Grade Buzz's Career At MU

[Tugg Speedman]

I gave him a B

(Mods, feel free to merge with "Make The Call on Buzz")

[HoopsMalone]

2008 recruiting-  A nice recruiting class that included Jimmy Butler thrown together in haste in April/May 2008

2008-2009 seasson- An injury away from the elite 8, all returning players play better (including DJ who actually looked like a true PG), some nice in game coaching adjustments like putting Acker in to guard McAlerney, top 10 ranking, "unleashed" Wes and developed an NBA starter

2009 recruiting class-  3 top 100 players and possible NBA player DJO

2009-2010 season-  VASTLY overachieved.  6 seed when most people expected no tourney.  Acker and Cubes developed under him.  DJO breaks out, Lazar gets a guaranteed contract.  MU plays everyone close.  Buzz with some good coaching down the stretch with some clutch play calls.

2010 recruiting class-  2 top 100 players including our first five star and highest rated since Doc.  JUCO player of they year.  Jamil Wilson comes to MU

2010-2011 season-  a few tough losses, .500 in the Big East with a softer schedule coming up.  Probably on pace to maintain our 10 wins/year.  Jae Crowder breaks out.  Developed some bigs.

2011/2012 classes-  2 more top 100 players with many more to go.


I think that is a pretty nice resume. 

Maybe Buzz missed when he shot for the moon this summer recruiting.  Maybe we have lost a few games.  We are .500 folks.  We lost to two ranked teams. 

Buzz had no 2007 class and missed out on his best recruit in 2008.  Buzz is doing an incredible job here. 

[Knight Commission]

I gave him a B (but would have given him a B-) even though I criticized the decision to hire him. This grade was based primarily on his results in Year 1 and 2. I thought we were at least Sweet 16 in Year 1 until DJ's injury, so although we dissapointed, I cant blame Buzz. Year 2 he overachieved by a significant margin. He lander Vander and Maymon.  He is meeting expectations this year.

My beef is the reliance on JUCO's--first and foremost, and then the lack of "D". I wish he was a little "smoother" with the media and more "professional". The 3 piece suits dont fit his personna...

Also, I think Buzz feels he needs to live and die with DJO. DJO is a very good player but not necessarily a great teammate. I feel like he is ruining some chemistry. My sense is that Butler and DJO are rivals.  DJO needs to distribute more.

A B is not bad. I got alot of those at MU and never complained (except the Fr Donnely "B" I had to begrudgingly accept in 87 because of the pre-final blizzard).

[GGGG]

A B is not bad. I got alot of those at MU and never complained (except the Fr Donnely "B" I had to begrudgingly accept in 87 because of the pre-final blizzard.

I remember that blizzard.  Went to bed when the snow was gently falling...woke up to a ton of snow on the ground and a bunch still falling.  Whole place was chaos.  No one knew what was going on with finals.

[Knight Commission]

I remember that blizzard.  Went to bed when the snow was gently falling...woke up to a ton of snow on the ground and a bunch still falling.  Whole place was chaos.  No one knew what was going on with finals.

Joe Nethen shouting "get off my lawn" from his "triple"/double after seeing snow ball fights in the front of McCormick at midnight, still garners a smile.

[warriors1965]

I gave him a C, but actually thought he did a good job last season (and was OK the prior years) until the meltdown against Washington in the NCAA's.  As I've said before, I think he's a terrible X's and O's coach once the opposing coach has made adjustments after half.  Having a good initial game plan only goes so far.

And I'm not nearly as bullish on this year's freshman class as others are.  I think there is real chance that Vander Blue will be one of the biggest busts in MU history.  I don't care how naturally athletic and quick a guy is, if he can't shoot the basketball (long or mid range), he won't be an elite player.  And he's certainly not good enough to look at the NBA after one season.

[Marquette84]

2009 was pretty much as expected.  Disappointed with the end of the season--but I don't think we would have done much more with James.  Acker played admirably against 5 of the eventual elite eight teams.  Maybe one or two more wins.  Missouri in the NCAA would still have been a crapshoot, even with James healthy.

2009 I think we actually underachieved talent.  I'll grant that the team overachived a lot of peoples expectations.  But based on the talent we had, losing to DePaul, NC State and Notre Dame should not have happened.  Of the wins, I think only the BET game against Villanova came against a truly better team.  UConn was lousy (7-11 overall in conference)--we didn't "overachieve" to take that one.  Georgetown and Louisville were more or less equivalent to us.  Xavier was only 8-5 in non-coference.

