Coaching Carousal, Part 2011-03

The Tipping Point...
In the three-plus weeks since Connecticut cut down the nets and ended the 2011 season, 13 coaching positions were filled even as three more head opened up. Even more notable, of the three which opened up, two were at the initiative of the current head coach, a strong signal that the momentum in cycle has begun to wind down. Dane Fife became the latest in a growing trend of low-major coaches who abandon the first chair to take an assistant job at a high-major when he left IPFW for a spot on Tom Izzo's staff at Michigan State. 25 years old when tabbed to lead the then independent IPFW in 2005, Fife led the Mastodons into the Summit League in his third season at the helm. A historic 0.218 program after three Division 1 seasons, Fife led IPFW to a 0.357 winning percentage his first season (12-18), and bettered that mark in each of his next five. The Mastodons logged an 18-12 record (0.600) last season and perhaps Fife felt it was time to move on. Division 2 (and lower level) head coaches traditionally take assistant positions to move up the ladder, have successful head coaches voluntarily leave their positions to take assistant jobs may be another piece in a growing body of evidence of the gap between BCS-level programs and nonBCS-level programs.

The timestamp on Dana O'Neil's ESPN feature, "Old Coaching Assumption Fading", was barely 10 days old when Jim Larranaga, cited by O'Neil as an early trend-setter, exchanged the familiar surroundings of the program he built at George Mason to lead Miami and work in the ACC on April 23. Put O'Neil at the end of a line of disappointed observers that no doublt includes Providence (Larranaga's alma mater, twice rebuffed when they came to court after his 2006 Final Four run) AD Bob Driscoll and anyone who bet money that Kansas State's Frank Martin would suceed the departed Frank Haith as the Hurricanes' most likely next coach (not to mention Martin himself perhaps?).

Only Karl Hobbs, the George Washington University head coach dismissed unexpectedly on April 25, was an employer-initiated move. The circumstances of Hobbs' dismissal were typical of a post season evaluation, and so seemed strange coming more than a month after the GWU men played their last basketball game. That Hobbs was fired by Patrick Nero less than a week after Nero was designated the successor to Athletic Director Jack Kvancz, and more than eight weeks before Nero will take up the day-to-day duties as AD, strongly hints that Nero's first personnel move was decided before he was hired, and therefore by others in the GWU administration. Why the quick trigger for Hobbs? The key may well be Jim Larranaga's move to Miami -- Vermont head coach Mike Lonergan has been featured prominently on George Mason Athletic Director Tom O'Connor's short list. Nero, whose previous job was Commissioner of the American East Conference -- of which Vermont is a member -- may emerge as the point man to bring Lonergan to Foggy Bottom. Should Lonergan prove to be the target for both programs (other overlapping targets for those two include Jeff Capel, released in March from Oklahoma), the 2011 edition of the Coaching Carousal may have a bidding war should both programs go full bore for either Capel or Lonergan. Andy Katz may believe that George Mason is the better situation, but as a member in the best non-BCS conference (the A-10) in Division 1, a renovated arena in the nation's capital and access to a top 10 media market and a few good coaches in the past two decades (Tom Penders, Mike Jarvis) George Washington can offer a higher profile.

Best Hires? Worst Hires?!
If the talking heads have no clear favorite for "Best Hire" (Ed Cooley to Providence, Sidney Johnson to Fairfield and Cuonzo Martin to Tennessee are drawing most of the approving nods...), a (negative) consensus is about Frank Haith, Missouri's choice to succeed the departed (for Arkansas) Mike Anderson. Adapting Dan Hanner's efficiency margin comparison method for the two coaches, even as we allow for different schools and conferences, might give us a hint at expectations for the Missouri fan-base...

	Average Adj.
Coach	Offense	Defense	Diff.
Anderson, Mizzou 2007-11	113.6	92.7	+20.8
Haith, Miami 2007-11	112.5	96.7	+15.8

While Anderson appears to have the edge (good news for the Arkansas fan-base?), Haith does not appear to be an unreasonable choice. A comparison of styles (using Ken Pomeroy's coaching resume feature) can perhaps give Missouri fans an idea of what to expect...

			Offense
Coach	Year	Pace	eFG%	OR%	TO%	FTRATE
Mike Anderson, Missouri	2009	71.3	52.8	34.3	16.0	36.6
Frank Haith, Miami	2008	67.4	49.2	36.1	19.0	39.1

Anderson's version of "40 Minutes of..." is much in evidence at Mizzou, and Arkansas fans, who enjoyed three Final Fours, including a National Championship under Anderson's mentor Nolan Richardson, should recognize (and appreciate) the style. Haith ran a more deliberate offense, that compensated for less efficient shot (fewer transition points most likely) converson (and a slightly higher turnover rate) with more aggressive offensive rebounding and lane work (the 'Canes got to the line more).

