The Wes Miller Thread

[Gypo O'Leary]

Half of the teams in the B12 (8 of 16) finished the regular season at .500 or better and all are projected to be in the tourney. I'd be thrilled with that as progress. The Cats finished 7-13, 6 games under .500. That's not even close to the mark and happened because they are so wildly inconsistent under Miller.

Miller has been here 4 years and the talent he has are guys he recruited and most of who were highly rated before coming here. My take is that he doesn't develop what he has and indeed needs more self motivated guys because he can't provide it. In the B12 I feel they really need more size and strength in the post since what he brought in hasn't developed. I also feel his overall scheme, especially on offense, is garbage regardless of who the players are.

I know he has another year and I hope he proves me wrong and finally gets his team to that .500 mark in league and in the tourney. I feel Cats' fans have been very patient with the guy and only improved results matter.

ya...Lukosius and Badaogo were both brought in before the move to the Big 12. In the AAC they would have been fine. So...exactly my point - 2 of the starting 5 are not Big 12 quality. And yet we blew a road game against Kansas St. by a bucket. a home game against them we could have won. a road game against Utah by a bucket. and 1 bucket loss home to WV. So really...we are five buckets from flipping those games and being over .500 in the Big 12 despite starting 2 seniors that are not Big 12 Quality. And I'm back to my point. Mckinley/Griffith/Page/Betsey ...add them to this roster as contributors and you are adding three big men and a wing. So...I see next year as the year Wes needs to produce, and I see the recruits as all guys brought in for the Big 12.

[BorisTheCat]

My question/fear is whether CWM is capable of doing HONEST self-assessment and analysis of EVERYTHING in his control. As I see it, here are some points:
1) Roster construction - Is how he builds a roster compatible with the Big 12 ?
2) Offense approach - Is that approach workable in the Big 12 ?


Seems to me he has constructed a roster full of wing-type players which combined with his offensive approach results in a very perimeter oriented approach with poor shooting 3 pt players.
That's problematic. The run so much offense parallel to the 3-pt line and with no inside scoring threat there is not inside-out game possible. Thus far, I've not seen CWM admit that fundamental
changes are necessary... we are beyond needing only tweaks.

[leeraymond]

Half of the teams in the B12 (8 of 16) finished the regular season at .500 or better and all are projected to be in the tourney. I'd be thrilled with that as progress. The Cats finished 7-13, 6 games under .500. That's not even close to the mark and happened because they are so wildly inconsistent under Miller.

Miller has been here 4 years and the talent he has are guys he recruited and most of who were highly rated before coming here. My take is that he doesn't develop what he has and indeed needs more self motivated guys because he can't provide it. In the B12 I feel they really need more size and strength in the post since what he brought in hasn't developed. I also feel his overall scheme, especially on offense, is garbage regardless of who the players are.

I know he has another year and I hope he proves me wrong and finally gets his team to that .500 mark in league and in the tourney. I feel Cats' fans have been very patient with the guy and only improved results matter.

Gmann, I think you hit on a very good point here concerning Miller bringing in guys that are self-motivated. I once heard John Calipari say that, "he does not have the time to teach motivation when he is trying to teach the fundamentals of basketball" or something like that. Calipari went on to say that he does not recruit guys that are not self-motivated.

I think that understanding where a player is on the motivation scale is of key importance. Some players are always ready, from the neck up, for the next game. Those will probably be the team's most competitive players. Other players, like Page perhaps, need all types of motivation, hand-holding, and confirmation that they can perform at high levels.

I could also imagine that motivating players over the course of a season takes its toll on a coach. That is why coaches may prefer older more experienced players. Fast story. When I was a sophomore in high school, my baseball team was dominated by seniors. We also had a brand new coach that was a football coach and had never coached basball before. That team went to the City Championship without really having a coach. The players were self-motivated and that made all the difference in the world.

[sedz]

So that means that UC is actually 3 games under .500, not 6. Remember 10-10 is .500.

This is where the semantics comes in. 7-13 is indeed 6 games "under .500". We would have to win our next 6 games to get to .500 (now impossible because the season is over). But we finished 3 games "behind" a 10-10 team.

[leeraymond]

Yes, 6 games under .500 but only 3 games behind 10-10. Just need to flip 3 losses to wins.

So that means that UC is actually 3 games under .500, not 6. Remember 10-10 is .500.

[sedz]

I hope that is just tongue in cheek.

It's math (and a bit of semantics).

[leo from jersey]

Yes, 6 games under .500 but only 3 games behind 10-10. Just need to flip 3 losses to wins.

I hope that is just tongue in cheek.

[sedz]

Half of the teams in the B12 (8 of 16) finished the regular season at .500 or better and all are projected to be in the tourney. I'd be thrilled with that as progress. The Cats finished 7-13, 6 games under .500. That's not even close to the mark and happened because they are so wildly inconsistent under Miller.

Yes, 6 games under .500 but only 3 games behind 10-10. Just need to flip 3 losses to wins.