2010 is too soon to tell.  I'd say that we should have beaten Gonzaga given our--I'll reserve judgement on Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, UConn, Notre Dame, and Louisville until I see what they do the rest of the season.
 
Overall, I think the jury is still out.  Incomplete.

[Danny Noonan]

2009 was pretty much as expected.  Disappointed with the end of the season--but I don't think we would have done much more with James.  Acker played admirably against 5 of the eventual elite eight teams.  Maybe one or two more wins.  Missouri in the NCAA would still have been a crapshoot, even with James healthy.

MU84-Sorry, I have to disagree. As admirable as Acker played, there is no comparing the two players as not having DJ was a tremendous blow to our offensive and defensive.  If DJ doesn't get hurt, I think MU beats UCONN, Louisville, Syracuse and Nova and gets no worse than a 3 seed, possibly a 2. Even if they only win two of those games, they would have received a higher seed. Even if they had to play Mizzou in the tourney, how could you say a healthy DJ doesn't have a significant impact on that game? I'll agree to saying it is one of those things that can't be accurately calculated as we will never know but make no mistake MU was considered a darkhorse to make a long tourney run until DJ went down.

[Tugg Speedman]

As of this writing we have 57 respondents and the results are very interesting!

No one has picked "D" or "F".  You don't fire a coach that is graded "A", "B" or "C" or "Incomplete".

Is it correct to concluded that despite MU nation "melting down," no one wants Buzz fired?

I know, we just want him to hold a second half lead!

[77ncaachamps]

Recruiting is the lifeblood of any program. Buzz has done a good job getting in the recruits that seem to keep this program competitive.

That said, wins are wins and recruits like to win. So Buzz needs to coach these kids into a winning mindset, form, and team.

[mu_hilltopper]

All of this talk of "melting down" and/or suggestions that some advocate Buzz being fired is grossly, galactically over-stated.   

[pillardean]

As of this writing we have 57 respondents and the results are very interesting!

No one has picked "D" or "F".  You don't fire a coach that is graded "A", "B" or "C" or "Incomplete".

Is it correct to concluded that despite MU nation "melting down," no one wants Buzz fired?

I know, we just want him to hold a second half lead!

I like the last line and obviously, from the results of the survey, the majority of individuals on this board believe that Buzz will be able to hold those second half leads and begin to overtake some teams. 


From what I have seen, he has an internal fire that will not extinguish and will find ways to better himself as a coach.  From that I beleive he will become on of the great ones (throw in his personality and you have magic).

I gave him an A but wanted to give him a B+/A-.

[Ari Gold]

I said incomplete. I'm very happy with how buzz has preformed so far but it's about sustainability and player growth. Can't measure that in 2 1/2 years

[rocky_warrior]

All of this talk of "melting down" and/or suggestions that some advocate Buzz being fired is grossly, galactically over-stated.   

No kidding.  As far as I can tell the cooling tower is working fine.  I guess it's just the new buzz phrase (no pun intended).

[willie warrior]

2008 recruiting-  A nice recruiting class that included Jimmy Butler thrown together in haste in April/May 2008

2008-2009 seasson- An injury away from the elite 8, all returning players play better (including DJ who actually looked like a true PG), some nice in game coaching adjustments like putting Acker in to guard McAlerney, top 10 ranking, "unleashed" Wes and developed an NBA starter

2009 recruiting class-  3 top 100 players and possible NBA player DJO

2009-2010 season-  VASTLY overachieved.  6 seed when most people expected no tourney.  Acker and Cubes developed under him.  DJO breaks out, Lazar gets a guaranteed contract.  MU plays everyone close.  Buzz with some good coaching down the stretch with some clutch play calls.

2010 recruiting class-  2 top 100 players including our first five star and highest rated since Doc.  JUCO player of they year.  Jamil Wilson comes to MU

2010-2011 season-  a few tough losses, .500 in the Big East with a softer schedule coming up.  Probably on pace to maintain our 10 wins/year.  Jae Crowder breaks out.  Developed some bigs.

2011/2012 classes-  2 more top 100 players with many more to go.


I think that is a pretty nice resume. 

Maybe Buzz missed when he shot for the moon this summer recruiting.  Maybe we have lost a few games.  We are .500 folks.  We lost to two ranked teams. 

Buzz had no 2007 class and missed out on his best recruit in 2008.  Buzz is doing an incredible job here. 

