Hot Stove: UNC Basketball

  • Thread starter Thread starter UNCMSinLS
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 27K
  • UNC Sports 
No issues really with what you are saying but this is the world we live in with the portal. Trimbles are increasingly rare, most kids will leave to $$greener pastures when faced with adversity. EC leaving also games the system a bit, "Hubert" becomes the reason he isn't in the NBA instead of his poor decision making and lack of maturity. We've seen a lot of these types of transfers in college bball the last few years, I expect EC will do well at UM but I doubt he'll look like a different player.

I don't think EC OR our coaching staff should feel they did a good job last year, both performed below UNC expectations.
While the player does hold some responsibility for developing into a better player and reaching their maximum potential, the coaches/staff hold much more of that responsibility. If the coaches/staff had a track record of making the players significantly better, then most would chalk it up to EC, and UNC/HD/staff wouldn't have the current stigma of not being able to develop players.
 
It's perfectly rational to hold Hubert accountable for EC leaving.

If you think Hubert made the decision to not retain EC, then he should be held accountable for why he decided to jettison from the program a guy he recruited and was responsible for developing.

If you think EC made the decision to leave fairly unilaterally, then HD should be accountable for why an established starter thinks his future is better served elsewhere.

If you think it was some sort of a mutual decision, then HD should be accountable for getting a PG at least as talented/experienced/fit for the team as EC

There can be perfectly wonderful reasons for EC to leave the program in which Hubert would be held "accountable" with a pat on the back and supported for "a job well done". Or the reasons that EC left may not be good and we should not have a positive view of Hubert for creating his exit or not figuring out a way to keep him on the team. But Hubert, as head coach, is paid for his involvement in these decisions and it is perfectly fair for him to be held accountable for what happens.

(Of course, we're all just fans on a message board - except for Rock, of course, who kills it as an insider - so us holding anyone "accountable" mostly comes down to either posts celebrating or complaining about what happens far beyond our control. But the point is that HD is responsible for the players on the team and public praise/criticism is fair game depending on what happens with the overall roster and particular players.)
This is CBB now. I’m realizing it’s kind of pointless to search for blame. This is the new normal.
EC was a free agent and exercised his option.
 
Last edited:
While the player does hold some responsibility for developing into a better player and reaching their maximum potential, the coaches/staff hold much more of that responsibility. If the coaches/staff had a track record of making the players significantly better, then most would chalk it up to EC, and UNC/HD/staff wouldn't have the current stigma of not being able to develop players.


I think it's actually completely the opposite. Almost all of "getting better" is due to the players ability and work ethic. Coaches have very very little to do with player improvement given the short amount of time they have with them.

If you are going to discount HD for EC/IJ then you have to credit him for Trimble/Harrison Ingram/Bacot/RJ Davis.
 
I think you are reading far to much into my post.

First, I don't want to beat these to death. Some of these questions cannot be answered until we see the results of next season.

My concern is purely from the perspective of a fan. I've never in anyway claimed to have any inside knowledge. Never claimed to know more than the coaches. I've never claimed or aluded to anything in your second paragraph.
So, no I'm not overestimating myself. I'm making the conversations that fans make. You are reading fast to much into my post to come up with that paragraph.

I agree with your third paragraph.

For your 4th paragraph, do you have any inside knowledge of why the staff made this decision, or, as I was doing, are you simply making a statement based on your knowledge and opinion? While I do agree with you, it reads like you are making a statement in a similar fashion to what i did. And we see how you responded to my opinion in paragraph two. :cool:

I agree mostly with your last paragraph. But ultimately wins matter. Otherwise we wouldn't be having these discussions.

If the team wins 15 games next year, do you believe that the team culture is going to be the variable that allows him to keep his job?

Just to add, I am not one of the people who want the coach gone. I'm just a spoiled fan that wants to see the level of success that we have grown accustom to. And, I don't see last season as a failure, but I do believe it could have been better. AND, last one I promise, I do understand the importance of culture and chemistry, I'm not saying that only wins matter.
Fair enough.

For my 4th paragraph, I said “my money says…” which implies it is an opinion, hunch, etc. Not a declaration of fact or truth.
 
Probably old news, but I just saw that Acaden Lewis is no longer committed to UK.
Is there any mutual interest?
We were definitely in his final list when he committed to UK, but I don't think there's anything new to link him to us at this time.
 
It's perfectly rational to hold Hubert accountable for EC leaving.

If you think Hubert made the decision to not retain EC, then he should be held accountable for why he decided to jettison from the program a guy he recruited and was responsible for developing.

