Finishing Strong

General NCS Basketball57

Among the many things that I see on NC State message boards after ugly “preseason” losses are statements like:

– State often lays a few eggs early in the year.
– State starts slow but always finishes the year strong.

So I decided to see if these statements are grounded in reality or wishful thinking:

BAD LOSSES
There are at least two ways to define a bad loss. For my purposes here, I have listed the losses to bad teams (the definition that I prefer) and also included those games where the final deficit was 10+ points.

style=’width:354.2pt;margin-left:5.4pt;border-collapse:collapse;mso-padding-alt:
0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt’>

Losses to Teams Ranked in RPI 50+

2002

Sat
Dec 1

(107)
UMass
69, North Carolina St.
62

Wed
Feb 20

(82)
Georgia Tech 65, North Carolina
St. 59

2003

Thu
Jan 2

(209)
UMass
68, North Carolina St.
56

Sat
Jan 11

(76)
Georgia Tech 85, North Carolina
St. 61

Sun
Feb 9

(80)
Virginia
61, North Carolina St.
58

Sat
Feb 15

(88)
Temple 76,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St.
54

2004

Tue
Dec 2

(55)
Michigan
68, North Carolina St.
61

Wed
Feb 18

(90)
Clemson 60, North Carolina St.
55

2005

Thu
Dec 30

(165)
St. John’s
63, North Carolina St.
45

Sun
Jan 9

(69)
Miami FL
67, North Carolina St.
66

Wed
Jan 19

(112)
Virginia Tech 72,
North Carolina St.
71

Wed
Jan 26

(135)
Florida St.
70, North Carolina St.
64

Sat
Feb 5

(80)
Virginia
64, North Carolina St.
62
style=’width:354.2pt;margin-left:5.4pt;border-collapse:collapse;mso-padding-alt:
0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt’>

Losses by 10 Points or More

2002

Tue
Nov 27

(23) Ohio St. 64,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St. 50

Sun
Jan 13

(4)
Duke 76, North Carolina St.
57

Sun
Feb 3

(2)
Maryland
89, North Carolina St.
73

Thu
Feb 14

(4)
Duke 108, North Carolina St.
71

Sat
Mar 2

(24)
Wake Forest 83,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St. 71

Sun
Mar 10

(4)
Duke 91, North Carolina St.
61

2003

Thu
Jan 2

(209)
UMass
68, North Carolina St.
56

Sat
Jan 11

(76)
Georgia Tech 85, North Carolina
St. 61

Thu
Jan 16

(49)
Boston College 93,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St. 81

Thu
Jan 30

(37)
Maryland
75, North Carolina St.
60

Thu
Feb 6

(7)
Wake Forest 73,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St. 58

Sat
Feb 15

(88)
Temple 76,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St.
54

Sat
Feb 22

(12)
Duke 79, North Carolina St.
68

2004

Thu
Jan 15

(1)
Duke 76, North Carolina St.
57

2005

Thu
Dec 30

(165)
St. John’s
63, North Carolina St.
45

Sun
Jan 2

(34)
West Virginia
82, North Carolina St.
69

Thu
Jan 13

(4)
Duke 86, North Carolina St.
74

Thu
Feb 3

(6)
North Carolina
95, North Carolina St.
71

Thu
Feb 10

(7)
Wake Forest 86,
w:st=”on”>North Carolina St. 75

Tue
Feb 22

(6)
North Carolina
81, North Carolina St.
71

Observations
1) The bad losses (by whichever definition you prefer) are spread throughout the season. There is no basis for claiming that the “eggs�? are only laid in the early part of the season. (This pretty much already proves that State doesn’t always finish strong.)

2) IMO, the Great Herb Debate (GHD) raged hotter during 2003 and 2005. While the GHD certainly existed in 2002 and 2004 (and even earlier), the unexpected wins in those two years cooled the flames somewhat. My purpose in mentioning the GHD was not to fuel the debate, but to point out that the loudest complaining appears directly tied to bad losses ….Imagine that!

3) Over this four year stretch, the most losses to bad teams (both RPI 50+ and RPI 100+) occurred in 2005. Yet another inconvenient fact that flies in the face of those who love to cry about steady improvement.

4) I am not really interested in debating the margin of victory/defeat statistics. This number can be misleading in too many cases. I was just curious to know what the data would look like, so I included the table here for anyone who is interested.