[Gmann]

well if you are not in the top 5 in the Big 12...you are just playing .500 ball pretty much. Kansas was 1 game over. West Va. was 10-10 in the league. So Cincinnati is not really far off the mark. They definitely lost a couple of games that they could have (and should have won). And that is my point....they did it with 2 players that in my opinion do not have the talent to play in the Big 12. (Aziz/Lukosius). One guy stands under the basket hoping for a missed shot that he can get a dunk off of, the other is 6'8" and can't jump and is so slow he can't get open. I watched teams put 6'3" guards on him and I never saw him back anyone into the paint and take them. So I'm not accepting any lower standard, I'm pointing out that the talent on paper that they come back with looks good if one or two of these big guys has any talent.

Half of the teams in the B12 (8 of 16) finished the regular season at .500 or better and all are projected to be in the tourney. I'd be thrilled with that as progress. The Cats finished 7-13, 6 games under .500. That's not even close to the mark and happened because they are so wildly inconsistent under Miller.

Miller has been here 4 years and the talent he has are guys he recruited and most of who were highly rated before coming here. My take is that he doesn't develop what he has and indeed needs more self motivated guys because he can't provide it. In the B12 I feel they really need more size and strength in the post since what he brought in hasn't developed. I also feel his overall scheme, especially on offense, is garbage regardless of who the players are.

I know he has another year and I hope he proves me wrong and finally gets his team to that .500 mark in league and in the tourney. I feel Cats' fans have been very patient with the guy and only improved results matter.

[Gypo O'Leary]

Four years in and a different set of excuses every year. Miller will get you in the conversation but always fades down the stretch. I agree next year is the last chance and my bet is that it will be more of the same. I saw Louisville and WVA each hire new coaches and turn over their rosters and both are on target to make the dance this year. With WVA they lost their best player early on for the entire season. We as fans have been conditioned to lower the standard for what is acceptable and that's a shame.

well if you are not in the top 5 in the Big 12...you are just playing .500 ball pretty much. Kansas was 1 game over. West Va. was 10-10 in the league. So Cincinnati is not really far off the mark. They definitely lost a couple of games that they could have (and should have won). And that is my point....they did it with 2 players that in my opinion do not have the talent to play in the Big 12. (Aziz/Lukosius). One guy stands under the basket hoping for a missed shot that he can get a dunk off of, the other is 6'8" and can't jump and is so slow he can't get open. I watched teams put 6'3" guards on him and I never saw him back anyone into the paint and take them. So I'm not accepting any lower standard, I'm pointing out that the talent on paper that they come back with looks good if one or two of these big guys has any talent.

[leeraymond]

Miller should be able to recruit based on the fact that he has a contract that extends beyond next season. If he is let go after next season, UC will have to accept that any recruits will potentially not come. Next year will be crucial either way.

Yes, that is true. However, although Miller's contract extends beyond next year, that does not mean that Miller will be back after next season. I think that as a coach, there is a need to be very honest with your players a let them know what the situation is. Let the players decide if they want to become part of the program after they are aware of the coach's occupational situation.

Given Miller's occupational situation, I am not sure if he will attract any players with two or more years of eligibility remaining in the portal. You never know, he just may be able to attract exactly what he needs to win games.

[leo from jersey]

The way it works in academia is the AD makes a recommendation as to whom will be a good fit for a coaching opening. He then sends that recommendation up the latter where the AD's choice is either approved or not. What I am saying is, Cunningham does not make hiring decisions without approval from the administrators that control the money purse.

of course his choice carries weight and often it is rubber stamped.

[leeraymond]

We are all very critical of Wes and rightfully so... but he is who he is and he has probably reached his top potential. That doesn't make him a bad person. The next level up is where the blame possibly lies. With the AD. He has got be feeling the heat for his job.He hired 2 unproven coaches and gave them ridiculous contracts. And now refuses to discuss or offer any explanations. He is likely scrambling right now and hitting his contacts .Looking for his next job.Lets go up another level. How did the Board and Dr Pinto let this happen? Is there no oversight !? Maybe they were so damn fixated on getting into a major conference that minor details like hiring competent coaches and winning games became less important.

The way it works in academia is the AD makes a recommendation as to whom will be a good fit for a coaching opening. He then sends that recommendation up the latter where the AD's choice is either approved or not. What I am saying is, Cunningham does not make hiring decisions without approval from the administrators that control the money purse.

[longtimefan]

I think this is probably a non starter. Donors would never buy this move because of the Xavier ties and other issues and I doubt Mack would take the position even if it was offered. Neither of us actually like each other.

Not in a million years.

[Lobot]

Wes is toast. He doesn’t have it to lead this program. Going to poke the bear, but Chris Mack might be a coach to consider, I’m just saying, he has delivered at a big time program and is now rebuilding his image, same as Hugs

I think this is probably a non starter. Donors would never buy this move because of the Xavier ties and other issues and I doubt Mack would take the position even if it was offered. Neither of us actually like each other.