As much as I give Diebler credit, I don't think that he will have enough games under his belt to be in consideration.
I agree with the caveat that IF the Buckeyes had beaten Minnesota and Diebler ended up 6-0 I think he would be in consideration.
I get the idea that it goes to the over-achieving team, but I think the field is just that weak this year.
This part I think we both just accept as a given. I agree to an extent with
@MaximumSam 's comment above that it is goofy but for purposes of this discussion that is more-or-less irrelevant. As a practical matter it is an award for achieving beyond expectations.
Yes, Hoiberg exceeded preaseason expectations, but in the end, he is improving his team from 9-11 in 2023 to 12-8 in 2024 (assuming a Michigan win) and did so against one of the easier Big Ten schedules (Nebraska only faced Purdue, Illinois, Iowa, and MSU once, so they only had 3 double games against the top half of the league.)
By that same token, Painter improved his team from 15-5 to 17-3 (assuming a Wisconsin win) and will likely win the league by 3 games TWO YEARS IN A ROW. Also bear in mind that (again, assuming a win on Sunday) he will have 10 wins against teams in the top 25 of the NET / Kenpom, with 7 of those being neutral or road wins. That is just insane.
By what you've laid out here, Painter improved by two games from 15 to 17 wins (assuming a win at Iowa) and Hoiberg improved by three wins from nine to 12 (assuming a win at Michigan). Hoiberg wins that because 3>2.
Beyond that, it isn't just games, it is also relative place in the league. Hoiberg's team was projected to finish in the bottom four and playing on Wednesday and instead they will be in the top-4 taking not only Wednesday but also Thursday off. That is obviously a MUCH bigger jump than Painter who went from being expected to finish first to finishing first.
I think the argument about relative SoS is getting way too far into the weeds. Bottom line, Hoiberg's team was projected to be bad and they are good. Painter's team was expected to be really good and they are . . . really good.
Recent B1G Champions:
- 15-5 Purdue in 2023, won by 3 games. Second best team was 12-8.
- 15-5 Illinois and Wisconsin in 2022, won by 1 game. Second best team was 15-5.
- 14-3 Michigan in 2021, won by 1/2 game. Second best team was 16-4.
- 14-6 Wisconsin, Maryland, and Michigan State in 2020, won by 1 game. Second best team was 14-6.
- 16-4 Purdue and Michigan State in 2019, won by 1 game. Second best team was 16-4.
- 16-2 Michigan State in 2018, won by 1 game. Second best team was 15-3.
17-3 (assuming a win in Iowa City) is the best league Champion we've had since 2018 and that is an accomplishment but they were already favored to win the league. As a neutral fan, I don't consider Purdue finishing 17-3 in the league this year to be a big surprise.
Also, Purdue went 15-5 last year and they brought back the POTY. I expected them to be better this year so 17-3 is about what I expected. If anything, I expected more. As discussed upthread, having an award where low expectations helps is goofy but that is what it is.
If you had told me before the season started that I could have $1,000 if I correctly picked which of the following two things would happen:
- Purdue wins at least 17 B1G games, or
- Nebraska gets a double-bye in the B1G Tournament.
I'd have chosen #1 because I'd have considered it to be MUCH more likely.
