02-11-2014, 09:31 PM
You would have to compare it to the entire universe of coaches, not just the ones who are household names (in part because they've been especially successful). For what it's worth Duke has outperformed expectations; simulations would show a median number of wins of 72, while Mike Krzyzewski has actually won 86 tournament games (this is almost statistically significant; the probability of seeing 86 or more wins is about 5.5%). Most impressively, he has won 8 national championships; in 10,000 simulations, that only happened 7 times. But there is a reason that Mike Krzyzewski is a hall of fame coach.
By the way, to give you an idea of a comparable coach to Monty, look at Mark Few of Gonzaga. Based on his championship seeding, he would have expected to get about 17.4 wins; he actually got 15. He never made it to the elite eight, though teams with comparable profiles would be expected to make the elite eight 96% of the time and the final four 72% of the time. Twice he's been a 1 or 2 seed, and neither time did he get out of the second round (OTOH, he also made it to the sweet sixteen as a 10 and 12 seed, as well as when he was a 3 and a 4 seed). Like Monty, he exceeded his seed a couple times, and fell flat a couple times, but on the balance his teams have nominally underperformed their seeding.
BC
By the way, to give you an idea of a comparable coach to Monty, look at Mark Few of Gonzaga. Based on his championship seeding, he would have expected to get about 17.4 wins; he actually got 15. He never made it to the elite eight, though teams with comparable profiles would be expected to make the elite eight 96% of the time and the final four 72% of the time. Twice he's been a 1 or 2 seed, and neither time did he get out of the second round (OTOH, he also made it to the sweet sixteen as a 10 and 12 seed, as well as when he was a 3 and a 4 seed). Like Monty, he exceeded his seed a couple times, and fell flat a couple times, but on the balance his teams have nominally underperformed their seeding.
BC