Hey, you forgot a few things on that nice resume:
Transfers, Misses and Misfires:
Maymon; Christopherson, Smith, Roseboro, Mbao, Clark
Others: Missed out on every quality big we targeted for next year's recruits

Incredible? Don't think so yet. In Buzz we trust: Meltdown after meltdown

[Tugg Speedman]

Hey, you forgot a few things on that nice resume:
Transfers, Misses and Misfires:
Maymon; Christopherson, Smith, Roseboro, Mbao, Clark
Others: Missed out on every quality big we targeted for next year's recruits

Incredible? Don't think so yet. In Buzz we trust: Meltdown after meltdown

You cannot call guys that never showed up misfires.  So take Roseboro, and Clark of the list.  Besides, what would Roseboro actually contribute if he was here?

Christopherson was due to Crean leaving.  That happens whenever the coach leaves.  Ditto Mbakwe.

Buzz still has two schollies left, too early to say he missed on every big this year.  We don't know what is left and what Buzz has in mind.  Once they are filled and if no big guy, then this applies.

A better example of a miss would be keeping Smith instead of Newbill when over-signed last year.

[willie warrior]

You cannot call guys that never showed up misfires.  So take Roseboro, and Clark of the list.  Besides, what would Roseboro actually contribute if he was here?

Christopherson was due to Crean leaving.  That happens whenever the coach leaves.  Ditto Mbakwe.

Buzz still has two schollies left, too early to say he missed on every big this year.  We don't know what is left and what Buzz has in mind.  Once they are filled and if no big guy, then this applies.

A better example of a miss would be keeping Smith instead of Newbill when over-signed last year.

I can certainly call them misfires when they accept an offer and do not make it. Thanks for reminding of another misfire--the Newbill fiasco.

And I certainly would not categorize what Buzz has done at MU as "incredible", as the poster did.

[Mr. Nielsen]

I wonder what the trolls on JSonline would vote. Many wanted Buzz fired.

[MerrittsMustache]

I give the people who keep starting threads like this an F in logic and common sense.

[Goose]

I am curious on the A and B graders, what would TC get? I gave Buzz a C on overall performance thus far. If I were grading off my expectations of Buzz I would give him an A+. Grading an A or B means we are on par or better off than three years ago and it does not appear that way to me. Any program or business is current results and forecast ahead. In my opinion next year looks promising but am afraid we could see a transfer or two.

[Pakuni]

I am curious on the A and B graders, what would TC get? I gave Buzz a C on overall performance thus far. If I were grading off my expectations of Buzz I would give him an A+. Grading an A or B means we are on par or better off than three years ago and it does not appear that way to me. Any program or business is current results and forecast ahead. In my opinion next year looks promising but am afraid we could see a transfer or two.

I give Buzz a solid 'B'. First year was slightly disappointing, though the injury to DJ played a part in that. Second year bested almost everyone's expectations, and he deserves much credit for that. This year has gone pretty much as expected. The way they've lost some of these games has been brutal, but the fact they lost really comes as little surprise. I suspect if we go back and check the pre-season predictions, not many here had MU winning at Vandy, at Louisville, at Notre Dame, etc. Maybe at home against UConn, but that was long before anyone knew how good ,this UConn team was.

As for Crean, I'd give him at least a B+. He was not without his faults, and the two post-Final Four seasons were pretty much inexcusable (though defended by some of the same people ripping Buzz today), but he also brought MU to the Final Four and that season ultimately played a large part in MU getting into the Big East.

[GGGG]

A better example of a miss would be keeping Smith instead of Newbill when over-signed last year.

He had no choice.  Newbill wasn't enrolled but Smith was.

[Marquette84]

You cannot call guys that never showed up misfires.  So take Roseboro, and Clark of the list.  Besides, what would Roseboro actually contribute if he was here?

Christopherson was due to Crean leaving.  That happens whenever the coach leaves.  Ditto Mbakwe.

Buzz still has two schollies left, too early to say he missed on every big this year.  We don't know what is left and what Buzz has in mind.  Once they are filled and if no big guy, then this applies.

A better example of a miss would be keeping Smith instead of Newbill when over-signed last year.

Why do you say this "happens whenever the coach leaves"? We didn't have similar departures during our previous two coaching changes (following O'Neill and Deane). I don't even think we had this much turnover following Dukiet, and if we ever needed to clear the decks, it was then.

I'm not trying to start some string of personal attacks or accusations of agendas.  I'm really trying to understand the source of the belief that a coaching change normally results in significant roster turnover.  My experience is that while it sometimes happens, its certainly not a given.

