Let’s talk timing of a new hire

Are there any up and coming NBA assistant coaches we coaches we could get?

IMO a coach wont matter unless we raise more money for NIL. Hopefully in 3-4 years we will be in SEC or B1G.

CarolinaBlue said:

The timing of this hire is going to be interesting to see play out. Right now, almost all possible candidates are actively working (ie. their season isn’t over). So, how late is too late for UNC? How willing are you to wait for the best hire? Are you willing to sacrifice next year to wait longer for the best hire? Here is an extended list of names we have seen mentioned here and when they might be available: Available now: -Mark Few -Mark Byington -Josh Schertz -Jay Wright Might be available tomorrow: -Dan Hurley -Todd Golden -Tommy Lloyd -Nate Oats -Ryan Odom -TJO Not available until at least next weekend -Fred Hoiberg -Dusty May Not available until at least mid-April -Billy Donovan -Brad Stevens

Back channel all of them. The one concern of course is they play us for a raise in their current position. Then we miss on others. Has to be speedy if we can make it speedy.

Roydean1980 said:

IMO a coach wont matter unless we raise more money for NIL. Hopefully in 3-4 years we will be in SEC or B1G.

We had a 14 million $ nil roster one of the biggest in country it’s not about money it’s about who we’re spending the money on

tarheeltyler9 said:

We had a 14 million $ nil roster one of the biggest in country it’s not about money it’s about who we’re spending the money on

We missed on Evans. If we had a PG and a SG instead of Trimble starting we’re not having this convo. Trimble is a 6th man that provides defense and energy.

tarheeltyler9 said:

We had a 14 million $ nil roster one of the biggest in country it’s not about money it’s about who we’re spending the money on

Agree but how much did we have to pay Caleb and Henri? 2/3 of the budget? 1/3?

I'm also genuinely curious why football coaches are poachable before their seasons end (including CFP seasons like Lane and Sumrall) and why basketball coaches aren't.

Roydean1980 said:

Agree but how much did we have to pay Caleb and Henri? 2/3 of the budget? 1/3?

I can tell you right now that they probably weren’t paid enough relative to the rest of the roster. Everyone else should be sending them checks.

Brad Stevens has a front office job. He could leave mid season and not cause much disruption, especially since the NBA trade deadline has passed.

Roydean1980 said:

Agree but how much did we have to pay Caleb and Henri? 2/3 of the budget? 1/3?

Well Kyan and Luka got 2 million a piece so id say Caleb and Henri were underpaid

You likely publicly interview Byington/Schertz this week. If the Stevens thing is real, him as well. Obviously you hire Stevens right away if the fit is there, and if not you let Byington/Schertz know you're going through the process with coaches still in the tournament. Those two would wait another week or two for a decision.

Hoiberg would be unbelievably awful.

OakCityHeel said:

I'm also genuinely curious why football coaches are poachable before their seasons end (including CFP seasons like Lane and Sumrall) and why basketball coaches aren't.

Because you can win it all in the NCAA tournament, you can’t in the independence bowl in Missouri

UNCBornandBred said:

Hoiberg would be unbelievably awful.

Why?

Roydean1980 said:

We missed on Evans. If we had a PG and a SG instead of Trimble starting we’re not having this convo. Trimble is a 6th man that provides defense and energy.

I don't see it that way exactly. Close, but not exactly. I'd say we 'missed' on our true primary PG targets; true PGs with the capability of running the team as a PG. Just flat missed on them. Then I think the staff pivoted because they didn't want to end up with a true roster construction issue, both in terms of recruiting and in terms of 'team vision' and went with a less 'PG centric' approach to rely more on team and ball movement, passing, etc, for offensive creation and a player at the PG maybe 'good enough' to provide necessary ball handling ability along with more shooting ability. That didn't work very well either, but not because they expected Evans to be a great PG or even primarily function as a 'team running' PG. But I think their original vision was a very good, experienced P4 level PG capable of 'running the team' in the traditional way, and they just flat missed there. That was the real 'miss'; not Evans as a compromise but landing a true PG capable of being what Evans really never could be. I think the real issue with this team as it was constructed wasn't the PG because we were actually ok in scoring, creating assist, and assists per game. It was the complete miss in another aspect of the approach, Bogavac being able to provide consistent scoring, perimeter shooting, and secondary shot creation. Between Evans at first and Dixson later I think we were 'good enough' at that position under the new scheme, and IMO Trimble, Veesaar, and Wilson all gave us everything we needed from them. But at that last critical 'completion piece' of a team-centric, not PG centric, offensive approach we essentially got nothing meaningful on a consistent basis. So I'd say the true 'miss' #1 was not landing a high-level traditional PG capable of 'running' an elite team on his own. IMO miss #2 wasn't Evans not developing into a high-level PG equivalent to that because IMO that was never realistic outcome or expectation in scenario #2. The real miss IMO was not filling out that 3 position with someone that could add consistent perimeter shooting to complement the inside ability of Wilson and Veesaar and compensate for the relative lack of perimeter shooting from Trimble. That piece, and some secondary ball-handling, were going to be critical to complete this team under the team-centric approach and it just didn't get there. Where Evans was a miss in the team as fielded isn't so much that he didn't develop into a 'top flight' PG, which was unrealistic to expect, it's that he didn't even provide 'his' share of the perimeter shooting that was going to be required as his contribution to a wholistic team offense approach. So IMO, yes, Evans was a 'miss', but not as a PG, but simply as a basketball player. I think the staff did a pretty good job of obviating miss #1 with their scheme (it was still a miss), but for the pivot to work we needed Evans and Bogavac to supply the missing pieces our interior players with Trimble as a starting guard and lack of a 'true' PG required, and they didn't really deliver. So yes, Evans was a miss, but not as a top-flight PG which I don't think he was recruited or expected to be, but as an effective perimeter basketball player, which I think he was recruited for and expected to be. It came very close to working and as a whole this team was pretty good, but to be very good at least one of those two had to 'meet' expectations, and to be very, very good, both had to meet expectations. And neither did. To me, that was the real story of this season with the team as it actually was. Neither of those guys was able to fill the roles that I think it was reasonable to expect based on what they had done previously.

