OK, I confess. The only reason I'm putting these tables in a fanpost is because I can't figure out how to put them in a comment and keep them nice and tabular. Tables in a comment - no. Tables in a fanpost - yes. So here they are.
One suggestion for the retention of the guy currently in charge is that he "significantly improved Tony Parker." This chart shows that Parker was significantly improved in some games, but had covered head to toe in major suckage in other games. If you want to credit the guy currently in charge for the good games, then it follows that you have to let him accept the blame for the bad games. Anyway, the chart shows Parker's numbers, and those numbers speak pretty loudly on each end of the scale.
Opponent |
Minutes |
Points |
Rebounds |
Fouls |
Azusa Pacific (W) |
23 |
16 |
10 |
1 |
Montana State (W) |
22 |
11 |
6 |
4 |
Coastal Carolina (W) |
26 |
11 |
11 |
3 |
Nichols State (W) |
24 |
20 |
7 |
2 |
Long Beach State (W) |
24 |
10 |
5 |
4 |
Oklahoma (L) |
22 |
9 |
8 |
4 |
North Carolina (L) |
26 |
9 |
6 |
2 |
UAB (W) |
17 |
8 |
8 |
5 |
Cal State Fullerton (W) |
23 |
12 |
9 |
4 |
San Diego (W) |
25 |
8 |
5 |
3 |
UC Riverside (W) |
32 |
16 |
16 |
4 |
Gonzaga (L) |
25 |
5 |
9 |
4 |
Kentucky (L) |
25 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
Alabama (L) |
29 |
10 |
4 |
3 |
Colorado (L) |
22 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
Utah (L) |
18 |
12 |
3 |
5 |
Stanford (2 OT - W) |
42 |
22 |
12 |
2 |
Cal (W) |
26 |
13 |
8 |
4 |
$c (W) |
21 |
14 |
7 |
4 |
Oregon State (L) |
Did not play |
|||
Oregon (L) |
Did not play |
|||
Utah (W) |
25 |
4 |
6 |
2 |
Colorado (W) |
15 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
Stanford (W) |
27 |
8 |
8 |
5 |
Cal (L) |
30 |
20 |
7 |
3 |
Oregon State (W) |
27 |
15 |
10 |
4 |
Oregon (W) |
26 |
9 |
7 |
4 |
Arizona State (L) |
20 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
Arizona (L) |
16 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
Washington (W) |
23 |
20 |
5 |
3 |
Washington State (W) |
26 |
15 |
10 |
4 |
$c (W) |
32 |
22 |
7 |
3 |
$c (W) |
26 |
14 |
2 |
3 |
Arizona (L) |
21 |
15 |
4 |
4 |
SMU (W) |
18 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
UAB (W) |
30 |
28 |
12 |
2 |
Gonzaga (L) |
27 |
16 |
11 |
3 |
The other chart is related to player development. Another argument for keeping the guy currently in charge is that he had a thin bench. Laying aside the fact that the thinness or thickness of the bench is entirely the responsibility of the guy currently in charge, it remains a fact that the guy in charge of the basketball team is responsible for developing the 6th, 7th and 8th players. That is tough when one player is going to get disproportionately more minutes solely because of his ancestry. There just aren't enough minutes to give the 6th, 7th and 8th guys enough time, and that leads to your bench being outscored in all but two games, and being outscored by 11.5 points a game.
Opponent |
Bench production |
Azusa Pacific (W) |
14-19 |
Montana State (W) |
24-26 |
Coastal Carolina (W) |
10-26 |
Nichols State (W) |
15-29 |
Long Beach State (W) |
4-19 |
Oklahoma (L) |
5-16 |
North Carolina (L) |
11-28 |
UAB (W) |
15-40 |
Cal State Fullerton (W) |
7-14 |
San Diego (W) |
5-26 |
UC Riverside (W) |
2-12 |
Gonzaga (L) |
2-15 |
Kentucky (L) |
4-39 |
Alabama (L) |
2-10 |
Colorado (L) |
2-7 |
Utah (L) |
9-28 |
Stanford (2 OT - W) |
0-16 |
Cal (W) |
7-13 |
$c (W) |
11-24 |
Oregon State (L) |
6-6 |
Oregon (L) |
5-29 |
Utah (W) |
10-18 |
Colorado (W) |
11-14 |
Stanford (W) |
0-4 |
Cal (L) |
2-17 |
Oregon State (W) |
8-12 |
Oregon (W) |
9-3 |
Arizona State (L) |
7-10 |
Arizona (L) |
0-27 |
Washington (W) |
12-19 |
Washington State (W) |
15-6 |
$c (W) |
2-26 |
$c (W) |
20-22 |
Arizona (L) |
7-8 |
SMU (W) |
2-17 |
UAB (W) |
4-27 |
Gonzaga (L) |
2-18 |