Who’s your all-setx sports top players/coaches

[oldschool2]

32 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Yes but it’s a “little” different with McClure.  When you have a 6-6 wing who can handle it and shoot it and he’s the only D-1 in the district (other than Silsbee’s freshman or two that look like future D-1s, it makes an even bigger difference.   But your point is well taken in general. 

No question.  The other "guys" don't compare to a 6'6 D1 prospect, but each of them are still outcome changers for sure.  It doesn't necessarily take a college prospect to make the difference between a great season and a mediocre one.  It happens all of the time.  Another thing that happens all of the time (in pretty much any sport) is a team will have a fantastic year, then the coach will be in an exact conversation like this, then lose one or more good players to graduation and it's a whole new group of "best coaches" the next year.  I've always argued that a combination of talent and coaching is absolutely necessary.  I love when coaches do more with less.  I'm more impressed with that than anything.. watching a game where one team has no business even being in it, yet strategy and preparation keeps it interesting.

I get bored with the best players always beating worse players lol.  How fun is that.. 

[JayBilas]

22 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

No question.  The other "guys" don't compare to a 6'6 D1 prospect, but each of them are still outcome changers for sure.  It doesn't necessarily take a college prospect to make the difference between a great season and a mediocre one.  It happens all of the time.  Another thing that happens all of the time (in pretty much any sport) is a team will have a fantastic year, then the coach will be in an exact conversation like this, then lose one or more good players to graduation and it's a whole new group of "best coaches" the next year.  I've always argued that a combination of talent and coaching is absolutely necessary.  I love when coaches do more with less.  I'm more impressed with that than anything.. watching a game where one team has no business even being in it, yet strategy and preparation keeps it interesting.

I get bored with the best players always beating worse players lol.  How fun is that.. 

Ok, but how do you gauge "more with less" if they are losing anyway? its not horseshoes...You have to be able to coach talent and WIN against other teams with talent once the playoff starts as well.  I never understood that "less with more" nonsense. It just seems like an excuse for getting beat.

[TxHoops]

18 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

No question.  The other "guys" don't compare to a 6'6 D1 prospect, but each of them are still outcome changers for sure.  It doesn't necessarily take a college prospect to make the difference between a great season and a mediocre one.  It happens all of the time.  Another thing that happens all of the time (in pretty much any sport) is a team will have a fantastic year, then the coach will be in an exact conversation like this, then lose one or more good players to graduation and it's a whole new group of "best coaches" the next year.  I've always argued that a combination of talent and coaching is absolutely necessary.  I love when coaches do more with less.  I'm more impressed with that than anything.. watching a game where one team has no business even being in it, yet strategy and preparation keeps it interesting.

I get bored with the best players always beating worse players lol.  How fun is that.. 

Agree completely.  If we are going to say who did the most with what they had this year, my vote goes to either Kevin Foster of Big Sandy or Andre Boutte of West Brook.  Neither of their team’s had any business winning the games they won this year but for outstanding coaching.   And I’m not saying either team was terrible because they weren’t.  But Big Sandy was at least a year away from having a team that should be advancing to the regional tournament (or the equivalent).  And WB beating Atascocita in the regular season, winning a playoff game and then taking Shadow Creek to OT in the second round?  I’m not sure that any of the hardware on his hand is any more impressive than what he did with that squad this year.  
 

Oh and add Joe Sigler to those two.   

[oldschool2]

18 minutes ago, JayBilas said:

Ok, but how do you gauge "more with less" if they are losing anyway? its not horseshoes...You have to be able to coach talent and WIN against other teams with talent once the playoff starts as well.  I never understood that "less with more" nonsense. It just seems like an excuse for getting beat.

Anyone with a sports eye at all can tell if a team lacks size, skill, or athleticism.  Not to mention experience (underclassmen).  If a coach has any of the aforementioned attributes or lack-there-of.. yet still beats teams that has it, he/she is doing more with less.  

[oldschool2]

20 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Agree completely.  If we are going to say who did the most with what they had this year, my vote goes to either Kevin Foster of Big Sandy or Andre Boutte of West Brook.  Neither of their team’s had any business winning the games they won this year but for outstanding coaching.   And I’m not saying either team was terrible because they weren’t.  But Big Sandy was at least a year away from having a team that should be advancing to the regional tournament (or the equivalent).  And WB beating Atascocita in the regular season, winning a playoff game and then taking Shadow Creek to OT in the second round?  I’m not sure that any of the hardware on his hand is any more impressive than what he did with that squad this year.  
 

Oh and add Joe Sigler to those two.   

Indeed.  But the popular theory always leans towards most wins, deepest runs, most points, etc.  Regardless of having an overabundance of talent or not.  Not a popular opinion.. but winning the most games with the most talent isn't really that impressive.  Not taking away anything from anyone.  Coaches can't help who they have to suit up with any more than kids can help who they play against.  

[TxHoops]

49 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

Indeed.  But the popular theory always leans towards most wins, deepest runs, most points, etc.  Regardless of having an overabundance of talent or not.  Not a popular opinion.. but winning the most games with the most talent isn't really that impressive.  Not taking away anything from anyone.  Coaches can't help who they have to suit up with any more than kids can help who they play against.  

To be sure.  But I had Green as my COTY because of winning it all.  And with the youth on that team, it’s pretty impressive there were zero hiccups on the season.  And despite what was claimed here, they weren’t just a prohibitive favorite.  In fact many folks, myself included, would have had Lancaster as a solid favorite against them.  Lancaster had more seasoned players, and far more size.  And a high major Pg who seemed to be in his 8th season leading that team.  Several were deserving.  Give it to the guy who got the ring. 

[oldschool2]

15 hours ago, TxHoops said:

To be sure.  But I had Green as my COTY because of winning it all.  And with the youth on that team, it’s pretty impressive there were zero hiccups on the season.  And despite what was claimed here, they weren’t just a prohibitive favorite.  In fact many folks, myself included, would have had Lancaster as a solid favorite against them.  Lancaster had more seasoned players, and far more size.  And a high major Pg who seemed to be in his 8th season leading that team.  Several were deserving.  Give it to the guy who got the ring. 

I agree.  Also, the Hancock brothers are friends of mine so I'm glad they got to be a part.  Special season for sure. 

[BADSANTA]

David Green Coach 

Arceneaux 

Yates 

McClure 

Harris 

Harvey