blue2013 said:

Because you can win it all in the NCAA tournament, you can’t in the independence bowl in Missouri

You can win it all in the College Football Playoff and 2 of the 12 teams that made it had coaches who had already accepted jobs elsewhere before it even started.

tarhellraiser said:

Are there any up and coming NBA assistant coaches we coaches we could get?

No. We need a proven HC.

Ben Washburn said:

I don't see it that way exactly. Close, but not exactly. I'd say we 'missed' on our true primary PG targets; true PGs with the capability of running the team as a PG. Just flat missed on them. Then I think the staff pivoted because they didn't want to end up with a true roster construction issue, both in terms of recruiting and in terms of 'team vision' and went with a less 'PG centric' approach to rely more on team and ball movement, passing, etc, for offensive creation and a player at the PG maybe 'good enough' to provide necessary ball handling ability along with more shooting ability. That didn't work very well either, but not because they expected Evans to be a great PG or even primarily function as a 'team running' PG. But I think their original vision was a very good, experienced P4 level PG capable of 'running the team' in the traditional way, and they just flat missed there. That was the real 'miss'; not Evans as a compromise but landing a true PG capable of being what Evans really never could be. I think the real issue with this team as it was constructed wasn't the PG because we were actually ok in scoring, creating assist, and assists per game. It was the complete miss in another aspect of the approach, Bogavac being able to provide consistent scoring, perimeter shooting, and secondary shot creation. Between Evans at first and Dixson later I think we were 'good enough' at that position under the new scheme, and IMO Trimble, Veesaar, and Wilson all gave us everything we needed from them. But at that last critical 'completion piece' of a team-centric, not PG centric, offensive approach we essentially got nothing meaningful on a consistent basis. So I'd say the true 'miss' #1 was not landing a high-level traditional PG capable of 'running' an elite team on his own. IMO miss #2 wasn't Evans not developing into a high-level PG equivalent to that because IMO that was never realistic outcome or expectation in scenario #2. The real miss IMO was not filling out that 3 position with someone that could add consistent perimeter shooting to complement the inside ability of Wilson and Veesaar and compensate for the relative lack of perimeter shooting from Trimble. That piece, and some secondary ball-handling, were going to be critical to complete this team under the team-centric approach and it just didn't get there. Where Evans was a miss in the team as fielded isn't so much that he didn't develop into a 'top flight' PG, which was unrealistic to expect, it's that he didn't even provide 'his' share of the perimeter shooting that was going to be required as his contribution to a wholistic team offense approach. So IMO, yes, Evans was a 'miss', but not as a PG, but simply as a basketball player. I think the staff did a pretty good job of obviating miss #1 with their scheme (it was still a miss), but for the pivot to work we needed Evans and Bogavac to supply the missing pieces our interior players with Trimble as a starting guard and lack of a 'true' PG required, and they didn't really deliver. So yes, Evans was a miss, but not as a top-flight PG which I don't think he was recruited or expected to be, but as an effective perimeter basketball player, which I think he was recruited for and expected to be. It came very close to working and as a whole this team was pretty good, but to be very good at least one of those two had to 'meet' expectations, and to be very, very good, both had to meet expectations. And neither did. To me, that was the real story of this season with the team as it actually was. Neither of those guys was able to fill the roles that I think it was reasonable to expect based on what they had done previously.

Smart post. Evans has been discussed at length. But the gap between expectations of Luka and what he provided was also significant. His scoring was decent if inconsistent. But his inability to create and his poor defense means Luka really was a miss. I’d argue the three position this year - Luka, Powell, and Stevenson for a bit - was on the whole a much bigger miss than Evans/pg.

tarheeltyler9 said:

Well Kyan and Luka got 2 million a piece so id say Caleb and Henri were underpaid

I thought Evans and Luka were closer to $1M each. Either way, it was blatant highway robbery.

I understand the urgency of getting a coach soon however imo, getting the right coach is more important even if it takes a while. We need to get this right not right now.

OldTownRunner said:

Smart post. Evans has been discussed at length. But the gap between expectations of Luka and what he provided was also significant. His scoring was decent if inconsistent. But his inability to create and his poor defense means Luka really was a miss. I’d argue the three position this year - Luka, Powell, and Stevenson for a bit - was on the whole a much bigger miss than Evans/pg.

The reality is since Berry/White we haven’t had a pg perform at the level needed to be top 10 consistently in college ball. Love and Davis did it occasionally but were so streaky you never knew what we were getting game to game. Cadeau was Larry Drew level of head case but schockingly hasn’t produced as consistently as Drew did. Folks forget Drew averaged almost 8 anpg and shot close to 44% from 3 after he left UNC.

Yeah we can’t worry about a single recruiting or portal class. Have to find the right guy.

UNCBornandBred said:

Hoiberg would be unbelievably awful.

I am impressed by how hard they play but not sure how he would do at Carolina.

frodaddy said:

Why?

Because he doesn't win when it matters