Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Unsung Hero - Sean Kearney

Goose

Goose

Hoops Moderator
Club Member
Junta Member
I'm really starting to think that the best thing that Tad did this past off-season was bring in Kearney to be an assistant coach when Coach Abatamarco left. It didn't get a lot of attention when it happened, so if you missed out the first time, here are the CliffNotes on Kearney:

* Former head coach at Holy Cross. Fired after one season due to both bad luck and the fact that he took a slow plodding team and tried to mold them into an up-tempo squad.
* Former assistant at Notre Dame, Providence and Delaware - coaching under Mike Brey and Rick Pitino.
* Head of recruiting at Notre Dame and was their big man coach as well.

This gives Tad's staff some checks and balances. I love Rohn & Pri (especially Pri, I'm absolutely flabbergasted he hasn't gotten a head coaching job somewhere yet), but they don't necessarily have the gravitas to call Tad out for a decision during a game. Kearney does. And we've already seen the benefits. In the Kansas game, Tad switched to the 2-3 zone for a bit - something he absolutely detests - and that was a large factor in us winning that game. Not only that, but if you watch the bench during games, you can catch Kearney leading the charges at times. I re-watched the Utah game last night (because seriously, **** that Super Bowl) and at one point late in the game, Jelly was shooting two free throws. He made the first and they cut to the bench. You could see Kearney tell Tad to call time out - something he did immediately. And Tad let Kearney address the team.

Not only that, but I do know that Kearney is an analytics guy who is trying to use the numbers to his advantage (and that has to be music to JG's ears). Remember, Tad isn't exactly a guy who trusts advanced stats:

Tad Boyle, Colorado. "I just met with the San Antonio Spurs' analytics guy. I'm not in the analytics arena," Boyle said. "I'm not going to go overboard, but I will have new information to share with our players and the team. I will probably use it to analyze our own strengths and weaknesses and then use it for opponent scouting. It took me two years to start texting when it came out. I'm a little slow."
Click to expand...

Add it all together, and I'm thrilled we got Kearney this year. When Rohn or Pri (or both) leave for HC jobs this year, he'll slide over to their spot on the bench. Add in Rodney, and we have a solid core of assistants to help Tad out for the long term.
 
Wonderful post. Thank you.

You'd think a former stock trader like Tad would be more into advanced metrics. Guess that's why he left that gig.
 
Lot of basketball media guys thought Kearney was a home run hire for CU, and would pay dividends down the road
 
Also shows a lot about Tad that he is willing to hire a guy to call him out instead of being a yes man. Says a lot about them both.

If we get into the touney again this year, and especially if we can advance instead of going one and out we are likely to see increased interest in our staff for other jobs.
 
MtnBuff said:
Also shows a lot about Tad that he is willing to hire a guy to call him out instead of being a yes man. Says a lot about them both.

If we get into the touney again this year, and especially if we can advance instead of going one and out we are likely to see increased interest in our staff for other jobs.
Click to expand...

^^^This^^^

Now if we could get him to teach Tad about the 2 for 1 and fouling when up 3....
 
jgisland said:
^^^This^^^

Now if we could get him to teach Tad about the 2 for 1 and fouling when up 3....
Click to expand...

To Foul or Not To Foul When Up 3? - Ken Pomeroy

The fact is, chances of losing are close to remote in either case, but execution errors, an inflated offensive rebounding percentage, poor three-point shooting, and the chance of an extra possession are enough to counteract what might otherwise be the advantage of forcing a team to shoot free throws. In cases where the opponent has multiple good three-point shooters and you have confidence in rebounding a missed free throw, fouling may be the better option. But it appears the default decision should be to not foul.

One final note here. Some people might say there’s a definitive conclusion in this. After all, there are over 800 cases. But because there are so few cases of failure, that’s a misrepresentation of the sample size. The fact is, we could use an additional 5-10 years of data before making a definitive statement. Even then, tweaks in the methodology can get you closer to one answer or the other.

However, I think that says something about how difficult it is to determine the proper strategy. To me, the only conclusion one can make is that the criticism of coaches that choose to defend appears to be misplaced. A small percentage of the time you’ll get burned no matter what you choose to do. We will continue to see teams make game-tying threes near the end of games more often than they get fouled simply because more coaches choose this strategy. In the long run, it’s difficult to prove it's a bad idea.
 
