So if you were a coach with over 40 draft picks, a plethora of resources and support, and now at the Mecca of basketball, you wouldn’t consider one title disappointing? As a competitor, the pain of a loss sticks with me more than the joy of a win. If I were a coach and I looked back on my career with the resume Cal has, I’d be thinking about a lot of what if’s...
I don't know.
What is this coach's emotional maturity and level of education in statistics?
If it's grade school up to average middle schooler, I'm throwing a temper tantrum, because I have no sense of historical perspective nor can my mind even begin to wrap itself around the world of possibilities represented by the NCAA tournament in contrast with other methods of selecting a champion (such as seven game series).
If it's high school up to early college level, I'm still a little emotional over the exits, but I realize that logically, everything seems to be going pretty well.
If I'm someone with a real scientific adult level of statistical understanding, I'm thanking the lord every day for the tremendously improbable amount of success that I have. I recognize the childish nonsense underlying the panicky thoughts of those who now want to hire Wright after crushing him for never being able to make the final four just weeks ago.
But even the middle schooler would have no excuse in trying to rope in the first half of Cal's head coaching career with the second half. I already pointed out that it was a cheap and silly trick, yet you continue to use it against him, which demonstrates that you're purposely trying to angle.
Simply put, if you claim that Cal's years at UMass, one of the most impressive mid-major runs in history, form part of the case against him (or for that matter the first 3/4 of his career at Memphis), you're either a genuine drooling imbecile or a crotchety hater who can never be brought around on him. So which is it?
Also, there is a very simple, logical reason why sheer number of draft picks (or number of five stars, which is the pervert Zipp's version of your argument) is a sub-optimal proxy for roster quality at any point in time. If you can't work it out on your own, I'd be happy to discuss it, but first you have to address the nonsense about the first half of Cal's career. I need to know that you understand the fatal flaw in that argument.