FINISHING STRONG
I have compiled the results thru the last 10 games of the regular season, thru the ACC tourney, and thru any post-season tourney that State played in. If State usually finishes strong, then there should be some evidence of this trend in the won/loss records.

style=’width:254.5pt;margin-left:4.65pt;border-collapse:collapse;mso-padding-alt:
0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt’>

Record Over The Last 10 Games Thru

Year

Reg Season

ACCT

NCAAT

NIT

1997

5-5

7-3

—

7-3

1998

4-6

4-6

—

5-5

1999

5-5

5-5

—

4-6

2000

3-7

2-8

—

5-5

2001

3-7

3-7

—

—

2002

5-5

6-4

5-5

—

2003

4-6

5-5

5-5

—

2004

7-3

6-4

5-5

—

2005

5-5

6-4

6-4

—

Years with Significant Trends

1997
Herb’s first year looked a lot like the Les years until just before the end of the regular season. After winning 4 of 5 to end the regular season, State beat Georgia Tech, Duke, and Maryland in the ACC tournament before falling to Carolina in the Finals. I think that this stretch of basketball is arguably Herb’s finest at State. I can’t think of another example where a coach has done more with less.

2000
At the half-way point of the ACC season, State was sitting pretty at 15-4 overall and 5-3 in the conference. History suggested that three more ACC wins would secure State a position in the NCAA tourney for the first time since Les’s first year. State then proceeded to go on a seven-game conference losing streak to limp into the NIT once again.

Three wins in the NIT did little to ease the disappointment of the losing streak and missing the NCAA tourney. IMO (humble but accurate), the seeds of the GHD were sown during this losing streak. Those seeds blossomed ugly and loud during the disaster that was the 2001 season when State didn’t even qualify for the NIT.

2004
A five-game winning streak in February was topped off with a win against Duke. The streak stopped several days later at Clemson of all places. Starting with the Clemson loss, State played .500 ball for the remainder of the year. The ACC tourney ended with a record-breaking collapse against Maryland and the NCAA tourney ended even more abruptly against Vanderbilt.

2005
After a 3-9 stretch of horrible basketball that stretched out over six weeks, State’s chances of making the NCAA tourney were grim (to say the least). Then a really bizarre trend began. Starting with a nail-biting win against Georgia Tech, State ended the year by winning two games and then losing one…and then repeating this pattern three more times. While the records over the last 10 games don’t really show a hot streak, State did finish the year strong by winning 8 of the last 12 games.

CONCLUSION
I think that the myth of finishing strong started when State upset the #1 seed in the ACC tourney two years in a row (2002 & 2003). However it takes a lot more than just two big victories in two years to actually qualify as consistently finishing strong. (Just as a side note, those two ACCT wins were two of the four wins against teams that made the NCAA tourney during the 2002 and 2003 seasons.) So, let’s put an end to the myth of finishing strong. It sure is nice when it happens, but it hasn’t happened often enough to start depending on it…or talking about it incessantly.

About VaWolf82

Engineer living in Central Va. and senior curmudgeon amongst SFN authors One wife, two kids, one dog, four vehicles on insurance, and four phones on cell plan...looking forward to empty nest status. Graduated 1982

General NCS Basketball

57 Responses to Finishing Strong

  1. PACDADDY 12/23/2005 at 9:40 PM #

    “The ESA wasn’t built to watch intramural contests. If you are going to climb up into the Ivory Tower with Myles Brand, don’t get confused when no one takes you seriously.”

    You took my quote out on context…I want to win every bit as much as you, if not more…If I didn’t, I wouldn’t spend one second defending the program…especially here.

  2. Rick 12/23/2005 at 11:04 PM #

    “I want to win every bit as much as you, if not more”
    Well you are certainly much more happy about semifinal wins than I am.
    And I doubt anyone that celebrates second place like you wants to win like I.

  3. Class of '74 12/24/2005 at 7:19 AM #

    I beg to differ on you can’t compare the two programs. If that’s the case then we can’t compare anyone to anyone else. The rules change but you know what they still remain relative to their peers at the time. That’s what we are talking about Pacdaddy.

    As to the recruitment of Washburn, Dean and staff went to Hickory multiple times and they did not offer but I did not say they did! Only they recruited Washburn that’s all. Duke never did recruit Chris as he didn’t meet their standards. My sources for this were the Durham Morning Herald and friends in the Duke program.

  4. PACDADDY 12/24/2005 at 11:46 PM #

    “The rules change but you know what they still remain relative to their peers at the time.”

