Illinois v. Ohio St.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by ODJ

Ben Howland is so impressed with Lavin's years he decided to have a Gary Cunningham season instead.

Nice strawman. No one ever argued that Lavin was as successful as Howland has been. But since we're playing, here's what Lavin did at UCLA. What a horrible coach.


From Wiki: Steve Lavin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Season Team Overall Conference Standing Postseason
Steve Lavin (1996–2003)
1996–97 UCLA 24–8 15–3 1 NCAA Elite Eight
1997–98 UCLA 24–9 12–6 3 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
1998–99 UCLA 22–9 12–6 3 NCAA Round of 64
1999–00 UCLA 21–12 10–8 4 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
2000–01 UCLA 23–9 14–4 3 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
2001–02 UCLA 21–12 11–7 6 NCAA Sweet Sixteen
2002–03 UCLA 10–19 6–12 6
UCLA: 145–78 81–48
Total: 145–78

"During Lavin’s tenure as head coach, the Bruins qualified for six consecutive NCAA Tournaments (1997-2002). During this period, Lavin became one of two coaches (along with Duke’s Mike Krzyzewski) to have led his team to five NCAA Sweet 16s in six seasons. Lavin’s record in the first and second rounds of the NCAA tournament is 10-1. Lavin’s winning percentage (90.9%) in the first two rounds, is second only to Dean Smith in NCAA Tournament history"

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jbduke

What a horrible coach.

Don't confuse being a great recruiter with being a great coach.

There's a heckuva difference.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Don't confuse being a great recruiter with being a great coach.

There's a heckuva difference.

The really great coaches do both. Sometimes, a great coach gets to follow a great recruiter. Works well for a season or three.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Don't confuse being a great recruiter with being a great coach.

There's a heckuva difference.

Thanks so much for the sage advice.

I'm interested to get your thoughts on Howland and Roy Williams after the seasons those two great coaches have had.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jbduke

Thanks so much for the sage advice.

I'm interested to get your thoughts on Howland and Roy Williams after the seasons those two great coaches have had.

So where is Lavin coaching this year?

What?

Oh, never mind. I'm sure he prefers having Disney sign his paychecks.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Oh, never mind. I'm sure he prefers having Disney sign his paychecks.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So where is Lavin coaching this year?

What?

Oh, never mind. I'm sure he prefers having Disney sign his paychecks.

You honestly think he's working for ESPN because he can't get a good coaching job?

That's absurd on so many levels.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jbduke

You honestly think he's working for ESPN because he can't get a good coaching job?

That's absurd on so many levels.

Really? Is ESPN paying him what he'd get coaching? I'm sure he's paid well, but I doubt it's 7 figures.

So money ain't it.

Do you think he just wanted to quit coaching? That's the only plausible explanation I can think of aside from the theory that no one wants him.

Looks like he was UCLA's version of Tom Davis. Did great with the recruits he inherited, but plateaued after that. That makes him good, not great.

Now, this is just a surface examination of a coach who's had one head coaching job.

[jbduke]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Really? Is ESPN paying him what he'd get coaching? I'm sure he's paid well, but I doubt it's 7 figures.

So money ain't it..

So the only thing you've ever thought about when considering a job offer is the salary? No considerations at all to quality of life? Lavin probably gets a not-too-shabby six figures to talk about basketball. No recruiting necessary, no boosters to deal with, no sleepless nights wondering what might have been if you'd defended the final out-of-bounds play differently. Presuming he has a family, which job do you think they would prefer he work?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Do you think he just wanted to quit coaching? That's the only plausible explanation I can think of aside from the theory that no one wants him..

A. Please point to where I argued that he wanted to quit coaching. He knows he was fired. You know he was fired. I know he was fired. Who are you arguing with here?

B. I can name five coaches in the most prestigious basketball conference in the country who couldn't carry Lavin's water. So, um, no, "because no one wants him" doesn't come close to explaining things. You think no one would want Steve Mariucci to be their coach? You think Hubie Brown's been calling NBA games forever because he couldn't get hired? Geez.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Looks like he was UCLA's version of Tom Davis. Did great with the recruits he inherited, but plateaued after that. That makes him good, not great.

Now, this is just a surface examination of a coach who's had one head coaching job.

Again, who are you arguing with? No one in this thread has written that Lavin was "great" as a coach. I weighed in when people made the leap from Steve Lavin, misinformed officiating analyst, to Steve Lavin, weak basketball coach. And he did things well for long enough that you can't just dismiss him as someone who was only able to succeed with someone else's recruits.

Your examination is indeed surface-level.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jbduke

Thanks so much for the sage advice.

I'm interested to get your thoughts on Howland and Roy Williams after the seasons those two great coaches have had.

I'm not interested in either.