Started By
Message
Thoughts on what the KA hire looks like to me
Posted on 4/29/14 at 6:52 pm
Posted on 4/29/14 at 6:52 pm
Have you ever been to Las Vegas and watched people play blackjack for long periods of time? I have.
Invariably there is the person who sits down at the table and hits on 17, fails to split aces and eights, doesn't double down when they're supposed to, and for short periods of time, the random number generator that is "the shoe" makes them look smarter than you because they draw a 3 on 17, the dealer busts and they didn't split, the dealer hits 21 when they didn't double down on their 11 against a dealer 5, and they look at you like you're an idiot, the stupidest person in the world for trying to give sound advice in playing a very tough game.
An hour later they're gone, busted, the house has taken everything they started with, everything they won, and they even added more trying to chase their losses and lost that too. They think the reason they lost was that they were unlucky and hit a bad streak. Terrible gamblers always think that way, and then call you lucky because it hasn't happened to you-yet.
Even if Kim Anderson starts off winning, it will not be because he was the best hire or even a good hire. It might be because in the short run, anything can happen, and it obscures common sense and good judgment. That's what this feels like to me. The player next to you at the table has defied the odds, and some are saying the program is winning.
Invariably there is the person who sits down at the table and hits on 17, fails to split aces and eights, doesn't double down when they're supposed to, and for short periods of time, the random number generator that is "the shoe" makes them look smarter than you because they draw a 3 on 17, the dealer busts and they didn't split, the dealer hits 21 when they didn't double down on their 11 against a dealer 5, and they look at you like you're an idiot, the stupidest person in the world for trying to give sound advice in playing a very tough game.
An hour later they're gone, busted, the house has taken everything they started with, everything they won, and they even added more trying to chase their losses and lost that too. They think the reason they lost was that they were unlucky and hit a bad streak. Terrible gamblers always think that way, and then call you lucky because it hasn't happened to you-yet.
Even if Kim Anderson starts off winning, it will not be because he was the best hire or even a good hire. It might be because in the short run, anything can happen, and it obscures common sense and good judgment. That's what this feels like to me. The player next to you at the table has defied the odds, and some are saying the program is winning.
3
Posted on 4/29/14 at 6:55 pm to MizzouJim
Good analogy. I wish him all the success in the world. But I have no more goodwill left for Alden.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 6:59 pm to MizzouJim
In this scenario, FWIW, I see Mike Alden as the bettor and his hires each as a night of blackjack.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 3:23 pm to MizzouJim
So, in other words, even if he succeeds you will call it blind luck? What do you consider success? And how many years of success before he has "earned" it?
Just want to be clear on where you stand. Because it sounds like you are putting him in a no-win situation.
Just want to be clear on where you stand. Because it sounds like you are putting him in a no-win situation.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 3:32 pm to MIZ83
meh, strange comparison
Never seen a basketball coach compared to a random stranger a guy watches playing blackjack in Vegas.
It sounds like you want to tell everyone you have been to Vegas.
Never seen a basketball coach compared to a random stranger a guy watches playing blackjack in Vegas.
It sounds like you want to tell everyone you have been to Vegas.
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 4/30/14 at 3:36 pm to MIZ83
No, I'd say if he succeeds that he's a good D1 coach. I'd say Alden is lucky.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 3:42 pm to the808bass
If Anderson starts out winning it will be because of great coaching. We have some talent, but our team is extremely young and we have no proven scorers at the D1 level. If he makes the NCAA or even the NIT next year that will be because of good coaching and player development - not luck.
I think most people expect year 1 of Anderson to be a rebuilding/reloading year.
I think most people expect year 1 of Anderson to be a rebuilding/reloading year.
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 4/30/14 at 3:55 pm to the808bass
quote:
No, I'd say if he succeeds that he's a good D1 coach. I'd say Alden is lucky.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 4:20 pm to semotruman
quote:
But I have no more goodwill left for Alden.
