Dana Altman: How Does He DO IT?

[Haywarduck]

First off this is the perfect topic to discuss because I don't think anyone can definitively say they know how Dana Altman wins like he does. All we can do is offer ideas, which is what we all do best.

 

The question is how does he win every year like he does? You can't say he brings in his guys and he knows how to pick them. His first year at Oregon he won with Kents guys and won the CBI tournament against his Creighton team!

 

If that wasn't astounding enough he has continued to do it no matter who leaves, or who gets injured. His teams peak at the end of the season and his student athletes do what every coach dreams about, every year. His teams become teams and get better, no matter what.

 

Is it because he is unflappable, that just might be part of it. I don't think I have ever seen Altman lose his cool, or blame a player. He has a plan and meticulously puts it in place. Any deviation from the plan is expected and he adjusts. There are too few coaches as coolheaded as Altman, and it is almost like he is insouciant, but he just has a plan, it seems.

 

The other question, is he just that much smarter than the rest of the coaches? His strategic plays in a game are legendary, to me. It is almost like he sees things nobody else does. I tend to lean towards this scenario most. Altman is a genius, almost a Clark Kent type of a coach. He looks like the simple guy, but when basketball is concerned watch out for what is underneath that simple outfit he has on the outside.

 

He could also be accused of being a Svengali, but that would be deemed a negative. I do think he has amazing influence on his players and how the games turn out. He knows how to shut down players and instill a belief in his players like few can. They believe the guy, follow the guy and benefit from it.

 

All I know is if he knew football I would want him on the sideline helping out Cristobal.

[30Duck]

 You are right. It's hard to define what Altman does at Oregon, and that's a good thing as it would surely be copied if it could be. He has done it with a varied bunch of players,. The hardest stretch I think was immediately following the Final Four team.

 

A part of the problem is I don't think that Payton Pritchard was fully equipped to go from a supporting player as a freshman the year before to be in charge, and out of all the players that have come through, neither Elijah Brown of Troy Brown, appeared to buy in to Altman's plan.

 

 The next year, injuries were huge, first, early to Bol Bol, and later to Louis King, really impacted that teams chances. I'd say that the "buying in" is the key component of why Altman is doing so well, and why it isn't easily replicated. The buy In" also explains why he is so successful at not only recruiting, but attracting transfers. 

 

 Let's poke at Washington for a while. Lorenzo Romar did less with X's & O's at Washington than did Ernie Kent at Oregon. Unfortunately, Washington finally canned him and brought in Mike Hopkins from Syracuse. He did well early, but the Huskies are awful now. 

[Charles Fischer]

I have maintained for a long time that a great coach is beyond just rare ... because of all the components that it takes.  How Dana recruits better than any basketball coach at Oregon before is still a mystery to me, yet how many salesmen (recruiters) can also do the Xs and Os, the in-game adjustments like a CPA?  Darn few.

 

Add to that--the best coaches are also superb managers of which is a very rare talent; the best are earning millions in corporate America.  So the best coaches have all three components and there is only a few in each sport because they are a one-in-10-million-people type of guy.  All the other coaches have their weaknesses that we have to live with, such as Cristobal being so good at everything except running an offense. 

 

We like everything else about them, and have to live with their faults as our spouses do with us...  Hence Dana is rare....top 5% rare.  If he had won several National Championships...then he would be in the Top 1%, and he may still do that.

 

I do not know how he does it, only that I recognize how hard it is and appreciate that he has stayed to coach Our Beloved Ducks!

[olcodgerduck]

I think a big part of the reason Coach Altman is so good is that he appears to be here for the journey, not just the trophy at the end.  From comments following the UCLA game, he stated that he was just wanting the guys to have fun playing.  I think that was in the context of the seniors enjoying their last games as Ducks, but to me it speaks overall of his objective as a coach.  Also, if I understand the after game comments correctly, the players were the ones that wanted to crank up the defense and go man-to-man in their efforts to shut down the Bruins (which ended up winning the game for us!)