If you think EC made the decision to leave fairly unilaterally, then HD should be accountable for why an established starter thinks his future is better served elsewhere.

If you think it was some sort of a mutual decision, then HD should be accountable for getting a PG at least as talented/experienced/fit for the team as EC

There can be perfectly wonderful reasons for EC to leave the program in which Hubert would be held "accountable" with a pat on the back and supported for "a job well done". Or the reasons that EC left may not be good and we should not have a positive view of Hubert for creating his exit or not figuring out a way to keep him on the team. But Hubert, as head coach, is paid for his involvement in these decisions and it is perfectly fair for him to be held accountable for what happens.

(Of course, we're all just fans on a message board - except for Rock, of course, who kills it as an insider - so us holding anyone "accountable" mostly comes down to either posts celebrating or complaining about what happens far beyond our control. But the point is that HD is responsible for the players on the team and public praise/criticism is fair game depending on what happens with the overall roster and particular players.)
In summary, Snoop believes where Coach Davis is concerned:

deon cole the buck stops here GIF by Team Coco
 
Curious about this “HD can’t develop players” take. Which reputable (or any) source claims Hubert can’t, or hasn’t develop(ed) players? What does that even mean? Did ESPN make this claim? Stephen A? Mike Greenberg? Did Charles Barkley say this? The Sporting News? Sports Illustrated? Bleacher Report? Dan Patrick? Jay Bills? Who makes this claim? Anybody got any receipts on this? Any links to share where this was actually written? Any videos of some knowledgable person making this claim? Or is this just some internet hoo doo, or perhaps somebody on IC said this first? Or did a former disgruntled player like Dontrez Styles say this upon his flight from Chapel Hill? Is Trez on record for claiming “Coach Davis failed me, he didn’t ‘develop’ me?”

Also, it usually takes 3 or 4 years to “develop” as a player… unless of course you’re a generational talent straight out of H.S. and you’re good enough to go straight to the pros. Back in the day, freshmen weren’t even eligible to play college ball. Then as a Soph, most didn’t make it as a starter - unless of course they beat out an upper classman for the spot - because they hadn’t fully “developed” yet. Only by the time the average player was a junior or senior did they crack the starting line up of a decent D1 team. UNC was a prime example of that. Sure there were some soon to be NBA players for Carolina who could crack Dean Smiths starting line up as a frosh … but there weren’t many OKorens or Fords or Jordans who started the majority of games as a frosh. Not too many Isiah Thomas’ who started as a freshman for Bobby Knight.

But I digress. Does anybody here say that EC didn’t improve from his Freshman year to his sophomore year? I’m not sure, haven’t looked it up yet, but didn’t all of his numbers, metrics and percentages improve from last year? I’m thinking they did. Did EC claim that HD failed to “develop” him as a player?

Can anybody share a link proving that HD doesn’t “develop” players?
 
I think it's actually completely the opposite. Almost all of "getting better" is due to the players ability and work ethic. Coaches have very very little to do with player improvement given the short amount of time they have with them.

There is skill development and then there is putting players in positions to maximize strengths and weaknesses

When I hear "player development" when it comes to college coaches (esp. over 1-2 years) I am only thinking of the latter

I don't think anyone blames HD for EC's shooting. The blame lies in an offense that was mostly stationary and had no bigs, exposing his weakness
 
I agree with that, I think HD did a poor job with our team last year. I always felt it screamed uptempo/high pressure. I also felt like he overcoached at times and his sets were stale.

Most of the issues came from a poor transfer portal season and then inability of the staff to modify it's scheme to fit the pieces we did have. HD def. deserves some blame there.

Still, the issues EC had were mostly his own. HD didn't make him repeatedly make stupid fouls/take himself out of games and HD didn't make him repeatedly make bad decisions in big moments. HD handed him the keys to a blue blood, not many kids get that chance.
 
I think it's actually completely the opposite. Almost all of "getting better" is due to the players ability and work ethic. Coaches have very very little to do with player improvement given the short amount of time they have with them.

If you are going to discount HD for EC/IJ then you have to credit him for Trimble/Harrison Ingram/Bacot/RJ Davis.
Then why is UNC, and most/all other programs, along with all NBA teams, European organizations, etc., spending tons of money on player-specific staff to help improve their players? By the way, this happens in all sports.

Bacot and RJ were basically the same players their last 3 years. HI was FOTY in the Pac-12, no? Do you felt like he significantly improved after getting here? And, something is causing the perception that HD/staff can't develop talent.
 
