized for taking over a good program. Others have tried under the same circumstances and have failed. He's kept it going.

The only reason we're talking about Ollie is whether he's an example of a former NBA player who has been able to achieve success as a college HC without prior head coaching experience. After looking at his record of the past 4 years that I listed above, I don't see how you can say that he hasn't been successful both as a recruiter and as someone who has developed the talent he's had.

Don't have a dog in this fight but here are my impressions. Not sure if you guys are comparing Ollie to Calhoun or just trying to justify if Ollie is a good coach overall. They are two different things. First, if you are going to compare the two, I think you'll have a hard time justifying Ollie as being on par with Calhoun. In his first 5 years Ollie has a .656 winning %. Calhoun's over his last 10 years was .725 and he played in an absolute grind of a conference in the BE, as opposed to the ACC. Advantage : Calhoun. In those 10 years Calhoun had 2 NC's, 3 FF's and 4 E8's. He missed the tourney twice. You can argue that 3 of Ollie's teams would have made the tourney with one NC. UConn, unless they win their conference tourney, is not making the tourney this year. So two misses in 5 years as opposed to 2 misses in 10 years. Advantage : Calhoun. Both coaches can bring in talent. But for all the talent UConn has had the last couple of years, something is obviously missing. Their best win: Syracuse. Yes, that same Syracuse that lost huge at home vs SJU (among others). 7th in the ACC. Not a good job by Ollie to say the least. So is Ollie a good coach...seems decent; has got a NC that no one can take away from him. So that counts for something. But he's under performed some--at least compared to the UConn program under Calhoun IMO.

Not comparing Calhoun and Ollie. The only reason Ollie was brought into the conversation was to refute the statement that former NBA players without head coaching experience fail as college head coaches in overwhelming numbers, implying that Mullin will also fail. Hoiberg and Ollie were offered as examples of former NBA players who have become College head coaches and succeeded. The only issue is whether Ollie has been a successful college coach, not whether he has been as good as his Hall of Fame predecessor.

As for Ollie underperforming, I'd love to know which of his 4 seasons prior to this year he underperformed.

[Bill Marsh]

Bill:

So what? You just admitted that without Napier they wouldn't have won and that he was the best player on the team. The reason I say that is because he's a gift from Calhoun! So you already agree that without him they would not have won...that means that without Calhoun's player they would not have won. That's my point. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve ANY credit I'm saying you have to be very careful to attribute all the success to him. Calhoun may not have left much but what he did leave became one of the best guards in the country and literally took the team on his back en route to a ring. I believe he had one of the best performances through the tourney all time among guards if I remember correctly. He was literally unstoppable. If one of Ollie's players was the main reason they won, I'd obviously give more credit. And again, you haven't acknowledged the fact that UConn sucked even at full strength early in the season. Maybe they would have gotten much better during the season but the only time we saw them healthy they were bad. If he gets UConn back to prominence with his own recruits I will give him his due. Yes of course Hoiberg is an example of a successful coach which you can compare to Mullin, but is he the rule or the rare exception? We all know he's the rare exception.

Hooper, Hoiberg is NOT the rare exception. He's the rare case who's even tried it in the modern era. If there are others who've tried and failed, who are they other than Clyde Drexler? He's Exhibit One for a success story.

Exhibit Two is Kevin Ollie. You're desperately trying to prove that he hasn't been successful. Here's his record;

2012-13 - 20 wins, positioned for postseason but on probation due to Calhoun (20-10, 10-8)
2013-14 - National Champions (32-8, 12-6)
2014-15 - rebuilding year (20-15, 10-8, NIT)
2015-16 - NCAA tournament, round of 32 (25-11, 11-7)
2016-17 - To Be Determined (8-11, 3-4)

That looks like a pretty successful start to a coaching career to me.

You call Napier a gift from Calhoun. What did Calhoun accomplish with him when he had him? He was 6th man on the 2011 NC team. That's nice. They brought back 4 starters from that team, moved Napier into Kamba Walker's spot, and added current NBA star Andre Drummond and Ryan Boatright. What did Saint Jim do with that team? Finished 9th in the Big East (8-10) and failed to advance in the tournament (one and done). That team was loaded with championship talent.

Saint Jim's gift to Ollie was the premature departure of 3 NC starters + Drummond, chased away by the prospect of a meaningless season due to ineligibility for any postseason. Napier was prepared to leave as well. Ollie convinced him to stay. So who gets credit for recruiting him? Calhoun for the first time or Ollie for re-recruiting him the second time?

So when Saint Jim had Napier, he was a bench player (albeit an important one) and the point guard on a disappointing team. So what happened between the disappointing 2012 season and the 2014 NC season? Ollie's coaching. Yes, after Saint Jim was stymied without Kamba Walker but better talent than what he left Ollie, Kevin took Calhoun's leftovers and won a NC.

The way I see it, a coach gets credit or blame for what happens on his watch. Calhoun left Ollie some talent, but it was up to Kevin to do something with it - something Jim had been unable to do with the same talent + more. And Ollie did. If Calhoun is to get any credit it's not for coaching the kids on the 2014 team, it's for recruiting them. Is there any doubt that Ollie can recruit? After a top ten class this year and with more to come lined up for next year? He shouldn't be penalized for taking over a good program. Others have tried under the same circumstances and have failed. He's kept it going.

The only reason we're talking about Ollie is whether he's an example of a former NBA player who has been able to achieve success as a college HC without prior head coaching experience. After looking at his record of the past 4 years that I listed above, I don't see how you can say that he hasn't been successful both as a recruiter and as someone who has developed the talent he's had.

Don't have a dog in this fight but here are my impressions. Not sure if you guys are comparing Ollie to Calhoun or just trying to justify if Ollie is a good coach overall. They are two different things. First, if you are going to compare the two, I think you'll have a hard time justifying Ollie as being on par with Calhoun. In his first 5 years Ollie has a .656 winning %. Calhoun's over his last 10 years was .725 and he played in an absolute grind of a conference in the BE, as opposed to the ACC. Advantage : Calhoun. In those 10 years Calhoun had 2 NC's, 3 FF's and 4 E8's. He missed the tourney twice. You can argue that 3 of Ollie's teams would have made the tourney with one NC. UConn, unless they win their conference tourney, is not making the tourney this year. So two misses in 5 years as opposed to 2 misses in 10 years. Advantage : Calhoun. Both coaches can bring in talent. But for all the talent UConn has had the last couple of years, something is obviously missing. Their best win: Syracuse. Yes, that same Syracuse that lost huge at home vs SJU (among others). 7th in the ACC. Not a good job by Ollie to say the least. So is Ollie a good coach...seems decent; has got a NC that no one can take away from him. So that counts for something. But he's under performed some--at least compared to the UConn program under Calhoun IMO.

Not comparing Calhoun and Ollie. The only reason Ollie was brought into the conversation was to refute the statement that former NBA players without head coaching experience fail as college head coaches in overwhelming numbers, implying that Mullin will also fail. Hoiberg and Ollie were offered as examples of former NBA players who have become College head coaches and succeeded. The only issue is whether Ollie has been a successful college coach, not whether he has been as good as his Hall of Fame predecessor.

As for Ollie underperforming, I'd love to know which of his 4 seasons prior to this year he underperformed. I think the argument can be made that in his first 2 years he overperformed.

[GumbyDamnit!]

In my mind how he has done in the ACC has been where he has under-performed. Each year he's gotten worse: 3rd, 5th, 6th and now 7th. The ACC is not a particularly strong conference IMO. I expected them to dominate that conference from day one.