 

Any Coach that cares more about the players than the trophy, and puts that together with a great coaching schematic is certainly going to have some level of success.  I think Coach Altman adds something special through his personality that takes it over the top.  We are truly blessed to have Coach Altman on our side!

 

Go Ducks!!

[Duckdude]

I think the UCLA game gives a good example of Dana’s coaching skills.  Ducks were getting owned, and any chance for a Duck win was waning.  Dana needed better effort out of his guys.  They were getting deflated because they couldn’t get shots to fall.  Dana calls time out.  Institutes full court press.  Effort for full court press requires increased energy and focus on DEFENSE!(since offense not working).  Bruins crumble under pressure!  Ducks gain “mo” due to Bruins crumble.  Eventually translates to increased confidence in Offense(at first led by Figueroa....illustrating why it’s good to have experienced players on the squad........take note Will R!)......and........another win in Dana’s coaching career!   Great job!

[Haywarduck]

Interesting takes on what Altman does. I do wonder if he consistently has timeouts left at the end of the game. He doesn't seem like he want to micromanage the players like some coaches. It wouldn't surprise me if the players wanted to go man to man and were able to have that control.

 

Reminds of one aspect I really enjoyed about John Wooden. He let the players play and said the time to coach them was before the game and after. Too many coaches call all the timeouts and are constantly yelling at the players to do exactly what they want.

 

Altman seems to create a group of players bound together as a team. They look to Altman for guidance, but to themselves to win the game. I do think this is different in this day and age.

 

Definitely one thing I didn't like about one of my sons coach's. The micromanagement took away much of the creativity and individuality within the team. The love for the game waned and it killed some of the passion for a few of the players. Altman seems to keep the whole team excited and engaged.

[Duckdude]

“Altman seems to keep the whole team excited and engaged.”

Look at Kepnang.  He’s all in!  And, Duarte gives it his all.  Figueroa, too!

[Charles Fischer]

I wonder what is in Dante's head?  Is he on the way out....or has he bought in too?  HE is the missing piece to a Final Four with the way this team is progressing...  Like losing Chris Boucher....

 

[ICamel]

16 hours ago, olcodgerduck said:

 

Also, if I understand the after game comments correctly, the players were the ones that wanted to crank up the defense and go man-to-man in their efforts to shut down the Bruins (which ended up winning the game for us!)

What Altman said!

"The UO men generally play man defense after a missed shot and a trapping zone after a make. But Altman said his players convinced him to use more man in the second half Monday, and it paid off. We realized they were only attacking certain areas of the zone, UO senior Eugene Omoruyi said. We felt like (playing man) was more effective. And coach just let us do it."
 

[Charles Fischer]

8 minutes ago, ICamel said:

And coach just let us do it."

 

Very cool ICamel, and thanks for finding and posting that.

[Aix11]

There are certain players (that Dana has recruited for very specific purposes) over the 11 years that Dana has been coaching the Ducks that present match-up problems for the opposing team. Aside from the ball movement designed to not only break the defense down but also to wear them out, Dana can read various, complex situations on the floor and determine a way to win (again and again). Look, he sees things on the floor that only a limited number of fans see; he is like a Chess GrandMaster (there are far and few between). I am just very happy to say that I recorded that UCLA game at the last second and will enjoy watching it again, in time, along with last year's men and women's teams great victories! 

[Drake]

Have always been impressed with Altman. The focused effort he gets from his players on the court not only elevates each individual, but even more important, elevates the team. His guys may at times seem overmatched talent wise, but when they play with focus, and as a team, they can play with anybody. 
 

A game always has ebbs and flows, he seems to have a very good feel on managing the team through both. His demeanor on the sideline seems consistent whether the team is leading, or trying to come from behind. 
 

He is a great coach and I hope to see him get to hoist the NCAA Championship trophy. 

[Orebcker]

13 hours ago, Aix11 said:

Dana can read various, complex situations on the floor and determine a way to win (again and again). Look, he sees things on the floor that only a limited number of fans see; he is like a Chess Grand Master (there are far and few between). 