	Defense
Coach	eFG%	OR%	TO%	FTRATE
Anderson, Missouri	46.4	34.5	24.8	39.9
Haith, Miami	47.0	34.2	20.3	35.4

The defensive snapshot of their "best" season suggests that Anderson's defense was more aggressive (note the turnover rate and free throw rate, both higher than Haith's Miami squad, and frankly much higher than the Division 1 average). Neither squad excelled at rebounding, and were about the same for shot defense as well (Haith's squad was ranked #47 in 2008, Anderson's #53 in 2009). Both coaches seemed to favor guards and 'tweener type wing players, and Haith should find a familiar skill set on the Missouri squad next season. Missouri's playing style next season will be more deliberate than Mizzou saw under Anderson, but with a similar set of players, Haith should be able to make his system work (or not...) fairly early next season.


By the Numbers...
In the last Coaching Carousal post I suggested a floor of about 40 vacancies in this cycle. The total to date (fall practice to today) is 46. If the cycles over the last four off seasons is a good indication, the ceiling will probably be around 50 (48-53), as those unforeseen circumstances ("The things we know we don't know...") will acount for another 1 - 7 vacancies after the Spring signing period. The spate of coaching carousal articles this week (see Davis over at SI, Katz at ESPN for example...) hint that the cycle is winding down, yet in seasons past -- even setting aside 2009 (a very unusual off season for coaching changes) -- the cycle has continued into July and even into late August once or twice. The cycle picked up quickly between the end of the regular season and Selection Sunday, and spiked dramatically during the NCAA tournament. The NCAA Tournament is always the peak, but the period between the end of the tournament and the close of the spring signing period (the third week in May) is often as busy as the period between the end of the regular season and Selection Sunday. The average number of vacancies per season (season opening to fall practice of the following year) over the period 2000-2010 is 47.8 -- clearly the 46 vacancies to date means this season will, at worst be an "average" year in the cycle.

A Smaller Turnover in the post Tournament Period?
If the post tournament period period seems less hectic, consider that at this point in the cycle vacancies are created less from ADs firing coaches and more from coaches switching positions. The "fuel" that drives the carousal after the NCAAs is generally provided by the coaching fraternity, and indeed the coaches do account for 66% of the new vacancies since the crowning of the National Champions. BCS vacancies typically drive the carousal by triggering a chain reaction of coaching searches to replace coaches who move up the Division 1 food chain. Of the eight 2011 BCS coaching vacancies (Arkansas, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, Missouri, North Carolina State, Oklahoma, Providence and Texas Tech), two (NCSU & Texas Tech) were filled by currently unemployed ex-coaches (Mark Gottfried and Billy Gillispie respectively), three (Georgia Tech, Oklahoma and Providence) were filled by low/mid-major coaches whose departure triggered at most one other vacancy (Providence <-- Fairfield <-- Princeton), while the remaining three (Arkansas, Missouri and Miami) were part of the same chain reaction, initiated when Arkansas fired John Pelphrey on March 13 (Arkansas <-- Missouri <-- Miami <-- George Mason...for now). Given the pool of candidates George Washington and George Mason have to work with (compete over), expect no more than two additonal vacancies to be opened from their searches.

Tea Leaves, Dove Entrails, Odometers & Seed Lines -- George Mason Preview

Rendezvous in Cleveland
Villanova and George Mason are slated to play the #8/#9 game in the East Region of the NCAA Tournament, Cleveland Pod, on Friday afternoon. The Patriots, out of the Colonial Athletic Association, are seeded #8 as an at-large team, one seed higher than the CAA Tournament Champion, Old Dominion, and several seeds higher than Virginia Commonwealth, the team that knocked them out of the CAA Conference Tournament last week. They have to be very pleased with how the season has gone so far. Villanova, seeded #9 in the East Region, only Marquette at #10 was seeded lower of the 11 Big East teams invited to the NCAAs, and riding a five game losing streak into the first round, cannot be pleased with how their season has gone so far. For George Mason, this is a chance to add to the season highlights. For Villanova, this is a chance to begin a turnaround. The two have met four times in a series that dates to 1986. Villanova's record versus George Mason is 4-0. The Wildcats won the last meeting, a 69-68 nailbiter in the first round of the Puerto Rico Tip-off in November of 2009.