Curious about this “HD can’t develop players” take. Which reputable (or any) source claims Hubert can’t, or hasn’t develop(ed) players? What does that even mean? Did ESPN make this claim? Stephen A? Mike Greenberg? Did Charles Barkley say this? The Sporting News? Sports Illustrated? Bleacher Report? Dan Patrick? Jay Bills? Who makes this claim? Anybody got any receipts on this? Any links to share where this was actually written? Any videos of some knowledgable person making this claim? Or is this just some internet hoo doo, or perhaps somebody on IC said this first? Or did a former disgruntled player like Dontrez Styles say this upon his flight from Chapel Hill? Is Trez on record for claiming “Coach Davis failed me, he didn’t ‘develop’ me?”

Also, it usually takes 3 or 4 years to “develop” as a player… unless of course you’re a generational talent straight out of H.S. and you’re good enough to go straight to the pros. Back in the day, freshmen weren’t even eligible to play college ball. Then as a Soph, most didn’t make it as a starter - unless of course they beat out an upper classman for the spot - because they hadn’t fully “developed” yet. Only by the time the average player was a junior or senior did they crack the starting line up of a decent D1 team. UNC was a prime example of that. Sure there were some soon to be NBA players for Carolina who could crack Dean Smiths starting line up as a frosh … but there weren’t many OKorens or Fords or Jordans who started the majority of games as a frosh. Not too many Isiah Thomas’ who started as a freshman for Bobby Knight.

But I digress. Does anybody here say that EC didn’t improve from his Freshman year to his sophomore year? I’m not sure, haven’t looked it up yet, but didn’t all of his numbers, metrics and percentages improve from last year? I’m thinking they did. Did EC claim that HD failed to “develop” him as a player?

Can anybody share a link proving that HD doesn’t “develop” players?
cjones and bwall have stated that is the perception among athletes' and agents' circles, and Sherrell speculated that UNC was/might have to overpay for players in the pod last week. I doubt this is anything one can "prove," but the veracity of the statement matters little, compared to the perception.
 
There is skill development and then there is putting players in positions to maximize strengths and weaknesses

When I hear "player development" when it comes to college coaches (esp. over 1-2 years) I am only thinking of the latter

I don't think anyone blames HD for EC's shooting. The blame lies in an offense that was mostly stationary and had no bigs, exposing his weakness
This too, 100%.
 
Most of the issues came from a poor transfer portal season and then inability of the staff to modify it's scheme to fit the pieces we did have. HD def. deserves some blame there.

That has been my biggest critique of the HD era. Not a fan of the general approach of not crafting things to the talent (or lack of talent). If you want to play a certain way it's one thing but there has to be some sort of consistency in the types of players being brought in

Which brings us to next season, where a freshman 4 who doesn't shoot is going to be the starter, on a team that has no PG. Maybe a blessing in disguise, if it forces the staff to change the approach a bit
 
That has been my biggest critique of the HD era. Not a fan of the general approach of not crafting things to the talent (or lack of talent). If you want to play a certain way it's one thing but there has to be some sort of consistency in the types of players being brought in

Which brings us to next season, where a freshman 4 who doesn't shoot is going to be the starter, on a team that has no PG. Maybe a blessing in disguise, if it forces the staff to change the approach a bit
Rob nailed it a few weeks ago when he said that HD "needs a perfect roster to be successful." Meaning, he believes he can put a good team on the court, as long as the players fit his schemes perfectly. (I guess the question then is, wouldn't every college coach succeed if that were the case?)
 
Fair enough.

For my 4th paragraph, I said “my money says…” which implies it is an opinion, hunch, etc. Not a declaration of fact or truth.
We're cool.

My original post came across as more questioning of the staff than I meant it to be.

Next year will answer a lot of questions. Hopefully were all super happy, have 3 or 4 wins against dook and have forgotten about this season.
 
cjones and bwall have stated that is the perception among athletes' and agents' circles, and Sherrell speculated that UNC was/might have to overpay for players in the pod last week. I doubt this is anything one can "prove," but the veracity of the statement matters little, compared to the perception.
True or not, it’s not provable and there has been no verifiable source. But I will admit, I have no idea who cjones , bawll or Sherrell are. And I will also admit the truth may not mean much if perception matters.
 
True or not, it’s not provable and there has been no verifiable source. But I will admit, I have no idea who cjones , bawll or Sherrell are. And I will also admit the truth may not mean much if perception matters.
cjones and bwall work with and around players and agents, I believe. Sherrell works at IC and covers UNC recruiting. And while there's no way to "prove" it, it's all about what players/agents think. I guess it's as verifiable as saying that it's true that Kelvin Sampson is a good coach.
 
Back
Top