[Marquette84]

He had no choice.  Newbill wasn't enrolled but Smith was.

I think the point was that even if you buy the notion that we had a "side deal" with Newbill to hold off on enrollment to see if we could land Wilson, Buzz could have just as easily made that same deal with Smith instead.

[GGGG]

I think the point was that even if you buy the notion that we had a "side deal" with Newbill to hold off on enrollment to see if we could land Wilson, Buzz could have just as easily made that same deal with Smith instead.

I doubt that.  Smith signed in the early period (Nov. 09).  Newbill committed in Feb 10 and didn't sign until April 10.

[Marquette84]

I doubt that.  Smith signed in the early period (Nov. 09).  Newbill committed in Feb 10 and didn't sign until April 10.

If Wilson had come to MU before April 10th, you're correct. Smith had a signed LOI and Newbill was only a verbal.  

But as of April 10, both Smith and Newbill were on equal footing with respect to their future enrollment at MU. Both had signed LOIs on file with the school, and both would have the same potential date of enrollment.

Anytime after April 10, Buzz had equal ability to go to either Smith or Newbill and offer the deal to make room for Wilson. He chose to ask Newbill for the release from his LOI--he could have just as easily asked Smith.

[Lennys Tap]

2009 I think we actually underachieved talent.  

Our three guard starting backcourt had a TOTAL number of 8 high major starts under their belt entering the season. The number would have been 0 but for injury and the teams record was 2-6 in those games. They were 5'8, 5'11, and 6'2 (and that's being very generous. Our starting "power forward" was a 6'7 small forward who was an honorable mention AA in junior college (that's a couple of notches below a Jamail Lott) and had never started a D1 game. Our starting "center" was a stud, but he was a 3/4 totally playing out of position. In short, we were extremely small, and 2 of our 3 "experienced" players were undistinguished career backups. And as Big East teams go we had a very thin, weak bench.


Hall of fame coaches (Calhoun, Pitino) marveled at how much Buzz squeezed out of this undersized, ordinary at best group. Calhoun even admitted that UCONN had much more talent than MU despite Marquette's better record.

Saying that last year's team (11-7 conference, 6 seed in the tournament) UNDERPERFORMED its talents would be received by any knowledgeable basketball fan the same way a flat earther would be looked on by the scientific community - bewilderment and laughter.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Our three guard starting backcourt had a TOTAL number of 8 high major starts under their belt entering the season. The number would have been 0 but for injury and the teams record was 2-6 in those games. They were 5'8, 5'11, and 6'2 (and that's being very generous. Our starting "power forward" was a 6'7 small forward who was an honorable mention AA in junior college (that's a couple of notches below a Jamail Lott) and had never started a D1 game. Our starting "center" was a stud, but he was a 3/4 totally playing out of position. In short, we were extremely small, and 2 of our 3 "experienced" players were undistinguished career backups. And as Big East teams go we had a very thin, weak bench.

Hall of fame coaches (Calhoun, Pitino) marveled at how much Buzz squeezed out of this undersized, ordinary at best group. Calhoun even admitted that UCONN had much more talent than MU despite Marquette's better record.

Saying that last year's team (11-7 conference, 6 seed in the tournament) UNDERPERFORMED its talents would be received by any knowledgeable basketball fan the same way a flat earther would be looked on by the scientific community - bewilderment and laughter.

Well said. 

[Tugg Speedman]

Our three guard starting backcourt had a TOTAL number of 8 high major starts under their belt entering the season. The number would have been 0 but for injury and the teams record was 2-6 in those games. They were 5'8, 5'11, and 6'2 (and that's being very generous. Our starting "power forward" was a 6'7 small forward who was an honorable mention AA in junior college (that's a couple of notches below a Jamail Lott) and had never started a D1 game. Our starting "center" was a stud, but he was a 3/4 totally playing out of position. In short, we were extremely small, and 2 of our 3 "experienced" players were undistinguished career backups. And as Big East teams go we had a very thin, weak bench.


Hall of fame coaches (Calhoun, Pitino) marveled at how much Buzz squeezed out of this undersized, ordinary at best group. Calhoun even admitted that UCONN had much more talent than MU despite Marquette's better record.

Saying that last year's team (11-7 conference, 6 seed in the tournament) UNDERPERFORMED its talents would be received by any knowledgeable basketball fan the same way a flat earther would be looked on by the scientific community - bewilderment and laughter.