Common Opponents, Good Wins, Bad Losses...
The Wildcats and Patriots shared a single common opponent this season, Delaware:

	Nova		GMU
Opponent	W/L	Diff.	W/L	Diff.
Delaware	W (H)	+19	W (H)	+9
			W (A)	+20

Notable that each hosted Delaware within 16 days of the other. Mason traveled to Newark, Delaware about two weeks after their first game. The Patriots have two top 50 wins, versus Harvard (Ivy League, 21-6, 12-3, RPI #35) and conference rival Old Dominion (CAA, 27-6, 14-4, RPI #20). That road win over the Monarchs was GMU's best win of the season. The Patriots have five wins over RPI 51-100 teams. Villanova's has four top 50 wins and four wins versus 51-100 (RPI) competition. The Wildcats' worst loss was their last game, a one point loss to South Florida (RPI #155) in their last outing.

Lineups, Rotations
Coach Jim Larranaga, completing his 14th season at George Mason, will (according to the George Mason Game Notes) most likely start 6-4 senior Cam Long at the point guard spot, with 5-11 junior Andre Cornelius in the off guard spot and 6-5 sophomore Luke Hancock playing a kind of point forward. Hancock leads the team in assists, dishing over 4.3 assists per game, while Long leads the team in scoring, averaging about 15.3 points per game over the course of the season. Two undersized forwards will start in the front court, with 6-6 junior Ryan Pearson holding down the #4 spot and 6-9 junior Mike Morrison manning the low post. Pearson, at 230 pounds, may have the bulk (if not the height) to play in the paint. While GMU is ranked #222 (out of 345) for three point attempts/all attempts (31% per Ken Pomeroy's GMU Team Page, that attempt could come from four of the five positions on the court, with backcourt mates Long and Cornelius leading the way. Those two account for 282 of the team's total 543 attempts (51.9%), but forwards Hancock and Pearson accounted for over 100 attempts. In total, the forward spots took 20.8% of the three point attempts. The Patriots have looked to six players (the starters and senior guard Isaiah Tate) for minutes and points, six have played in all 32 games, nine have appeared in at least 30 of the Patriot's 32 games. When Coach Larranaga substitutes, expect to see Tate first. The 6-4 senior is one of three players to convert at least 40% of his three point attempts (42.4% to Cam Long's 42.6%). Next off the bench will be another guard, Vertrail Vaughns, a 6-2 red shirt freshman who converts threes at a 51.6% clip. Though Vaughns has logged only 289 minutes this season, 101 of those minutes have come in the last seven games. Expect Vaughns to get at least 15 minutes of court time Friday. The front court rotation could go as deep as Paris Bennett, Johnny Williams and/or Jonathan Alridge, though none has topped 300 minutes of playing time this season (about 25% of the available playing time for a single position). Coach Larranaga would have to take a scorer off the floor to substitute any one of those three, as none has a shot% of more than 15.9% (Johnny Willliams) -- role player status in the offense.

Coach Wright used the same line up for Villanova's first 20 (or so) games, but adjusted the starters as injuries mounted and inconsistent play ensued. The pre game notes indicate Coach Wright will use the line up that earned Villanova a 17-3 record, start 6-1 senior Corey Fisher alongside 6-2 sophomore Maalik Wayns in the back court. The two function as point guards, with Wayns bringing the ball up court, but Fisher takes control of the offense in the half court. 6-5 senior Corey Stokes will man the wing as a guard/forward. Stokes remains the most consistent three point threat, though he was hobbled through much of February with hamstring and turf toe problems. 6-8 senior forward Antonio Pena will play the #4. Pena can be especially effective on the boards, and if he hits his first 17 foot jumper, a recurring element in Villanova's offense for power forwards, then things should become easier for 6-10 sophomore Mouphtaou Yarou, Villanova's starter in the low post. Wayns and Fisher will go to the rim. If they can get there they should be able to finish. Or come up with fouls. When the game is about four minutes old, look for 6-6 sophomore Dominic Cheek or 6-8 sophomore Isaiah Armwood. If Coach Wright decides to go nine deep, then 6-5 freshman wing James Bell and/or 6-11 sophomore bfc Maurice Sutton will see the court as well. Guard fouls, either Fisher or Wayns or both has been a problem. Dom Cheek can serve as a stop-gap for very short periods of time, but a rotation that puts Cheek, Stokes and Sutton on the floor together has been vulnerable to turnovers from the press.

By the Numbers, Offense & Defense...
George Mason's shot efficiency (eFG%) is bolstered tremendously by a 39.7% conversion rate for three point attempts, ranked #12 in Division 1 per Ken Pomeroy. Mason would have to convert two point attempts at a 59.5% rate to yield an equivalent number of points. Given their two point conversion rate is a more modest (but still impressive) 50.9% (#49) suggest the Patiots offensive strength on the perimeter, can be extremely damaging if not contested effectively...