Why not? They were VERY close to getting Gregg Marshall on Saturday. It just didn't work out.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 4:25 pm to semotruman
I would say that when some of you folks come to the realization that Mizzou just ain't a great job you might be able to come to grips with the fact no big name coach would touch the job. All I can tell you is that Kim Anderson is a good man and it sucks the way some of you people knock him, particularly when he is a former player and two-time graduate of MU.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 4:26 pm to the808bass
quote:
No, I'd say if he succeeds that he's a good D1 coach. I'd say Alden is lucky.
Same argument, then. You don't like Alden, and no possible result will change your opinion. That's fine. I just don't like somebody saying "heads I win, tails I win", and then coming back and telling everybody what a genius he is for getting the call right.
Alden made the safe hire. Marshall didn't want the job and/or we didn't offer enough money. Howland had too much baggage and was politically risky. Hiring Anderson appeased the old-money crowd, the Norm faction, former players, most alumni, and a lot of ticket-buying fans.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 4:58 pm to MIZ83
quote:
Alden made the safe hire. Marshall didn't want the job and/or we didn't offer enough money. Howland had too much baggage and was politically risky. Hiring Anderson appeased the old-money crowd, the Norm faction, former players, most alumni, and a lot of ticket-buying fans.
Those weren't the only choices, and if they were, it means that Alden has a reputation that causes people to not want to work for him. Mizzou (even with Alden) is generally viewed as a top 30 job, and one national guy said it was even higher a few years ago. Money in general is not an issue, though north of 3 mill probably is.
Scenario one: Plenty of candidates, did we get the best coach? Probably not. If you go to DII coaches only and leave out every good D1 coach, then there are still better candidates than Anderson. If he hadn't gone to Mizzou he wouldn't have even been considered.
Scenario two: There weren't many candidates, why? Did we use the wrong search firm hired by Alden, or are there issues related to Alden in his interviewing/hiring process?
Quin Snyder was devastating to our program on more than one level. Anderson was interviewing every year he was here with other schools, paid more and left anyway. Was a procilivity for that not an interview question? Haith had regulatory issues that should have been known, a lackluster coaching record, and ultimately proved he couldn't coach. And now we have a reach hire who had never been a D1 head coach. Add to that Alden's two women's basketball hires haven't been good either. What does all this tell you?
It's not a Kim Anderson issue. I want him to succeed. I simply want the guy who hired him to be made accountable for his hires, and he has not been.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 5:09 pm to UOFMO
If you can't all the Mizzou job, you can't sell. It's the only major college in state. It has top 30 facilities. It could pay in the top 15.
If you can't sell that to other coaches, you aren't an AD fit for a major university.
If you can't sell that to other coaches, you aren't an AD fit for a major university.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 5:12 pm to MIZ83
quote:
Same argument, then. You don't like Alden, and no possible result will change your opinion. That's fine. I just don't like somebody saying "heads I win, tails I win", and then coming back and telling everybody what a genius he is for getting the call right.
Except Alden hired Haith, mismanaged the Painter situation, mismanaged the Quin situation, and has zero goodwill with CMA. And on this coaching search, he couldn't land a coach.
It's not a judgment made in a vacuum.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 8:03 pm to UOFMO
quote:
All I can tell you is that Kim Anderson is a good man and it sucks the way some of you people knock him, particularly when he is a former player and two-time graduate of MU.
I'm not sure who is knocking him as a bad man. I also think it's ok to question any hire, whether they went to Mizzou or not. Bottom line is, it is what it is. He's the coach. Either it excites ya and you'll go to games or it doesn't and ya won't.
I did have this thought though. I wouldn't have been nearly as opposed to the hire 10 years ago. Had that been done, call me crazy, I think he would have landed Tyler Hansbrough. Alden's frick up probably changed Mizzou basketball for decades. And that's why Alden has to go. Either Anderson is the man and Alden fricked up not hiring him all these years or Anderson is not the man and Alden fricked up by hiring him this time.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 8:04 pm to semotruman
quote:
Good analogy. I wish him all the success in the world. But I have no more goodwill left for Alden.