+1

[bilsu]

I thought the question was about his coaching ability and I gave him an A for that. The team always plays hard, but let face in the Big East we are less talented than a number of teams. I thought we were a quick team, but Uconns bigs were so much more athletic it was unbelieveable. MU has given up a number of leads and lost close games under Buzz and it is easy to say he was out coached. However, I have a different take on it. The announcers frequently say the MU is the hardest playing team in the conference. They play hard on defense and offense. That is how they get in these close games against more talented teams. The other teams do not work as hard, but because ot their talented level they can turn it on at end of games and steal a game from a less talented team that out played because of effort for most of the game. At this point if you base the grade on recruiting I would give him an A for effort and a C+ for results. At this point I think the talent level at MU is on a decline.

[Marquette84]

Our three guard starting backcourt had a TOTAL number of 8 high major starts under their belt entering the season. The number would have been 0 but for injury and the teams record was 2-6 in those games. They were 5'8, 5'11, and 6'2 (and that's being very generous. Our starting "power forward" was a 6'7 small forward who was an honorable mention AA in junior college (that's a couple of notches below a Jamail Lott) and had never started a D1 game. Our starting "center" was a stud, but he was a 3/4 totally playing out of position. In short, we were extremely small, and 2 of our 3 "experienced" players were undistinguished career backups. And as Big East teams go we had a very thin, weak bench.


Hall of fame coaches (Calhoun, Pitino) marveled at how much Buzz squeezed out of this undersized, ordinary at best group. Calhoun even admitted that UCONN had much more talent than MU despite Marquette's better record.

Saying that last year's team (11-7 conference, 6 seed in the tournament) UNDERPERFORMED its talents would be received by any knowledgeable basketball fan the same way a flat earther would be looked on by the scientific community - bewilderment and laughter.

Those are the exact same arguments you made BEFORE last season began.  

Why are you still making them even though we both know you were wrong on every one of them?

You thought that because DJO and Buycks were JUCOs without D1 experience, they would suck.
I thought that because they were 1st team AA JUCOs, they would be good players for us.
Who made the right call on this one?

You thought that because Acker had a 2-6 record, and he was short, that he wouldn't be any good.
I thought that because he played well against 5 Elite Eight teams, he would be pretty good.
Who made the right call on this one?

You thought that because Hayward was out of position and short, he wouldn't be good.
I thought based on an outstanding junior year and some preseason NBA draft interest, he would be a stud.
Who made the right call on this one?

You thought because Butler never started, and wasn't highly regarded in HS, that he couldn't be good.
I thought that because he had outstanding offensive performance in 2009, he would shine when moved up to a starting role.
Who made the right call on this one?

Saying that last year's team (11-7 conference, 6 seed in the tournament) UNDERPERFORMED its talents would be received by any knowledgeable basketball fan the same way a flat earther would be looked on by the scientific community - bewilderment and laughter.

You confuse overachieving our talent with overachieving your expectations.

We already know you booted it on making an accurate assessment of our talent. We actually had much more than you gave us credit for.

Now we have to look at what we did with that talent.  

For example, do you HONESTLY feel that it was an accurate reflection of our team's talent to lose to DePaul?  
Do you think we lacked the talent to beat Notre Dame and NC State at home?  
To hold a 17 point 2nd half lead to Florida State?  
Lose (as a #6 seed) to the #11 seed Washington by blowing a 15 point 2nd half lead?

I believe MARQUETTE was the better team in each of those five games, therefore, losing each is evidence of underachievement in each.

On the other side, only Villanova was clearly better than we were.  

[Lennys Tap]

You thought that because DJO and Buycks were JUCOs without D1 experience, they would suck.



You thought that because Acker had a 2-6 record, and he was short, that he wouldn't be any good.


You thought that because Hayward was out of position and short, he wouldn't be good.


You thought because Butler never started, and wasn't highly regarded in HS, that he couldn't be good.




 

1. Total fabrication/lie. NEVER said that Buycks or DJO would "suck" - or anything like that.

2. I will readily admit that Acker played better than I ever expected. He was recruited by Tom Crean as mid major transfer to serve as a back up point guard. I agree with Crean's assessment of his "talent" level.

3. Total fabrication/lie part II. Never thought or said Hayward "wouldn't be good". Quite the contrary.

4. Total fabrication/lie part III. Again please point out where I EVER said Jimmy Butler "couldn't be any good". You won't because I didn't.

