A Historical & Modern Comparison of John Beilein

Submitted by smwilliams on

Part 1: Introduction

In the aftermath of two consecutive, embarassing losses at home and a season that has been satisfactory at best (and by satisfactory, I mean, that outside of a win against Maryland, Michigan has handled the teams they should beat and lost to the teams they should lose to), there has been an ongoing debate on whether John Beilein should be on the hot seat or even fired. This is an objective look at John Beilein's success in the context of Michigan basketball history and Beilein's modern contemporaries.

Part 2: Michigan's Place in the Pecking Order

A week or so ago there was a debate about "blue bloods" as it pertained to college football programs. The consensus was that some programs (Michigan among them) have an inherent advantage and sustained legacy of success. The program draws the best coaches and the best players. Jim Harbaugh isn't leaving the NFL to go coach Purdue. John Calipari isn't leaving Memphis for Auburn. I used a fairly simple system to rank every program in a Power 5 + AAC + Big East conference. A NCAA Tournament appearance is worth 1 point. A Final Four is worth 5 points. A National Championship is worth 10 points.

In the interest of time and space I won't list every level and program. The system came up with 7 "Blue Bloods". UCLA, Kentucky, North Carolina, Duke, Indiana, Louisville, and Kansas. On the second level, there were 12 programs. They are:

Ohio State, Michigan State, Connecticut, Arizona, Cincinnati, Oklahoma State, Syracuse, Arkansas, Michigan, Villanova, Georgetown, and Florida.

These are the programs that historically have matched Michigan's success. You could argue against Oklahoma State's inclusion (made it based on two titles in the 1940s) or that State or UConn deserves to be bumped up a level. So, how is John Beilein doing compared to the coaches of these 11 programs (Ohio State and Michigan State will be saved for the B1G section)? Let's take a look:

Coach School Yrs W/L% CC NCAA FF NC
John Beilein Michigan 8+ .610 2 5 1 0

 

Coach School Yrs W/L% CC NCAA FF NC
Sean Miller Arizona 6+ .762 3 4 0 0
Mike Anderson Arkansas 4+ .624 0 1 0 0
Mick Cronin Cincinnati 9+ .618 1 5 0 0
Kevin Ollie Connecticut 3+ .693 0 1 1 1
Billy Donovan Florida 19 .715 7 14 4 2
John Thompson III Georgetown 11+ .675 3 8 1 0
Jim Boeheim Syracuse 39+ .742 10 31 4 1
Jay Wright Villanova 14+ .686 3 10 1 0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Throw out Boeheim. It's impossible to compare Beilein to a guy who has been at Syracuse for 40 years. Beilein's resume at this point is most comparable to Mick Cronin at Cincinnati which makes sense. Cronin relies on fielding a strong defense that creates rock fights, but his teams routinely hae trouble scoring. Cincinnati was in a strong Big East minus the last 2+ years so it's not like the American offered an easy way into the tournament. Every other coach outside of Mike Anderson (who has a higher winning %) has been more successful.

Part 3: Beilein's Place in Michigan History

Okay, so Beilein hasn't been as successful as the coaches of other programs on Michigan's level, but he turned what had been a pretty big disaster and resurrected it. How does Beilein compare to the other coaches in Michigan's long history? Because the NCAA Tournament didn't expand until 1985, I gave coaches a tournament berth if their team had a winning % over .667 (a 20-10 record today).

Coach Yrs W/L% CC NCAA FF NC
John Beilein 8+ .610 2 5 1 0
Tommy Amakar 6 .563 0 0 0 0
Brian Ellerbe 4 .508 0 1 0 0
Steve Fisher 9 .695 0 6 3 1
Bill Freider 9 .680 2 5 (+1) 0 0
Johnny Orr 12 .649 0 4 (+1) 1 0
Dave Strack 8 .559 3 3 (+1) 2 0
Bill Perigo 8 .438 0 0 (+1) 0 0
Ernie McCoy 4 .460 0 0 (+1) 0 0
Ozzie Cowles 2 .667 1 1 0 0
Bennie Oosterbaan 8 .528 0 0 0 0

This looks a little better for Beilein. He's already led Michigan to the 3rd most NCAA Tournaments under one coach (counting an extra one for Freider). He brought respectability back to Michigan basketball. His % of NCAA Tournaments to seasons is better than everybody but Fisher. Is he the 2nd best coach in Michigan history? I think he is.

