MBB: It's time for Haase to go - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: MBB: It's time for Haase to go (/thread-21691.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: MBB: It's time for Haase to go (/thread-21691.html)
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - OutsiderFan - 03-13-2021
(03-13-2021, 03:03 PM)BillBradley Wrote: Haase wants his teams to play like he used to play. Hustle like mad, defend, steals, floor burns, disruption/chaos, attack the basket, shoot lots of FT's, etc.
If this is the case, he's got to recruit better athletes who are quick, fast, and can jump. This is not the profile of Stanford recruits in any sport. If you aren't going to get the best athletes, then you get the most skilled players with high hoops IQ. This is what Monty understood. And it's why Stanford beat the teams with less skill with or without quickness, but struggled to beat the elite teams with skill and quickness.
IOW, Stanford is setup for failure if Haase wants to play like he did.
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - gailtate - 03-13-2021
(03-13-2021, 03:39 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(03-13-2021, 03:03 PM)BillBradley Wrote: Haase wants his teams to play like he used to play. Hustle like mad, defend, steals, floor burns, disruption/chaos, attack the basket, shoot lots of FT's, etc.
If this is the case, he's got to recruit better athletes who are quick, fast, and can jump. This is not the profile of Stanford recruits in any sport. If you aren't going to get the best athletes, then you get the most skilled players with high hoops IQ. This is what Monty understood. And it's why Stanford beat the teams with less skill with or without quickness, but struggled to beat the elite teams with skill and quickness.
IOW, Stanford is setup for failure if Haase wants to play like he did.
Pretty much sums it up.
lex24 - lex24 - 03-13-2021
(03-13-2021, 01:29 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Lex, ZW didn't provide what he hoped, but I don't think he's a bust. He's very gifted and will do ok/very well in the NBA. Not only is he gifted, he has always been recognized as a very good guy. Don't know what happened at the end.
No question, he’s gifted. And from everything I’ve read , a terrific young man.
He may have an excellent NBA career. But that’s irrelevant. His on court year at Stanford was beyond disappointing. Certainly there were extenuating circumstances. But we all know the lengths Haase went to get him. And while it was exciting to get a “whale” like him, I think it’s a mistake to recruit guys that are certain to leave after a year. I don’t think that works at Stanford. I don’t think it advances the program.
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - old spanish trail - 03-13-2021
Fair enough, Lex. But, it seems to me that if Stanford ran a more structured offense, e.g., and worked to set screens for ZW, not to mention Jones, our perimeter shooting would be much improved. I'm not sure I could cogently describe our offensive structure, other than find Oscar. What would it be next year? Find Jaire? I know there are other productive offenses besides a heavy screen game that might have worked as well. I think the analyst who said several potential lottery picks (including ZW) lost ground because they wound up with crummy offenses was right. He could have been used much more effectively on offense.... and defense too. For that, I fault Haase big time.
RE: lex24 - winflop - 03-13-2021
(03-13-2021, 10:10 AM)lex24 Wrote: But I thought Dawkins was a lousy coach. Stanford basketball has been irrelevant for some time. One and done era doesn’t help. Yes, this was a bad offensive team. Which happens when you can’t shoot and have almost no one that creates. Davis hurt most of year and them pfffft. Wills the same. Williams was a bust.
What do you want in a new coach? Be specific. What style of play? What type of player should he recruit. Give us programs to emulate.
Cause just bringing in the flavor of the month does nothing. They need someone that understands the landscape and can determine how best to win at Stanford.
To me that’s recruiting guys that are likely to stay and mature. That’s relying on upperclassmen. Not guys that will leave. Player development key. Size and the ability to hit threes. An offense that does not rely on recruiting a bunch of guys that can beat people off the dribble. And has a low post scoring presence. Recruiting should be international. I repeat - look at Wisconsin, Iowa, Gonzaga. (Different styles, but all three tend to keep players in the systems. Not many one and dones).
Dawkins was not a good coach at Stanford. Looks like he hasn't done better at UCF after a couple seasons with someone else's recruits and his son transferring.
Haase will likely do better at his next stop, like he did at UAB. He also has not been a good coach at Stanford.
I don't know enough about basketball to say what I want in a coach in terms of philosophy, style, etc. But here's what I do want, in priority order:
1. Results! Contend for a conference title and get into the Big Dance. Doesn't have to be every year, but it hasn't happened in more than a decade
2. Build a cohesive, functioning team. Make the whole greater than the sum of the parts. Do more with less. Insert your own cliche here
3. Someone who gets Stanford. This is arguably less important because I don't expect a successful coach to stay more than 3-4 years
4. Put butts in seats. Not only because it's more fun for the fans, but MBB needs to make money to support other programs and it hasn't for many years. Maples needs to average 4K+ per home game, if not more.