When the Patriots have the ball...							FTA
	eFG%	Rnk	TO%	Rnk	OR%	Rnk	FGA	Rnk
GMU O	53.6	19	16.7	15	32.8	157	39.3	129
Nova D	46.4	56	18.4	273	29.9	75	36.2	134

The Patriots' offensive rebounding is an average-for-D1 32.8%, and their propensity to get to the line, 39.3% (FTAs/FGAs) contradict the perimeter oriented team stereotype. Turnovers then can be understood as a function of an experienced (and quality) back court, not a function of their playing style. Combining lack of turnovers (not a strength for Villanova's defense this season) with three point shooting, traps to force turnovers is probably a poor strategy for Villanova's defense. Even a modest press to slow game flow and shorten the shot clock by 10-15 seconds may backfire, if Mason can set up secondary break opportunities for their three point shooters. Should Wildcat defenders prove to be slow picking up their defensive assignments, the 'Cats would be punished severely with three point conversions. Overall, GMU's assist rate, 55.2%, is a bit higher than average, suggesting the Patriots use the pass to set up the shooter. George Mason offers a balanced offense that draws just over half (52.3%) of it's points from inside 20 feet 9 inches, but relies on the three point attempt for just over a quarter (27.5%) of their points. When Long has the ball, he only slightly favors the three point attempt, but when Vaughn or Cornelius are on the court, alone or together, Villanova's perimeter defense needs to be on full alert. GMU's offensive rebounding, fair but not great, is an area that can be exploited by Villanova. Should the Patriot marksmen miss, Villanova should be able to deny them a second chance.

The "Four Factors" look at Villanova's offense versus George Mason's defense:

When the Wildcats have the ball...							FTA
	eFG%	Rnk	TO%	Rnk	OR%	Rnk	FGA	Rnk
Nova O	49.7	137	17.9	49	35.4	67	42.6	63
GMU D	45.8	37	20.8	123	30.7	96	32.0	58

The Wildcats have won by scoring, either on their first attempt of the possession, or via putbacks and second chance opportunities afforded by their offensive rebounding. Limiting turnovers maximizes their scoring opportunities, but the 'Cats also rely on points from the free throw line. They harvest about 24.5% of their points from free throw line, while getting 26.2% of their points from beyond the arc (much like GMU).

Want to Beat the Patriots? Then...
Unlike the Wildcats, the Patriots do not have an "offensive marker", a particular offensive element that strongly correlates to wins and losses. Nevertheless there are two elements that seem to matter in close games. Defense is another matter...
1. Keep them off the line. Filtering blowout wins (margins of 17 or more points), GMU's record when they get to the line 36.2% or less is 4-4. In closer games, those points are vital to their offensive bottom line.
2. Force turnovers. Again filtering for blowout wins, the Patriots are 2-3 when they lost 20% or more of their possessions.
3. Hit your shots. When GMU's opponents hit to Villanova's eFG% (49.7%) or better, the Patriots were 7-5. Filter blowout wins and their record was 5-5.
4. Dominate the offensive boards. When the Patriots' opponents rebounded to Villanova's offensive rebounding rate or better (35.4%), they were 6-4. Filter the blowout wins, and their record dropped to 4-4.
5. Get to the line. When George Mason's opponents had a free throw rate (FTA/FGA) of 42.6% or better (Villanova's FT rate), the Patriots were 2-4. Filter the blowout wins and the Patriots were 0-4.

Finally...
...For Mason, defense is the key, a counter point to Villanova, where the Wildcats' ability to win is tied clearly to their offense. Track the Wildcats' conversion rates, they should provide a clear indication on Villanova's prospects to win this game. Oddly George Mason seems very flexible on offense. They have a number of ways offensively to translate a game effort into a win. Ken Pomeroy calls this one a virtual tossup -- Villanova by one point with a 50% probability. That's the statistical "word" for tossup folks. Looking at distance to travel as an indicator does not help much. Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com posted a piece travel distance and winning percentages that asserted when teams traveling to sites 200-500 miles from their campus have a 52% winning percentage. George Mason has a very slight travel advantage, about 288 miles to Cleveland versus about a 338 mile commute for Villanova. About as close as the game is expected to be.

Roster Moves
Mason guards Andre Cornelius and Luke Hancock sprained their ankles during Tuesday practice. Cornelius waa able to walk off the court, while Hancock needed assistance. Both departed for Cleveland with the team, and Hancock assured a blogger Wednesday that he had gone through a full practice Wednesday and would play Friday, an assertion confirmed by Coach Larranage who indicated both would start as planned.