When does Pastner feel heat

slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,727
leatherneckjacket said:
Well, outside of 2020-21, we seem to always play poorly at the beginning of the year and outside of 2018-19, we seem to always to start playing better at the end.

2022-23: Started out at 117 in Kenpom, dropped to 213 in early February, finished at 167
2021-22: Started out at 54, dropped to 171 in mid February, finished at 156
2020-21: Started out at 72, moved up to 62 in mid February, finished at 37
2019-20: Started out at 66, dropped to 92 in early February, finished at 64
2018-19: Started out at 90, dropped to 103 in mid February, finished at 115
2017-18: Started out at 44, dropped to 140 in late December, finished at 119
2016-17: Started out at 107, dropped to 154 in late December, finished at 77
Click to expand...

Here's a little trip through Excel:


YearOctFebMar
2016​
107​
154​
77​
2017​
44​
140​
119​
2018​
90​
103​
115​
2019​
66​
92​
64​
2020​
72​
62​
37​
2021​
54​
171​
156​
2022​
117​
213​
167​
AVG
78.57143​
133.5714​
105​
STDEV.S
27.12844​
51.56503​
48.01042​

This also doesn't line up with "we get stronger towards the end of the year". More data points would be much better, but outside of a couple of seasons, we regress from October (the gold line from the end of the season is generally higher and worse than the orange line at the beginning of the season). We to improve from the middle to the end, but that's mostly because we regress so far in the middle.

Ending on a up-note probably helps Pastner's perception, because people tend to have a stronger memory of the last experience they had--and with Pastner, it seems to be a win streak.

1678455601217.png
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,588
leatherneckjacket said:
Well, outside of 2020-21, we seem to always play poorly at the beginning of the year and outside of 2018-19, we seem to always to start playing better at the end.

2022-23: Started out at 117 in Kenpom, dropped to 213 in early February, finished at 167
2021-22: Started out at 54, dropped to 171 in mid February, finished at 156
2020-21: Started out at 72, moved up to 62 in mid February, finished at 37
2019-20: Started out at 66, dropped to 92 in early February, finished at 64
2018-19: Started out at 90, dropped to 103 in mid February, finished at 115
2017-18: Started out at 44, dropped to 140 in late December, finished at 119
2016-17: Started out at 107, dropped to 154 in late December, finished at 77
Click to expand...


So I've already said it's true for this past year and 19-20, although again the lumping them together is just stupid because it just serves to avoid what the actual issues were. As you said, 20-21 doesn't fit that mold.

Of the other 4 years, I don't really see the argument for a triple digit Kenpom as support that we started playing better at the end. Going from 171 to 156, 103 to 115 or 140 to 119 isn't a significant jump to me. We finished 17-18 losing 12 of the last 15, and 18-19 losing 12 of the last 16. Last year also lost 12 of the last 16 (not including Clayton). Lumping these as slow starts ignores that the problems were for the entire season. We were just bad those years. It's not a defense of those years to say they weren't slow starts. It's just inaccurate to describe them as such and actually serves to downplay the issues with those teams.

In 2016-17, any particular reason for the shift from mid february to late december? In any case, since you seem to have the weekly rankings for Kenpom I can't find, mind sharing what we were ranked after the ACCT? Because on January 31st we were 13-8 (5-4) with 3 wins against top 15 teams, and then proceeded to lose 7 of our last 10 (not including the OOC cupcake) prior to the NIT. Yes, things clicked for the NIT run. But I find it hard to believe you view that as a slow start and strong finish considering the good ACC games we played were mostly on the front end of the conference schedule while the back half was where our most extended period of losses were.

The slow start narrative is just a lazy critique. It doesn't actually get into the causes of the issues for the years (Jose getting injured isn't a coaching issue. Trying to make Howard the focal point of your offense, is a huge coaching issue) it's true for and actually serves to try and hide the causes. And if you really want to consider it a trend you have to extend the meaning so much you might as well just say Pastner needs to lose less for how much value it adds.