From tads comments post game, I dont think fouling when up 3 is going to happen often (My guess is it could be green lighted when a very poor <50% FT shooter has the rock).
That being said, he's done that 2 times, and we've gotten burned both times this year (@wazzu, Vs Utah)

Does he do this because he thinks burning down the clock is a better option than giving them 2 points?
I understand that if we gave them 2 FTs when they were down 3 and made both, they could get a steal or a TO right away and end up winning. By forcing them to shoot a 3, they'll take a lower % shot and burn more time off the clock, and best case scenario they tie up the game.
 
wyobuff said:
From tads comments post game, I dont think fouling when up 3 is going to happen often (My guess is it could be green lighted when a very poor <50% FT shooter has the rock).
That being said, he's done that 2 times, and we've gotten burned both times this year (@wazzu, Vs Utah)

Does he do this because he thinks burning down the clock is a better option than giving them 2 points?
I understand that if we gave them 2 FTs when they were down 3 and made both, they could get a steal or a TO right away and end up winning. By forcing them to shoot a 3, they'll take a lower % shot and burn more time off the clock, and best case scenario they tie up the game.
Click to expand...

Either way, you're going to win 92+% of the time.

The other way fouling can lose is if the team makes the first FT and then O-Rebs the 2nd to follow with a put-back for 2 or 3 (or another foul line trip).

Worst case if you play defense is that it goes to OT. It takes an outright regulation loss out of the equation. And CU did go on to win both the games you mentioned.

In the end, it's a coin flip decision. What makes Tad come down on the "defend" side is the mentality it engenders in the team. The onus is on his team getting a stop instead of it playing ticky tack "not to lose" basketball.
 
I don't think we'll see Tad foul either, he said it on the radio post game and said it before, "it's not his style" - but there have been a few more studies done since KenPom's that suggest that your odds are better fouling.

If you're bored and want to read and look at decision tree probabilities read this.

In a nut shell - this study says you go to OT 1 out 5 times not fouling and 1 out 20 times fouling.
 
jgisland said:
I don't think we'll see Tad foul either, he said it on the radio post game and said it before, "it's not his style" - but there have been a few more studies done since KenPom's that suggest that your odds are better fouling.

If you're bored and want to read and look at decision tree probabilities read this.

In a nut shell - this study says you go to OT 1 out 5 times not fouling and 1 out 20 times fouling.
Click to expand...

It's so close on what to do (OT doesn't mean losing), that the team mentality is what drives his decision.

Bottom line is that when it's time to get a stop, Tad wants his team to get a stop. Whether that means CU is up 3, 2 or 1, tied, or down 3, 2 or 1 in the end-of-game scenario. He's not going to differ for that one "up 3" scenario.
 
MtnBuff said:
Also shows a lot about Tad that he is willing to hire a guy to call him out instead of being a yes man. Says a lot about them both.
Click to expand...

That's also part of the reason he wanted to hire Nate Tomlinson for the same position. Him and Nate clashed so much that Tad respected him and his approach.
 
Goose said:
Oh God, I'll donate an extra $100 to the program to help this happen just to make Snow's head explode.
Click to expand...
My head exploding is only worth $100? Pretty sure we could raise a solid sum from the political board if you want to funnel money into the program :lol:
 
Darth Snow said:
My head exploding is only worth $100? Pretty sure we could raise a solid sum from the political board if you want to funnel money into the program :lol:
Click to expand...

I don't hate you as much as they do, hence only $100 from me.

Political board might raise enough to get the $150 mil necessary for the Dal Ward upgrades raised.
 
I feel like there is a good sex joke in this thread but I can't get a good grip on it. Can anyone lend a hand?
 
jgisland said:
I don't think we'll see Tad foul either, he said it on the radio post game and said it before, "it's not his style" - but there have been a few more studies done since KenPom's that suggest that your odds are better fouling.

If you're bored and want to read and look at decision tree probabilities read this.

In a nut shell - this study says you go to OT 1 out 5 times not fouling and 1 out 20 times fouling.
Click to expand...

Anyone who watched the Syracuse v Duke game saw Syracuse foul in almost the EXACT situation that we were in. Hmmm. If it's good enough for Boeheim...
 
GoonieBuff said:
Anyone who watched the Syracuse v Duke game saw Syracuse foul in almost the EXACT situation that we were in. Hmmm. If it's good enough for Boeheim...
Click to expand...

Should Tad also switch exclusively to zone defense? :wink2:
 
Buffnik said:
Should Tad also switch exclusively to zone defense? :wink2:
Click to expand...

Ha. That has to be a huge focus for your team if you're going to do it anywhere near as well as cuse. I do think it's cool that even though Tad's a man to man or bust guy, he still sees the value in an occasional zone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top