We had talent on last year's team, but not elite level Big East talent. That was clear to anyone who gets paid to judge it. When a hall of fame coach like Jim Calhoun, a guy who could forget 80% of what he knows about basketball and still know twice as much as you, calls MU the poster child of OVERACHIEVERS  I listen. The good news, of course, is that the game doesn't always go to the team with the most talent.

If you want to stand alone on an island shouting that MU underachieved its talent last year be my guest - it's worth a good laugh for everyone else. Please refrain from lying (claiming I said Buycks and DJO sucked or Lazar and Butler couldn't play) in an attempt to make your point. 

[Da 'Lanche]

Might as well provide some context:

Al:   A+
Hank:  B+ as a head coach and A as an Assistant
Majerus:  C-
Dukiet:  F
Deanne: C
O'Neal:  B+
Crean:  A
Buzz:  Objectively a B with potential.   But, compared to my reactions/expectations when he was named head coach:  A+

[Marquette84]

1. Total fabrication/lie. NEVER said that Buycks or DJO would "suck" - or anything like that.

This is a simple one, Lenny.  You claimed that we had 12th place talent. 12th place sucks. 

2. I will readily admit that Acker played better than I ever expected. He was recruited by Tom Crean as mid major transfer to serve as a back up point guard. I agree with Crean's assessment of his "talent" level.

Let me get this straight:  You completely ignored Acker's recent performance against 5 elite eight opponents late in the 2009 season, and instead based your prediction on information from when he was recruited back in 2006? 

No wonder you were so wrong.

3. Total fabrication/lie part II. Never thought or said Hayward "wouldn't be good". Quite the contrary.

Contrary?  You thought Hayward was the centerpiece of a 12th place team.  12th place DEFINES a performance thats not very good.   
 

4. Total fabrication/lie part III. Again please point out where I EVER said Jimmy Butler "couldn't be any good". You won't because I didn't.

You specifically said Butler was "a couple notches below Jamil Lott."   

We had talent on last year's team, but not elite level Big East talent.

Straw man alert:  I never said we were going to contend for the league title and a #1 seed in the NCAA.

But I did say that we had top half talent, with upside to fifth or sixth place.

From day one you thought we had 12th place talent, and you stuck with it even when it was painfully obvious how wrong you were.

If you want to stand alone on an island shouting that MU underachieved its talent last year be my guest -
it's worth a good laugh for everyone else. Please refrain from lying (claiming I said Buycks and DJ sucked or Lazar and Butler couldn't play) in an attempt to make your point. 

You said over and over that our guys were no better than a 12th place team. 

12th place sucks.  Its the spot for the best of the sucky teams--bottom feeders like DePaul, Providence, South Florida, Rutgers and St. Johns.

Meanwhile, I know we underachieved last year--specifically in losses to DePaul, Florida State, NC State, Notre Dame and Washington.  And I don't think may people join you in laughing over those losses.

[Tugg Speedman]

Might as well provide some context:

Al:   A+
Hank:  B+ as a head coach and A as an Assistant
Majerus:  C-
Dukiet:  F
Deanne: C
O'Neal:  B+
Crean:  A
Buzz:  Objectively a B with potential.   But, compared to my reactions/expectations when he was named head coach:  A+

What is your grade for Tex Winters?

[mviale]

I believe Buzz, with the win over the Cuse, is an AB.

[Lennys Tap]

This is a simple one, Lenny.  You claimed that we had 12th place talent. 12th place sucks. 

So for you, the 12th most talented team in the Big East has NOBODY that can play. Everyone by definition sucks and has zero talent. That's your definition, not mine. Don't lie about what I said using that bogus criteria.

Last year, UCONN finished 12th in the Big East, PROOF to you that they had no, zero, nada talent. I would beg to differ. Kemba Walker, Jerome Dyson and Stanley Robinson were just a few of their guys I think can play a little. It must be fascinating to live in a world where a backcourt of Mo Acker and David Cubillan has more basketball talent than one with Kemba Walker and Jerome Dyson - lonely but nevertheless fascinating.

[Badgerhater]

If Buzz's MU career is graded based on a semester, I would say that he has a solid B coming out of a midterm (successful seasons, recruiting a roster) with the potential (next two seasons) of getting an A (top 4 BE finish and major NCAA run).  He still needs to put in the hard work to get that A, but thus far appears to have the capability to achieve one.

[ErickJD08]

Buzz has to get an A in my book.  He recruits extremely well.  Or roster is starting to look like an elite program.  What I mean by that is that we have high level recruits allowed to develop and not forced to contribute right away.  