Part 4: Beilein vs B1G Contemporaries

Last part of the analysis is how is Beilein doing compared to the other coaches who have been in the B1G while Beilein has been at Michigan.

Coach School YRS W/L% CC NCAA FF NC
Bruce Weber Illinois 9 .675 2 6 1 0
John Groce Illinois 3+ .575 0 1 0 0
Kelvin Sampson Indiana 2 .741 0 2 0 0
Tom Crean Indiana 7+ .541 1 3 0 0
Todd Lickliter Iowa 3 .396 0 0 0 0
Fran McCaffrey Iowa 5+ .591 0 2 0 0
Mark Turgeon Maryland 4+ .671 0 1 0 0
Tom Izzo Michigan St. 20+ .717 7 18 7 1
Tubby Smith Minnesota 6 .605 0 3 0 0
Richard Pitino Minnesota 2+ .521 0 0 0 0
Doc Sadler Nebraska 6 .532 0 0 0 0
Tim Miles Nebraska 3+ .500 0 1 0 0
Bill Carmondy Northwestern 13 .478 0 0 0 0
Chris Collins Northwestern 2+ .506 0 0 0 0
Thad Matta Ohio St. 11+ ..751 5 9 2 0
Ed DeChellis Penn St. 8 .452 0 1 0 0
Pat Chambers Penn St. 4+ .439 0 0 0 0
Matt Painter Purdue 10+ .640 1 7 0 0
Eddie Jordan Rutgers HA HA HA HA HA HA
Bo Ryan Wisconsin 14+ .737 4 14 2 0

Wow, that's a lot of data and one joke, so let's try to break it down. Matta, Ryan, and Izzo have been the gold standard for the past decade plus in the B1G. Beilein's closest comparison is probably Bruce Weber. You know who got fired after missing the tournament 3 times in 5 years? Bruce Weber. Still, during Beilein's tenure Michigan has been the 4th best program in the conference. That's basically in line with history.

Part 5: So, Should He Be Fired?

No. We don't know what the hell is going to happen the rest of the year. Michigan needs to take care of business against Minnesota and Northwestern, go 1-2 in their road games against Ohio St., Wisky and Maryland, and split their homes games against Iowa and Purdue. That'll give them 2 solid wins and no bad losses at 21-10 and a winning record in the B1G which should put them in the tournament. If that happens, Beilein is safe. If they make a run to the Elite 8 or Sweet 16, then it's even more of a no brainer. However, if Michigan collapses and loses 5 of their last 7 and miss the tournament, he goes into next year on the hot seat. If they miss the tournament against next year, that puts him well below the level set by let's say Matt Painter at Purdue, traditionally a worse program than Michigan's.

Comments

CaliUMfan

February 8th, 2016 at 12:02 PM ^

I don't want Lavall Jordan going anywhere. In fact, I think he should get a shot as the head coach if Belien does in fact get politely asked to retire. Bacari however I am not so sold on. Other than Jordan Morgan and the recent improvement by Donnal, he doesn't have much of a resume for developping our bigs. McGary came more than college ready. 

BuckNekked

February 8th, 2016 at 7:20 AM ^

So because weve been mostly mediocre through history we should just accept mediocrity?

Im not advocating he be fired this season but there needs to be an uptick in recruiting or the mediocrity will continue. Im hoping he struck gold with Watson and Simpson like he did with Burke but a couple more seasons with results similar to this year and last year and his job should definately be on the line. So not on the hot seat but its getting warmer.

Still +1 from me. Good stuff. 

Bob_Timberlake

February 8th, 2016 at 9:24 AM ^

Tom Izzo's MSU team won the national championship in 1999-00 and made it to the Final Four the next year. The three years afterwards, they went 19-12, 22-13 and 18-12. The two teams that played in the finals last year are struggling compared to past years. Beilein took Michigan to the finals three years ago and to the Elite 8 two years ago. Maybe it's not so rare for there to be a falloff after very successful seasons. Schools typically lose their best players early to the NBA.

The most disappointing thing about Beilein and U-M is their defense, or lack of it. While his teams have never been confused with the Denver Broncos, U-M's ability to stop the other team this season has been appalling. Maybe losing so many players early and having to scramble and sign guys like Aubrey Dawkins contributes to the defensive deficiency.

I can see Michigan possibly winning only 3 more games this year, including the B10 tournament and then getting steamrolled in an NCAA tournament game. Maybe LeVert returns and lights a fire under this team.

