Now that I've gotten my bitch out of the way (please stop saying "homerun hire". That should always be reserved for truly big name hires of known and proven winners at the highest level. That's Nick Saban. In basketball, that would be us hiring a healthy Thad Matta, or even a spotless Rick Pitino in his heyday at Louisville. This is a good hire, maybe a very good one, and I'm not knocking it. But don't overblow it, OK? If we call every hire a "homerun", we cause the expression to lose its meaning), I want to make what I believe is a fair assessment of the Nate Oats hire. It might surprise some of you.
There are many things to like about Nate Oats. He's young and he's energetic. I also don't think there is any question that he was the best non-homerun hire available. Clearly the best among the up-and-comers and the mid-majors. Byrne put some thought into this hire, and while it was made quickly, Byrne did some serious legwork. Like I said yesterday, it was not a lazy, easy hire of the sort I've complained about in the past (David Hobbs, Mike DuBose, Mike Shula, Greg Goff, for examples).
What sets Oats apart to me is that he runs a fast-paced, uptempo game, but plays in a structured, disciplined manner. His teams shoot a lot of threes, but they look for open shots, not just take shots. They play tough defense, staying on guys and not giving any easy shots. They make people work for points. Oats probably stresses strong defense more than any coach we've had since Wimp. In fact, like Wimp, strong D is a trademark of Oats' philosophy. I do like that a lot.
Oats is also known for player development. One of the things that drove most of us crazy about Avery was the lack of development over his time here. There was no way to sugar coat it. He simply failed at it. So having a guy who insists on it will be refreshing. It will be interesting to see how well he recruits, but he's going to recruit guys who play a fast, physical brand of ball. We're not going to get pushed around much once he has a couple of recruiting classes under his belt.
Probably the thing I like most about Oats is his fearlessness. He's not going to be afraid to challenge the Caliparis, the Pearls, the Howlands or the Barnes of this conference, nor even the big dogs of the ACC and Big Ten. He may not always have the talent of a Duke, but he will give the Dukes of the world all they can handle with what he has. I'm confident of that. He may not always win those games, but the other team is not going to relish playing his. When was the last time we could say that about basketball? Probably not since Wimp.
And that brings me to my last thought. I've said that Wimp should be the minimum standard we accept in a coach. It's way too early to tell if we're getting that level of predictable success in Oats, but temperamentally, Wimp is who Oats most reminds me of. Tough, disciplined, demanding and unaccepting of anything less than the best his team will give. If he can draw top kids to Alabama, and it looks like he's gunning for that already (at least the guys who fit what he does), then he could have a lot of success here. I don't want to jinx him, and I certainly don't want to put too much pressure on him from the get go (he may have a rocky first year here, and we should not go postal if he does), but it is possible that he could even have a Billy Donovan in him. He's got similar background and though he's green, he certainly has had success against highly regarded programs. A lot like Wimp, and a lot like Donovan. The similarities may not play out, but the potential is certainly there. If we couldn't make the slam dunk hire, I think we got a solid put back layup. I will support him and see how he does. I hope we all do.
There are many things to like about Nate Oats. He's young and he's energetic. I also don't think there is any question that he was the best non-homerun hire available. Clearly the best among the up-and-comers and the mid-majors. Byrne put some thought into this hire, and while it was made quickly, Byrne did some serious legwork. Like I said yesterday, it was not a lazy, easy hire of the sort I've complained about in the past (David Hobbs, Mike DuBose, Mike Shula, Greg Goff, for examples).
What sets Oats apart to me is that he runs a fast-paced, uptempo game, but plays in a structured, disciplined manner. His teams shoot a lot of threes, but they look for open shots, not just take shots. They play tough defense, staying on guys and not giving any easy shots. They make people work for points. Oats probably stresses strong defense more than any coach we've had since Wimp. In fact, like Wimp, strong D is a trademark of Oats' philosophy. I do like that a lot.
Oats is also known for player development. One of the things that drove most of us crazy about Avery was the lack of development over his time here. There was no way to sugar coat it. He simply failed at it. So having a guy who insists on it will be refreshing. It will be interesting to see how well he recruits, but he's going to recruit guys who play a fast, physical brand of ball. We're not going to get pushed around much once he has a couple of recruiting classes under his belt.
Probably the thing I like most about Oats is his fearlessness. He's not going to be afraid to challenge the Caliparis, the Pearls, the Howlands or the Barnes of this conference, nor even the big dogs of the ACC and Big Ten. He may not always have the talent of a Duke, but he will give the Dukes of the world all they can handle with what he has. I'm confident of that. He may not always win those games, but the other team is not going to relish playing his. When was the last time we could say that about basketball? Probably not since Wimp.
And that brings me to my last thought. I've said that Wimp should be the minimum standard we accept in a coach. It's way too early to tell if we're getting that level of predictable success in Oats, but temperamentally, Wimp is who Oats most reminds me of. Tough, disciplined, demanding and unaccepting of anything less than the best his team will give. If he can draw top kids to Alabama, and it looks like he's gunning for that already (at least the guys who fit what he does), then he could have a lot of success here. I don't want to jinx him, and I certainly don't want to put too much pressure on him from the get go (he may have a rocky first year here, and we should not go postal if he does), but it is possible that he could even have a Billy Donovan in him. He's got similar background and though he's green, he certainly has had success against highly regarded programs. A lot like Wimp, and a lot like Donovan. The similarities may not play out, but the potential is certainly there. If we couldn't make the slam dunk hire, I think we got a solid put back layup. I will support him and see how he does. I hope we all do.