After last season, I have a long leash with Buzz.  To pull off 10+ wins again with that roster was impressive.  And think about the last second losses we had too (WV and DePaul comes to mine).

We are definitely walking down the right road.  Blue will be a great player.  The jumper will come with confidence and a summer in the weight room will help him around the rim.  Wilson will be good.  JC, Crowder, Gardner, Otule, and DJO will all be solid contributors.  And we might get surprised by EWill, Jones, or a freshmen at some point.  

I think Buzz is setting up a great foundation and winning at the same time.  I am impressed by that.  And I don't think there is much more you can ask for.

[Marquette84]

So for you, the 12th most talented team in the Big East has NOBODY that can play. Everyone by definition sucks and has zero talent. That's your definition, not mine. Don't lie about what I said using that bogus criteria.

Last year, UCONN finished 12th in the Big East, PROOF to you that they had no, zero, nada talent. I would beg to differ. Kemba Walker, Jerome Dyson and Stanley Robinson were just a few of their guys I think can play a little. It must be fascinating to live in a world where a backcourt of Mo Acker and David Cubillan has more basketball talent than one with Kemba Walker and Jerome Dyson - lonely but nevertheless fascinating.

I'm surprised you you didn't simply say UConn underachieved.

For the record, most UConn fans I know thought their team sucked last year. Calhoun was distracted by the NCAA investigation.  He had too many guys that were only in it for themselves--not playing team ball.  A whole host of reasons they sucked.

Your attempt to build up their 12th place finish as some kind of elite performance that we should be proud of would generate the same type of laughter that would come from your belief that it was an overachievement to lose to DePaul, NC State, Florida State, Notre Dame and Washington.

I'm still waiting for you to name even a single game other than VU in the BET that truly represents overachievement based on the actual talent we had (not your incorrect idea of what you thought we had)

[Lennys Tap]

I'm surprised you you didn't simply say UConn underachieved.

For the record, most UConn fans I know thought their team sucked last year. Calhoun was distracted by the NCAA investigation.  He had too many guys that were only in it for themselves--not playing team ball.  A whole host of reasons they sucked.

Your attempt to build up their 12th place finish as some kind of elite performance that we should be proud of would generate the same type of laughter that would come from your belief that it was an overachievement to lose to DePaul, NC State, Florida State, Notre Dame and Washington.

I'm still waiting for you to name even a single game other than VU in the BET that truly represents overachievement based on the actual talent we had (not your incorrect idea of what you thought we had)

What's with all this bs about distractions and not playing team ball. In your world it's simple. If a team finishes 12th it proves they have 12th place talent. And in your world, having 12th place talent = every single player on your team sucks and has no talent.

Off the top of my head, the many teams we beat last year with more talent than us include Xavier, Georgetown, and UCONN, Cincinnati and St Johns back to back to back on the road.

[TJ]

What's with all this bs about distractions and not playing team ball. In your world it's simple. If a team finishes 12th it proves they have 12th place talent. And in your world, having 12th place talent = every single player on your team sucks and has no talent.

Off the top of my head, the many teams we beat last year with more talent than us include Xavier, Georgetown, and UCONN, Cincinnati and St Johns back to back to back on the road.

You really think that we were less talented than SJU last year?  Wow.

I disagree with Marquette84 about listing the 5 games and saying they should have won them all (except DePaul) - there's going to be losses in a season and we didn't have any horrible ones (except DePaul).  However, I agree with 84 in that I don't see the great number of games they won that they shouldn't have, which would be required to over-achieve.

Nova - sure
Xavier - they were good, not sure if they were that much better than us though.  One of those games that could go either way.
Georgetown - same as Xavier
UConn - not a better team than MU.  12th place finish doesn't lie
SJU - I have no words if you think that last year's SJU team was more talented than last year's MU team.

[Lennys Tap]

You really think that we were less talented than SJU last year?  Wow.

I disagree with Marquette84 about listing the 5 games and saying they should have won them all (except DePaul) - there's going to be losses in a season and we didn't have any horrible ones (except DePaul).  However, I agree with 84 in that I don't see the great number of games they won that they shouldn't have, which would be required to over-achieve.

Nova - sure
Xavier - they were good, not sure if they were that much better than us though.  One of those games that could go either way.
Georgetown - same as Xavier
UConn - not a better team than MU.  12th place finish doesn't lie
SJU - I have no words if you think that last year's SJU team was more talented than last year's MU team.

