Coaching ability is judged and job retention is ultimately predicated on one stat: wins. But in order to get a truly accurate view of the success of the coach’s job, it goes far beyond just that. Every team has a different roster, some teams get 5-stars and some have to pick up players from their local YMCA—but regardless of the players on the team, a good coach maximizes their roster. In order to adequately judge the quality of a coach, we need to identify three things that are unquantifiable and largely unknown to us outsiders: how motivational their half time speeches are, how their emotional support positively impacts players to play their best, and how well they communicate. But since we can’t get into their locker rooms or team meetings (at this point, anyhow), let’s focus on what we do know and can track:
- Effectiveness of their offensive system independent of talent.
- Effectiveness of their defensive system independent of talent.
Let me get this out of the way now, a good offensive system doesn’t solely just take a lot of rim & 3 shots and force a lot of midrange. This is the low-hanging fruit, and removes all the nuance behind what’s actually a good shot and what goes behind forcing a bad shot. Purdue is 220th in rim & 3 rate and has some of the best shot selection in the nation, ranking 41st in our shot selection stat and one of the best offenses in the country. The Boilermakers only get the highest quality rim shots, transition layups, and are top in the nation in percent of 3’s that are open. Here’s a converse example: Arkansas Pine Bluff, who’s currently 27th in the nation in rim & 3 rate, but based on our shot selection metric is 283rd in the nation. Yes they get a lot of 3’s, but shoot the 5th most off-the-dribble 3’s. Yes, they get a lot of rim shots, but almost none are assisted, ranking 27th in isolation frequency and are close to last in cutting frequency (ranking 351st).
I can’t mention shot selection and not bring up Mick Cronin’s UCLA team. They shoot a ton of midrange, 22nd most in the nation, and are damn good at it, and get an average of .89 SQ PPP when they take it. They have an elite offense in the league because of their star Johnny Juzang, and when he takes the middy, it’s a .97 SQ PPP. When you have an elite midrange shooter like that, it makes it challenging to say NEVER shoot midrange. Here’s a list of some of the guys that need to have a green release from midrange, not a big list, but big enough where it proves there are no absolutes in the game of basketball…
I mean holy crap, based on the quality of looks, an Isaiah Wong midrange is 28% more efficient than the average perimeter drive to the basket (.94 PPP).
In summary, judging shot selection is difficult, and it’s not as straightforward as:
- Shoot a lot of 3’s
- Shoot a lot of shots at the rim
- Don’t shoot midrange
To try and get a better and more nuanced understanding of what good shot selection looks like, take a look at this graphic below:
Now that a definition of shot selection is established, let’s get back to the coaches that are truly maximizing this on both ends, maximizing their offense by getting those cuts for layups, easy transition looks and open 3’s, and forcing those midrange shots. Our shot selection metric measures this, so in order to figure out the coaches with the best process, I averaged the two of them (offensive shot selection and defensive shot selection).
Here’s a ranking of the coaches with the best process in NCAA Men’s and Women’s (ranked 1-15):
Coaches have different schemes, different talents and different emphases, but it’s clear that based on this list of coaches, the most successful ones do the most to maximize their team on both ends of the court.