Well, let's put some %s on these guys...
Mack's probability of failure 30%
Prob. of good, not great 50%
Prob. of great 20%
Pitino's probability of failure in 2001 <5%
Prob. of good, not great 35%
Prob. of great 60%
We can have a good/great debate about Pitino, but that's not the issue. His probability of failure was minimal; Mack's isn't likely, but it's a lot more than minimal. That's because Mack wasn't a great hire.
We can also debate whether there were more than a couple other guys qualifying as "great" candidates. Again, that's not the issue... It's not yours or my job to gauge "realistic". We simply want great hires pursued whatever the likelihood of landing them. You're downgrading your progam not shooting for truly great hires. Was Pitino a likely hire in 2001?...Not close. But he was a great coach, and along with the UNlikelihood of being able to land him made Pitino a great hire.
In general, your standards for "great-ness" are too low. That would have left a lot of other great-hire candidates. Of course, that's the low bar that Tyra supporters want to see him face as AD...