Agree that JB will be on the hot seat next season if the team fizzles out the rest of this one.

champswest

February 8th, 2016 at 9:24 AM ^

I would have liked to see two more columns to make it easier to read and comprehend. 1. Total points for each coach and 2. Divide coaches total points by number of years coached to get average points per year.

beef supreme

February 8th, 2016 at 10:24 AM ^

I'm not sure how much to attribute to the caris injury, but it is pretty apparent to me that they do not care about playing defense. Defense is about effort. There is always the opportunity to run up against a more talented team that you can't match up against, but I dont think you can claim that when you are getting run out of the gym and you have Bryn Forbes launching wide open 3's. I won't claim to have been wasting my time watching these debacles, but I know defense is effort. And effort is motivation, desire and a sense of accountability. Looks to me like we are missing at least one of those ingredients, if not all 3.

doggdetroit

February 8th, 2016 at 11:24 AM ^

I really appreciate this analysis. I have long felt that Michigan basketball, while not a blue blood program, was in the next tier of programs. I have also felt that Michigan was historically the 4th best program in the B1G, which your data also confirms. (I was going by Final Four appearances, Michigan has 7, Indiana has 8, MSU has 9, OSU has 11). This should be required reading for any Michigan fan that thinks the basketball program has been mediocre aside from the Fab Five and that we should accept the current situation because it is better than mediocre.



I'm also with you regarding Beilein's job status. Make the tournament this year and this talk dies down. I still would like to see some changes (staff, recruiting approach, etc.) because this team isn't making any noise in the tournament and since the entire roster returns next year minus Levert, who has barely played this season, I don't see it making any noise next year since Beilein isn't brining in any instant impact recruits. Basically, the trajectory of the program is flatlining and barring changes, we aren't going to get back to the heights acheived from 2012-2014.



I will push back on you regarding Beilein's place in Michigan history. I agree that Fisher is the program's best coach. It's harder for me to agree that Beilein ranks 2nd. Frieder has a much higher winning percentage, the same number of NCAA appearances and the same number of B1G championships. He also won an NIT title and made the quarterfinals of another NIT, I know that doesn't mean much but it is worthwhile to consider because Beilein's teams have either made the NCAAs or missed the postseason entirely. Beilein has the Final Four advantage but you have to give credit to Frieder for building the 1989 team that won it all despite him not coaching it in the tournament. Personally, I think he's tied with Orr for 3rd. Orr has a higher winning percentage, the same number of conference titles (Michigan finished 1st in the B1G in 1974 and 1977), to go along with a Final Four. Where Beilein has the edge is one more NCAAA appearance and only missing the NCAAs three times, whereas Orr missed it 7 times.

smwilliams

February 8th, 2016 at 12:08 PM ^

Quick note. I meant to add a line in the Mick Cronin section that Cronin is essentially JB's opposite. Same coin, different sides. Cronin makes the tournament semi-regularly, but his teams can never score. Beilein's teams can score, but have below average defenses on the regular.

Just to respond to some of the various comments:

I'm not advocating to accept mediocrity. Before Jim Calhoun, UConn wasn't a program that could be mentioned alongside UNC or Kansas or UCLA. Same for Boeheim and Syracuse. I'm sure there are more examples, but those are the first two that spring to mind. Hell, Coach K is largely responsible for turning Duke into DUKE. The issue is that Beilein is already in his 60s. He's not going to be at Michigan for another 20-30 years which means it'll be tough to get Michigan onto the UNC level. And, even once at that level, it's not a guarantee that there will be eternal success.

Look at Tom Crean's #s above. He was put in a similar situation and has had far less success than Beilein at a historically better program. Making the NCAA Tournament can cool that hot seat a bit for any coach.

@Timberlake

Interesting tidbit about Izzo. I'm not going to unfairly bash the coach of our biggest basketball rival, but a lot of his perceived value comes from unlikely runs in the NCAA Tournament. I can think of at least 2-3 times in the past decade where a State team in the 5-7 seed range has made the Final Four. Good for Izzo, but in a single elimination format, a lot of it boils down to luck. Could Beilein have made 3 Final Fours? What if Aaron Harrison (or was it the other one) misses that 3 in the Elite 8? What if Darius Morris hits the pull-up against Duke and Michigan wins the game in OT? What if Michigan doesn't draw the worst possible matchup in Ohio in 2012? It's called March Madness for a reason.

