Coaching Record In Games Decided by 5 Points or Less
- Thread starter BoilerIron
- Start date
Can someone save my eyesight and tell me where Painter is on that chart.
We old fogies start losing things after a while. First the memory goes. Then the eyesight. Then the hearing. And then the memory after that.
We old fogies start losing things after a while. First the memory goes. Then the eyesight. Then the hearing. And then the memory after that.
100 games and a 55% win percentage. For reference Izzo is around 107 games with the same win percentage.
Mark Few, Bill Self and Jim Boeheim leading the way at the top, along with....Andrew Toole? Not even sure who that is. Archie right about 60%, Brad Stevens barely above him, Coach K at about 52.5%, Dana Altman about the same as Archie, but with MANY more games, and last of all.....Fran McCaffery at the lowest win% for anyone over 100 games, sitting just above 40%.
S,SW from Bill Self's quadrant just below and to the left of Bill Carmody.....straight line down from Thad Matta.
without the eye chart does it suggest that teams need a player or two capable of taking over for a short duration to increase that percent. Second, how close does that percent track with conference win percent and total win percent? Are teams that typically win also win close games?
This is not my graph. There is nothing about specific players on the graph. There is nothing about conference wins or total win percentage on the graph. Most of the good coaches on the list are above the red line. There are outliers like Billy Donovan below the red line.
This is simply a graph of win percentage in games decided by 5 points or less dating back to 2002.
I know that. What I posed were legitimate questions all should ask rather than being led down a narrative that it is indicative of a good coach...Saw where John Groce was fairly high. I hate seeing games on ESPN because they talk about things they don't know. I'd rather they shut up and clarify fouls and such..see replays etc. We as fans put way too much value into the media and what they say...and me with a bit of data work just quickly had those questions. A close game can end up 10 points easy and a game that had a 10 point lead can close to 5 in seconds just to ensure the win. I'm thinking IU/Louisville ended up being much closer than it was 30 seconds earlier or such.
Not blaming you, but people can chart anything and think the chart shows things..and it may and it may not. Is it more relative to see the delta between win percentages of games that end by winning by less than 5 points and those of just winning all games or conference games?
Just looking at the graph it appears about half is below .5 and half above .5 which you would expect. For every winner there must be a loser. Anyway, this graph would be a nice starting point for further investigation and I'm not suggesting you were going down a path of error....just that I have witnessed quite a few people draw conclusions that I don't know how they do ang just quickly threw out another thought as a qualifier should one wish to investigate this. Do appreciate the chart as no data is bad data!
Last edited:
I went to Iowa a couple years ago for a football game and spent a couple days checking out the discussion on their hoops and football boards beforehand. On the hoops board, Fran was commonly referred to as Mount McCaffrey by their fans which I found absolutely hilarious.
This was more of just pointing out that CMP can in fact win close games, and does so at a rate higher than the average for coaches with 50+ 5 point games in their career.
I tried and got called on itWait, did you say something positive about Painter?!?!?!
Someone record this
...On the real though, I have always said Painter is a good developer and good in game coach haha.
I know, but don't we expect good coaches to win close games and most games? My point was that if the percent of winning close games is substantially higher than all games or conference games...why? First question would be tempo and that those teams are used to playing games close and slow. I think the chart is a nice chart for further investigation...that is all.
I noticed Zo was at 45%, and McDermott was also surprisingly under .500. Alford, Pitino, Weber and Coach k were all about the same at 53% I noticed Sampson and Crews were hovering around 60% with Davis not far behind.
What I found interesting is that Davis and Weber had so many games coached decided by 5 points or less. one could conclude while they still win their games, they had a very hard time holding the lead and coached a lot of nail biters.
What I found interesting is that Davis and Weber had so many games coached decided by 5 points or less. one could conclude while they still win their games, they had a very hard time holding the lead and coached a lot of nail biters.
Painter at 100 games. he's coached 484 total. So about 20% of his games were decided by 5 points or less. In contrast, Self has coached 863 games with about 110 games decided by 5 points or less. that's about 1/8th or 12.5%. Obviously Kansas games are not close.
I had to Wiki Andrew Toole too. He's intriguing. Someone to keep an eye on for sure.
From 2005/6 to end of 2017/18, I tallied Painters record at 62-44. 58.5 Win %. Did not look at games this year or the one year at So Ill.
Yr. w-l
05/06 0-2
06/07 2-2
07/08 6-3
08/09 6-3
09/10 7-1
10/11 2-3
11/12 6-5
12/13 1-3
13/14 7-4
14/15 8-5
15/16 3-4
16-17 7-4
17/18 7-5
Did my best on getting this correct. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Playing close games and winning against blue blood talent isn't the same as barely beating Stetson or Northwestern.
Good stuff. I don't remember the stat, but Keady was always acknowledged for being a leader gutting out the close ones. Cardiac kids.
Similar threads