RE: lex24 - SamuelMcF - 03-13-2021
(03-13-2021, 06:14 PM)winflop Wrote: Dawkins was not a good coach at Stanford. Looks like he's done better at UCF.
UCF had one good run a couple years ago with 3 good seniors: 2 of his predecessor's recruits and his son who transferred in from Michigan. They have been unsurprisingly mediocre since.
RE: lex24 - winflop - 03-13-2021
(03-13-2021, 07:01 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(03-13-2021, 06:14 PM)winflop Wrote: Dawkins was not a good coach at Stanford. Looks like he's done better at UCF.
UCF had one good run a couple years ago with 3 good seniors: 2 of his predecessor's recruits and his son who transferred in from Michigan. They have been unsurprisingly mediocre since.
I stand corrected. Post edited
lex24 - lex24 - 03-14-2021
(03-13-2021, 05:15 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Fair enough, Lex. But, it seems to me that if Stanford ran a more structured offense, e.g., and worked to set screens for ZW, not to mention Jones, our perimeter shooting would be much improved. I'm not sure I could cogently describe our offensive structure, other than find Oscar. What would it be next year? Find Jaire? I know there are other productive offenses besides a heavy screen game that might have worked as well. I think the analyst who said several potential lottery picks (including ZW) lost ground because they wound up with crummy offenses was right. He could have been used much more effectively on offense.... and defense too. For that, I fault Haase big time.
What other options did they have with Davis, Wills and Zaire out? They had no one that could beat people off the dribble (with the possible exception of Delaire). They lack three point shooters. DaSilva was their only threat.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. Not particularly enamored with Haase. I do wonder what happened this year. I remember the effort and his tears after Oregon. Then they just tanked.
RE: lex24 - winflop - 03-14-2021
(03-14-2021, 10:23 AM)lex24 Wrote:(03-13-2021, 05:15 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Fair enough, Lex. But, it seems to me that if Stanford ran a more structured offense, e.g., and worked to set screens for ZW, not to mention Jones, our perimeter shooting would be much improved. I'm not sure I could cogently describe our offensive structure, other than find Oscar. What would it be next year? Find Jaire? I know there are other productive offenses besides a heavy screen game that might have worked as well. I think the analyst who said several potential lottery picks (including ZW) lost ground because they wound up with crummy offenses was right. He could have been used much more effectively on offense.... and defense too. For that, I fault Haase big time.
What other options did they have with Davis, Wills and Zaire out? They had no one that could beat people off the dribble (with the possible exception of Delaire). They lack three point shooters. DaSilva was their only threat.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. Not particularly enamored with Haase. I do wonder what happened this year. I remember the effort and his tears after Oregon. Then they just tanked.
I think they played some of their best games of the season when those three were out, and I was genuinely excited to see what they could do when they got those guys back. And then they just collapsed instead, and that's a big part of why I think Haase needs to go
RE: lex24 - BostonCard - 03-14-2021
(03-14-2021, 10:23 AM)lex24 Wrote:(03-13-2021, 05:15 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Fair enough, Lex. But, it seems to me that if Stanford ran a more structured offense, e.g., and worked to set screens for ZW, not to mention Jones, our perimeter shooting would be much improved. I'm not sure I could cogently describe our offensive structure, other than find Oscar. What would it be next year? Find Jaire? I know there are other productive offenses besides a heavy screen game that might have worked as well. I think the analyst who said several potential lottery picks (including ZW) lost ground because they wound up with crummy offenses was right. He could have been used much more effectively on offense.... and defense too. For that, I fault Haase big time.
What other options did they have with Davis, Wills and Zaire out? They had no one that could beat people off the dribble (with the possible exception of Delaire). They lack three point shooters. DaSilva was their only threat.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. Not particularly enamored with Haase. I do wonder what happened this year. I remember the effort and his tears after Oregon. Then they just tanked.
I thought the tears were after beating UCLA, which was definitely the highlight of the season.
BC
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - Phogge - 03-14-2021
(03-13-2021, 02:06 PM)burger Wrote:Sorry but what is the one word sentence “This” mean? Defies grammar. Don’t get it. Is it a street argot?(03-13-2021, 01:08 PM)CompSci87 Wrote: Not to say MBB can follow the same model, but in WBB Tara tends to get the best admissable players and then modify the system to work with what she has. She's completely changed offensive systems at least three times over her Stanford career.
This. At Stanford, it's dumb to say that "<x> is our system, and we will recruit only guys who fit that system." With our recruiting limitations, we have to settle for what we get. A good coach should adapt the system to work with the players they have. If you don't have a bunch of good 3-point shooters, don't rely on it. Or if you only have one good 3-point shooter *cough cough*, run some freakin' screens to get that guy open.