 

Good insight.  Same can be said of another grandmaster by the name of Chip Kelly.

[Haywarduck]

1 hour ago, Orebcker said:

 

Good insight.  Same can be said of another grandmaster by the name of Chip Kelly.

 

Agree, but I think he is a grandmaster of the game and the players. His ability to bring out the best in each player is uncanny. His ability to see the game is also under appreciated but what he does with the players it is almost like he is a puppet master and a grand master of the game.

 

I also agree with Drake, he deserves to win the NCAA title and so far has been a few injuries away from it. One magical season it will happen, maybe even with some or all of these players we see on the court now.

[Duckdude]

10 hours ago, Orebcker said:

 

Good insight.  Same can be said of another grandmaster by the name of Chip Kelly.

 

Sorry.  Chip Kelly is a traitor.  I know, I know........”you can’t expect him to turn down a job for millions!”   Well, apparently, I can......and, do.  Now, he’s trying to beat the Ducks?!  Say it ain’t so, Chip!!!

[Duck 1972]

I read somewhere that he wanted to come back before UCLA but the ducks turned him down.

[Duckdude]

If memory serves me correctly, Chip took the UCLA job one week before.....Willie Taggart said “bye-bye” to the Ducks.  If he’d waited one more week, there woulda been an opening with the Ducks again.  “They” say: “timing is everything!”......

[Jon Sousa]

4 hours ago, Duckdude said:

If memory serves me correctly, Chip took the UCLA job one week before.....Willie Taggart said “bye-bye” to the Ducks.  If he’d waited one more week, there woulda been an opening with the Ducks again.

 

I, for one, am glad he is not back. (I never thought I would ever say that.)

 

However, Chip had/has his problems. The biggest one is recruiting. We were all afraid when he went to UCLA because (if he was a recruiter) UCLA is a lot "easier" to recruit to.

 

Another problem is his people skills. Not only do the press not like him very much, but more importantly, he didn't know how to schmooze the donor base. During his years there was a lot of rumblings among the higher echelon of the fan base (I am not talking about Uncle Phil) that his people skills were lacking.

 

Last, but not least, many fans did not like his ego and stubbornness in play calling and many other areas.

 

Looking back it is easy to remember "the good old days", and much harder to remember the things we didn't like about them.

 

The most important thing, of course, is winning... and that is why the stuff folks didn't like were tolerated. 

 

If CK was winning big, we would be ruing the fact that he didn't come back to the Ducks.

Right now I am pretty happy being ranked with the #4 recruiting class in the country (Rivals) instead of #32.

[Charles Fischer]

10 minutes ago, Jon Sousa said:

During his years there was a lot of rumblings among the higher echelon of the fan base (I am not talking about Uncle Phil) that his people skills were lacking.

 

You are being very kind; he alienated so many donors and former players and it took a long time to rebuild those relationships.  He made life harder for the athletic department...the stories are legendary.

[30Duck]

On 3/6/2021 at 6:09 PM, Jon Sousa said:

 

I, for one, am glad he is not back. (I never thought I would ever say that.)

 

I'll say it with you. Many consider "Godfather ll" superior to the original. But that is rare for sequels. I think not having Chip come back was a great move for all concerned. Chip had great success at Oregon, the expectation would have been, "alright. let's do it again!"

 

But I believe all it would have done is tarnish the legend Chip created, and put Oregon in Coach seek mode again. Now, Oregon has won back to back conference championships, and Chip has UCLA headed in the right direction. 

[Haywarduck]

He did it again, well done! Not sure we solved how he does it, but he just keeps it up.

[Duck 1972]

Guys this was before taggart took the duck job. I for 1 wanted him back but Mullins said no

[Duck 1972]

As far as Dana goes he is always positive but very honest and always teaching. I believe people respond the best to that style in performance related activities although sometimes having to kick some backside is necessary.

His defense changing and zone press is the best in the country.

Can someone tell me why he's not in the HOF???