Now if you want the a trend along the similar thought process, we've often had single bad OOC early in the several years whether we were good that year or not (and bad enough losses where we should have won even with our bad teams). That includes Ohio in 17, Grambling in 18, Gardner Webb in 19, Mercer in 21, Miami (Oh) in 22. To me that points to Pastner having an issue with making sure guys are focused for each and every game and it takes a "wake up game" for that to not be true. That he does need to sort out as those type of games are more or less meaningless in the bad years but they could be the difference between making and missing the NCAAT if we find ourselves on the bubble. Ironically we didn't have one of those this year.
 
leatherneckjacket

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,155
Location
Atlanta, GA
lv20gt said:
So I've already said it's true for this past year and 19-20, although again the lumping them together is just stupid because it just serves to avoid what the actual issues were. As you said, 20-21 doesn't fit that mold.

Of the other 4 years, I don't really see the argument for a triple digit Kenpom as support that we started playing better at the end. Going from 171 to 156, 103 to 115 or 140 to 119 isn't a significant jump to me. We finished 17-18 losing 12 of the last 15, and 18-19 losing 12 of the last 16. Last year also lost 12 of the last 16 (not including Clayton). Lumping these as slow starts ignores that the problems were for the entire season. We were just bad those years. It's not a defense of those years to say they weren't slow starts. It's just inaccurate to describe them as such and actually serves to downplay the issues with those teams.

In 2016-17, any particular reason for the shift from mid february to late december? In any case, since you seem to have the weekly rankings for Kenpom I can't find, mind sharing what we were ranked after the ACCT? Because on January 31st we were 13-8 (5-4) with 3 wins against top 15 teams, and then proceeded to lose 7 of our last 10 (not including the OOC cupcake) prior to the NIT. Yes, things clicked for the NIT run. But I find it hard to believe you view that as a slow start and strong finish considering the good ACC games we played were mostly on the front end of the conference schedule while the back half was where our most extended period of losses were.

The slow start narrative is just a lazy critique. It doesn't actually get into the causes of the issues for the years (Jose getting injured isn't a coaching issue. Trying to make Howard the focal point of your offense, is a huge coaching issue) it's true for and actually serves to try and hide the causes. And if you really want to consider it a trend you have to extend the meaning so much you might as well just say Pastner needs to lose less for how much value it adds.

Now if you want the a trend along the similar thought process, we've often had single bad OOC early in the several years whether we were good that year or not (and bad enough losses where we should have won even with our bad teams). That includes Ohio in 17, Grambling in 18, Gardner Webb in 19, Mercer in 21, Miami (Oh) in 22. To me that points to Pastner having an issue with making sure guys are focused for each and every game and it takes a "wake up game" for that to not be true. That he does need to sort out as those type of games are more or less meaningless in the bad years but they could be the difference between making and missing the NCAAT if we find ourselves on the bubble. Ironically we didn't have one of those this year.
Click to expand...
Lazy? Excuse me.

Look you can try to explain it any way you want, but there are clear trends over his seven years. If we merely lost or won by the margins expected, we would not see the significant shifts (up and down) in our KenPom ranking as we have experienced over the years. Even if we had an upset loss or two, we would not see the significant drop if those were also offset by similar upset wins. Regardless of your individual year by year explanation, we tend to trend in one direction from November to February and then another direction in the last month of the season.

Also, seeing a 10% or more shift in ranking in the last month of the season is absolutely pretty significant and suggests a sudden change in performance. It also cannot be explained by our schedule getting easier, as the rating would not change much if we won or lost by the expected margin. The shift is due to our winning games at the end that we were expected to lose based on our prior performance.
 
Last edited:

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,052
leatherneckjacket said:
Lazy? Excuse me.

Look you can try to explain it any way you want, but there are clear trends over his seven years. If we merely lost or won by the margins expected, we would not see the significant shifts (up and down) in our KenPom ranking as we have experienced over the years. Even if we had an upset loss or two, we would not see the significant drop if those were also offset by similar upset wins. Regardless of your individual year by year explanation, we tend to trend in one direction from November to February and then another direction in the last month of the season.

Also, seeing a 10% or more shift in ranking in the last month of the season is absolutely pretty significant and suggests a sudden change in performance. It also cannot be explained by our schedule getting easier, as the rating would not change much if we won or lost by the expected margin. The shift is due to our winning games at the end that we were expected to lose based on our prior performance.
Click to expand...
The offense changed, shooting got better, and Franklin was a solid starter.
 