@champswest

Doing the math just now, Beilein would place basically even with Weber and behind Izzo, Matta, and Ryan if you use pts/year as a measurement. The methodology is probably too simple. Adding a data point of "Sweet 16 Seeds" would be useful. That would give extra points to coaches who consistently have their teams in the Top 15 in the country. It raises another interesting question. Michigan was a #4 seed in 2012 and lost in the First Round. If they get in as a #10 seed this year and make a run to the Elite 8, the methodology considers both those seasons as equal. Maybe it balances out. The run in the tournament is nice, but the 2012 team had a better overall year.

@doggdetroit

I won't argue with you if you put Freider above Beilein. It's hard to measure the unique situation of a coach being fired before the NCAA Tournament and then his successor winning a National Championship. Had that ever happened before? Has it happened since? Will it happen again?

JBLPSYCHED

February 8th, 2016 at 1:28 PM ^

Beilein's winning % is surprisingly low for a coach at his level. He's at an elite institution and has the resources and infrastructure to win big. His X's and O's can be debated but personally I like his offensive system--it's fun to watch and difficult to defend. Defense under Beilein has had its moments but generally is not a strong suit. I think it comes down to recruiting, which has suffered the past 2 years. Outperforming your talent level is very hard to do consistently in a conference like the Big 10. Bo Ryan was a true marvel. Izzo gets better talent than us and typically gets the most out of it. Matta is a good coach when he recruits great talent but his record without the Oden class or the Sullinger/Craft classes is much worse. I for one like Beilein a lot and would give him more than another year or two because he does things the right way. We know what it's like to be in the news for wrongdoing--it sucks bad. And despite his winning % I think Beilein is probably the best basketball coach we've ever had. Frieder was slimey (although he recruited well and won his share of games). I think Fisher did an incredible job in the 1989 tournament (made all the right moves) but I can't overlook whatever responsibility he deserves for the violations that occurred later in his tenure.

smcdani

February 8th, 2016 at 3:16 PM ^

Problem is we have 16 D1 wins this year, 2 good wins.  High RPI.  If he misses tourney this and next, its time to move on.  Getting beat by 30 to MSU at home in year 9 is ridiculous.  With the resources and money UM has, its ridiculous to keep recruitng MAC Level talent.  He has had a lot of non-impact recruits (Vogrich, Smot, Brundage, Christian, McLimans, Bielfledt, Doyle, Donnal, Chapman, Wilson).  That is a lot of misses.  And next year doesnt look better.

Voltron Blue

February 8th, 2016 at 5:47 PM ^

While I don't think it explains everything, I do think it's at least fair to mention, if you're going to call Fisher our best coach historically, that his best accomplishments have been erased from the record books.  It at least deserves the asterisk.

Also, I'd quibble that you should throw out Beilein's first year as a program rebuild for sake of win %, but whatever.

UMinSF

February 8th, 2016 at 8:12 PM ^

IMO coach B is the best we've had in my lifetime.  His system is far more sophisticated than anything I ever saw from the likes of Orr, Frieder, Fisher, etc. Frieder loaded up with tremendous talent and just let them play glorified street ball. Their records look good next to JB's, but I take 2 factors into account:

1. JB doesn't cheat.  Can't say the same for Frieder or Fisher.  They either cheated themselves, or looked the other way while it was happening around them.

2. JB had to finish cleaning up the mess they created.  Amaker did a good job bringing the program back up to respectability, but JB took us to a high level.

JB is in front of the trend in basketball. His teams and style resemble the Warriors, now the gold standard for hoops - lots of talented shooters, ball movement, and usually a small, fast lineup.  What we've lacked this year and last are overall team defense and (obviously) a mobile big who can take some of the pressure off the outside shooters.

This year's team has some serious flaws.  Losing Caris and Spike hurt. When Robinson's shot isn't falling he's a real liability - he can't play a lick of d.  Walton is a tough, smart kid, but he's not a great playmaker. Of course, our bigs haven't stood up against good competition. All that said, when their shots are falling they are dangerous.

It seems most folks here are pessimistic about the future; I'm not.  Hopefully DR will continue to develop physically and grow into at least a mediocre defensive player. I also think MAAR and Dawkins have room to grow. All our bigs should get stronger and better with age - it takes time for big guys to develop, especially those with limited physical tools.