Posted on 5/1/14 at 10:27 am to the808bass
quote:
Except Alden hired Haith, mismanaged the Painter situation, mismanaged the Quin situation, and has zero goodwill with CMA. And on this coaching search, he couldn't land a coach. It's not a judgment made in a vacuum.
Look, I'm not an Alden apologist, so I won't get painted into that corner. But referencing the bolded part of your statement, that's why I said he made the safe hire. Alden is very good at playing politics and appeasing many factions, that's how he has survived so long (in addition to raising a bunch of money).
Here's my take:
Snyder was the sexy hire. Everybody loved it at the time: Young, good-looking, smart, blue-blood pedigree. He was a trainwreck. I'm not sure how Alden can be faulted for that.
Suitcase Mike Anderson, in hindsight, was just passing time until his destination job came up. But at the time he was a rising star, had success at UAB, and said all the right things about wanting to retire here. Very popular hire at the time, also. Had a pretty good run here, so I am giving Alden a pass on this one.
Haith, big swing and miss for Alden. NCAA problems, lack of coaching success, especially in the postseason, I have no idea where this one came from, and Alden should rightfully be crucified for this one.
Kim Anderson, again safe hire. Alden knows that at the very least it buys him time and goodwill with the people that really matter-big hitters and old money. Even if Anderson loses every game, he will bring defense, hard work, degrees, and loyalty. That will be considered a success regardless of his record.
I know there are probably other (better) coaches that we could have gotten. But I completely understand why we got Anderson, and I will support him, just as I supported all the previous coaches.
This post was edited on 5/1/14 at 10:29 am
Posted on 5/1/14 at 10:31 am to MIZ83
If we keep the recruiting class intact then this hire will work out just fine.
It's not like Haith was going to be any other big hitters for this year so basically it just comes down to the upcoming season.
I adamantly believe that Fuller is the better coach and we will see a better, more polished, more sound product on the floor each and every night.
If we can covert this season into wins then recruiting next year will be just fine.
It's not like Haith was going to be any other big hitters for this year so basically it just comes down to the upcoming season.
I adamantly believe that Fuller is the better coach and we will see a better, more polished, more sound product on the floor each and every night.
If we can covert this season into wins then recruiting next year will be just fine.
Posted on 5/1/14 at 10:37 am to MIZ83
quote:Kroenke and Laurie (but mostly Kroenke) were extremely involved in the Snyder hire. To the point of hire Snyder or you can pay for your own damn arena.
Snyder was the sexy hire.
Posted on 5/1/14 at 10:42 am to MIZ83
There's another problem though that's hidden by just discussing his hires.
And it's who he isn't able to hire.
Either he can't read people very well or he isn't a good evaluator of the possible for Mizzou or both. The last two hires, Alden has settled because he swung for the fences and didn't hit a homerun. And then he didn't slap a single to the opposite field. He tried to drag bunt his way on base.
I get not being able to land option A1 at Mizzou on a consistent basis. But when you get turned down by A1, hiring option D12 (which certainly happened with Haith and, based upon my information, seems to have happened here as well) isn't a recipe for program building.
Anderson may turn out to be a great coach. But it won't be because Alden identified anything in him. It will be because we lucked into a good coach.
And it's who he isn't able to hire.
Either he can't read people very well or he isn't a good evaluator of the possible for Mizzou or both. The last two hires, Alden has settled because he swung for the fences and didn't hit a homerun. And then he didn't slap a single to the opposite field. He tried to drag bunt his way on base.
I get not being able to land option A1 at Mizzou on a consistent basis. But when you get turned down by A1, hiring option D12 (which certainly happened with Haith and, based upon my information, seems to have happened here as well) isn't a recipe for program building.
Anderson may turn out to be a great coach. But it won't be because Alden identified anything in him. It will be because we lucked into a good coach.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News