ESPNjacket

ESPNjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,531
g0lftime said:
The offense changed, shooting got better, and Franklin was a solid starter.
Click to expand...
Which caused which of the first two? I think I know the answer but I'll let others opine.

I am surprised anyone can argue that Pastner's teams, other than year 1, haven't looked bad at the start of the season. I can only imagine that comes from not attending the games. In live action it screams at you.
 
Techwood Relict

Techwood Relict

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,508
lv20gt said:
The slow start narrative is just a lazy critique.
Click to expand...
Random analogy,
Stech wakes up with a hangover, and his wife gets mad at him.
Stech's wife wakes up and it's that special time of the month, and his wife gets mad at him.
Stech wakes up and eats all the leftover pizza for breakfast because he has a hangover, and his wife gets mad at him.

Three different scenarios, not all Stech's fault. Still feels like a theme.

CJPs teams just feel like they start slow. It's a theme. Not all his fault, but we have to focus our font anger somewhere and I like the players more, so CJP catches it. Kinda like Stech.
 
Buzzbomb

Buzzbomb

Mello Yellow-Jacket
Messages
12,014
Techwood Relict said:
Random analogy,
Stech wakes up with a hangover, and his wife gets mad at him.
Stech's wife wakes up and it's that special time of the month, and his wife gets mad at him.
Stech wakes up and eats all the leftover pizza for breakfast because he has a hangover, and his wife gets mad at him.

Three different scenarios, not all Stech's fault. Still feels like a theme.

CJPs teams just feel like they start slow. It's a theme. Not all his fault, but we have to focus our font anger somewhere and I like the players more, so CJP catches it. Kinda like Stech.
Click to expand...
We can deduce two things:
1)Stech’s wife is going to be mad at him.
2)Some people get angry with CJP.

Bonus:
Stech81 drinks beer. Mostly Budweiser.
 

CEB

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,821
ESPNjacket said:
Which caused which of the first two? I think I know the answer but I'll let others opine.

I am surprised anyone can argue that Pastner's teams, other than year 1, haven't looked bad at the start of the season. I can only imagine that comes from not attending the games. In live action it screams at you.
Click to expand...
I’ll start.
Basketball is still a shooters game. All of the athleticism and scheme and analysis in the world won’t make up for bad shooting and it’s equally hard to overcome good shooting in the other side.
We didn’t turn the ball over a lot. When we did, we didn’t commit a lot of live ball turnovers. It’s not like we weren’t getting shots because we played sloppy. We did take contested shots late in the clock more often than I would like, but shot attempts were not the problem. the bottom line is that we couldn’t hit the floor with it through most of January.
After one particularly abysmal shooting performance (don’t remember which one; take your pick) I said practice needs to be nonstop shooting for a while until these guys start seeing the ball in the net regularly. No idea if that happened but if there was increased emphasis, players and coaches need some credit.
My vote: improved shooting opened up the offense..
 
MidtownJacket

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,873
A lot of digital ink spilt to say causation and correlation are not the same thing.

At the end of the day the reason ADs hire and fire (as opposed to using a W/L formula) is because there are various and nuanced reasons for the record.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,373
lv20gt said:
Except that isn't what was being argued.
Click to expand...
Actually if that is not what you are arguing you have failed to articulate what you are actually arguing.

The original point was CJP's teams start poorly and are playing bad basketball thru mid February almost every year.

You have stated that is not true. So the question is do you stand by your stated position that CJP's teams have not started slowly and are not played bad basketball most years thru Mid February?
 
MidtownJacket

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,873
In all seriousness, I hope we hear an announcement on (or around) selection Sunday about what direction we are going.

My personal preference is we announce a big ol NIL fund and CJP brings in a new asst coach who has more Offensive chops. Either way, I am ready for the speculation to end and a path be shown to the roster.
 

57jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,593
MidtownJacket said:
In all seriousness, I hope we hear an announcement on (or around) selection Sunday about what direction we are going.

My personal preference is we announce a big ol NIL fund and CJP brings in a new asst coach who has more Offensive chops. Either way, I am ready for the speculation to end and a path be shown to the roster.
Click to expand...
Agree with all.
 
ESPNjacket

ESPNjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,531
Top