So I'm not looking for any specific style of play on offense, and Muir shouldn't either when he hires his next coach. He should look for someone who gets the most possible out of their players. I don't think Haase is doing that
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - PVTree - 03-14-2021
This = completely agree
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=This&utm_source=search-action
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - Phogge - 03-14-2021
Thanks! Hate it, however to each her own.
lex24 - lex24 - 03-14-2021
(03-14-2021, 01:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(03-14-2021, 10:23 AM)lex24 Wrote:(03-13-2021, 05:15 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Fair enough, Lex. But, it seems to me that if Stanford ran a more structured offense, e.g., and worked to set screens for ZW, not to mention Jones, our perimeter shooting would be much improved. I'm not sure I could cogently describe our offensive structure, other than find Oscar. What would it be next year? Find Jaire? I know there are other productive offenses besides a heavy screen game that might have worked as well. I think the analyst who said several potential lottery picks (including ZW) lost ground because they wound up with crummy offenses was right. He could have been used much more effectively on offense.... and defense too. For that, I fault Haase big time.
What other options did they have with Davis, Wills and Zaire out? They had no one that could beat people off the dribble (with the possible exception of Delaire). They lack three point shooters. DaSilva was their only threat.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. Not particularly enamored with Haase. I do wonder what happened this year. I remember the effort and his tears after Oregon. Then they just tanked.
I thought the tears were after beating UCLA, which was definitely the highlight of the season.
BC
Ok. UCLA.
triangle2 - triangle2 - 03-14-2021
(03-13-2021, 05:15 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Fair enough, Lex. But, it seems to me that if Stanford ran a more structured offense, e.g., and worked to set screens for ZW, not to mention Jones, our perimeter shooting would be much improved. I'm not sure I could cogently describe our offensive structure, other than find Oscar. What would it be next year? Find Jaire? I know there are other productive offenses besides a heavy screen game that might have worked as well. I think the analyst who said several potential lottery picks (including ZW) lost ground because they wound up with crummy offenses was right. He could have been used much more effectively on offense.... and defense too. For that, I fault Haase big time.
The one time that Stanford was truly successful in the modern era was during the Montgomery era when he implemented a structured screening offense with a lot of high-low passing. I have argued before that a “system” coach is likely to be more successful at Stanford in the longer term because of admissions restrictions. Watching both the Dawkins era and the Haase era, I’m even more convinced that my theory is correct. I think it’s fairly hopeless to think about competing against the programs that can basically admit anyone. Even if you get one out of twenty, the other programs are getting 7 out of 10.
I’d rather sign Lichti and find four large bodies to set screens for him. I mean, that worked out pretty well.
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - Hurlburt88 - 03-15-2021
I am personally torn on whether to give Haase another year or not. But with the season officially over, I'll mark it down as "should've" and next year as "must" (assuming Muir sticks with him . . . )
RE: triangle2 - Goose - 03-15-2021
(03-14-2021, 10:29 PM)triangle2 Wrote: I have argued before that a “system” coach is likely to be more successful at Stanford in the longer term because of admissions restrictions. Watching both the Dawkins era and the Haase era, I’m even more convinced that my theory is correct. I think it’s fairly hopeless to think about competing against the programs that can basically admit anyone. Even if you get one out of twenty, the other programs are getting 7 out of 10.I think your argument supports the idea that a "system coach" is exactly the wrong approach for Stanford. If the one out of twenty you can actually get doesn't fit your system, what do you do? If you don't get the four bigs and a shooter but rather two bigs, a shooter, a defender and a point you can't play the same system and wouldn't want to do so. You can be a "system" coach at Stanford only if you can always find admissible players that fit your system who you can successfully recruit. I think Stanford needs a coach who can adapt to what players he has and can get. Naturally, being a "good" recruiter can help you attract guys who you think can help your team, but if you put many parameters on those guys there will be multiple years where you come up empty IMHO.
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - winflop - 03-15-2021
(03-15-2021, 06:48 AM)Hurlburt88 Wrote: I am personally torn on whether to give Haase another year or not. But with the season officially over, I'll mark it down as "should've" and next year as "must" (assuming Muir sticks with him . . . )
I think that's the most likely outcome, but nonetheless I think he needs to go now. He has lost the locker room, and another year with bad chemistry will only further damage an already-broken program.
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - BobK - 03-15-2021
Neither Davis nor Williams will be on the team next year
RE: MBB: It's time for Haase to go - winflop - 03-15-2021
Someone needs to explain to me why Haase would have a substantial buyout. I assume at some point his contract was extended but I have to wonder what did he do to earn any kind of contract extension?
Head-spinner that once again leaves me questioning Muir's financial management.