03-15-2021, 08:09 AM
(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.