    That’s my point ’74…Our “peers” weren’t offering those types of kids. Every coach makes a mistake now and then. NCSU made many during those mid 80’s. My point is Herb doesn’t give a kid like that 5 seconds of thought, because he knows he can’t. V got caught up in the “win at all cost”, or “I’m here to coach these kids not make sure they graduate” mentality. Like I said before…V was changing the program around and would have made it right, but it was too late.

    I’m sorry…but the image of this program for long term is quite different than the one in the 80’s. Now we just need to win big, so Herb can continue to recruit the best student athletes out there. Trust doesn’t happen over night…but it shouldn’t have taken 6 years either. Les was suppose to put the “image” back together, and he did…kinda…he just couldn’t get the top student/athletes. This is where we needed a high profile coach with a reputation for preparing kids for life and winning. Herb has had to prove it over these years, because he wasn’t that coach.

    “As to the recruitment of Washburn, Dean and staff went to Hickory multiple times and they did not offer but I did not say they did! ”

    Dean made the correct decision…look…if it were just Washburn, it wouldn’t matter, but there was quite a number of poor character guys in this program during the mid 80’s….I’ll leave it at that. This is why the “evil meda” was able to get away with junk they put on V. Image is everything!

    Merry Christmas!

  5. Class of '74 12/26/2005 at 8:51 AM #

    My point in comparisons is that you can compare Herb to his peers and V to his at the time. Herb at this point just doesn’t measure up very well to his peers and all the emotional blinders in the world do not alter the facts of his paltry record. Now in this his tenth year maybe Herb will get it done, but to this point he has little to show for his nine years. That is what most of the posters on this site seem to agree.

    Herb would never have gotten away with this record for nine years at: Duke, UNC, Maryland or Uva. He probably would not have seen his 5th or sixth year at any of those schools.

  6. PACDADDY 12/26/2005 at 6:36 PM #

    There’s truth to what you say ’74. I would like to point out UVA got rid of Jones, who during an 8 year span where he made the NCAA 5x’s and was in final 8 once, and sweet 16 once…he also made the ACC title…but…his last 3 seasons he only went to NCAA once(Lost Alexander to transfer), so UVA hired an up and comer…EVERYONE thought Gillen was the answer and many Pack fans used him as an example of how a program should be run…press…beat UNC an Duke. Gillen went to NCAA once in six seasons…NEVER WON 1 ACC tourney game or NCAA game.

    NOW…had Herb started off strong in early years and had we struggled of late, I would expect the same thing would have happened to Sendek. You say “he has little to show” for his first 9 seasons, and that’s simply not true. If you mean banners….OK…but he has done quite well the past 4 seasons. Not to V’s standards, but “standards” is a misleading word when comparing the two coaches.

    You’re right…UNC and Duke woudn’t have tolerated Les for more than 2 seasons, when it was clear he couldn’t recruit the caliber of players required to win an ACC championship. Les had an incredible difficult task, and he wasn’t the right man for the job. Those programs wouldn’t HAVE ALLOWED the program to reach the programs that created this mess. Those programs would have run V off, unless he ran the program to their “standards”. We should have hired Barnes when we had our chance, but the ADMIN over-reacted to correct the poor image our program had and they must of thought Les was the man. When Herb came in, we already had to play catch up with all ACC teams…even Clemson and FSU!

    I understand you point about Sendek and V. Bottom line is comparing these 2 “PROGRAMS” is more important to the long term health and tradition of NCSU…not w/l records. Ths program is garnering “respect” on many different levels. I only wish Sendek could have turned it around faster…Bottom line…untimely injuries, unexpected attrition and having to build a winning program in the most competitve league, makes life difficult for a 33-38 year old coach.

    BTW…you do realize it took GW 5 seasons to make NCAA’s, and Sendek has the same number of NCAA wins his first 4 NCAA tourneys as GW…and more ACC tourney wins! We can only hope Sendek can come close to what GW has done in his last 7.

  7. Rick 12/27/2005 at 10:11 AM #

    I think you hit every Sendek tlaking point in your post.
    blame Les – check
    slow improvement – check
    doing it the “right way” – check
    compare to GW – check
    show he is better than other sucky coache – check
    blame injures and transfers – check

    And of course you give no expectations of winning a title. You put no time limit on when he should do this.
    NCSU we are all about lower expectations. It is the only way to justify keeping Herb.

1 2 3

Leave a Reply