I think St. John's talent was close to ours last year and the game was our third consecutive road game. The same guys that played for them last year just absolutely routed Duke yesterday. UCONN certainly didn't turn out to be the better team than us but unquestionably had more talent (Walker, Dyson, Robinson, Oriakhi, etc.)

[mutodd5]

What's with all of the A-/B+/B- talk?  When I went to MU, there were 8 potential grades....

A
AB
B
BC
C
CD
D
F

I gave him an "A" in the poll, because I didn't have AB as an option.  I believe Buzz has overachieved in recruiting.  When Cottingham hired him, did *anyone* out there think we'd have as good of recruiting classes as we've had? 

As for some comments about recruiting JUCOs, I think that that was partly the hand he was dealt in the team he took over.  He's really hit big time as the core of our team and majority of the leadership right now are from JUCO guys (Butler, Buycks, Crowder, DJO, & Fulce).  It's not like we're becoming Huggins' Cincy teams of the 90s.... All of our JUCO guys appear to be good representatives of Marquette, so I don't like the grouping of all JUCO guys into the same category.  I think where regularly relying on JUCO guys hurts is that potential 4-year recruits question whether 1) they'll get any PT or 2) if Buzz can develop a frosh to be an NBA player.

As for NCAA tourney success, I'd LOVE to be mentioned in all of the national media as Final Four contenders every year.  I think it's great that we've consistently made the NCAA tournament and consistently finished in the top half of the Big East, however I think 2010-2011 is the first time that we really get to see Buzz with *his* team.  These are the guys he put together and I think this year getting to the NCAA tournament would be a good step to build on for next year.  A Sweet 16 run would be even better!  I do think that Buzz has had his teams all peak at the right time of the season (Feb/Mar), but just haven't been able to finish out a W in the NCAAs.  I think that happens this year!

Similar to lots of other fans out here, it'd be outstanding if we could get a big with Jimmy's heart/skill and Otule's size.  I'm not saying that Otule hasn't been much improved this year, and I think he will continue to get bigger, but wouldn't it be great to have 2-3 6'10" - 7'2" guys of his size to rotate in throughout the game?

[Pakuni]

Georgetown - same as Xavier
UConn - not a better team than MU.  12th place finish doesn't lie

Really? Georgetown ... a team with a lottery pick (Monroe) and this year's preseason favorite for POY (Freeman) weren't more talented than MU last year?

As for UConn, the issue, I believe, wasn't who had a better team or season (if it were, we'd never have such discussions, we'd just look at records), but rather who was more talented. I'm not sure who in their right mind would argue UConn's roster last year was less talented than MU's. Calhoun certainly got less from his talent than Buzz got from his, but that doesn't change the level of talent. Much as MU overachieved last year, UConn underachieved.

[ErickJD08]

You really think that we were less talented than SJU last year?  Wow.

I disagree with Marquette84 about listing the 5 games and saying they should have won them all (except DePaul) - there's going to be losses in a season and we didn't have any horrible ones (except DePaul).  However, I agree with 84 in that I don't see the great number of games they won that they shouldn't have, which would be required to over-achieve.

Nova - sure
Xavier - they were good, not sure if they were that much better than us though.  One of those games that could go either way.
Georgetown - same as Xavier
UConn - not a better team than MU.  12th place finish doesn't lie
SJU - I have no words if you think that last year's SJU team was more talented than last year's MU team.

Yeah... this is kinda ridiculous.  You are on a message board writing about basketball and yet you sound like every analyst making vanilla statements.  If a team has a good year, they are "talented".  If a team has a bad year, they are "not talented".  UConn recruits extremely well every year.  They are without a doubt more talented than MU and they have been for many years. 

Think about this... So since UNC couldn't make the tourney, does that mean they are not talented even though they get stellar recruits EVERY YEAR?  Watch the game, watch the players, and you decided.  Don't look at the record and the stats and make a vanilla statement about talent.  It is very clear you don't watch many games outside of MU games.

[TJ]

Yeah... this is kinda ridiculous.  You are on a message board writing about basketball and yet you sound like every analyst making vanilla statements.  If a team has a good year, they are "talented".  If a team has a bad year, they are "not talented".  UConn recruits extremely well every year.  They are without a doubt more talented than MU and they have been for many years. 

Think about this... So since UNC couldn't make the tourney, does that mean they are not talented even though they get stellar recruits EVERY YEAR?  Watch the game, watch the players, and you decided.  Don't look at the record and the stats and make a vanilla statement about talent.  It is very clear you don't watch many games outside of MU games.

I give up.  I admit my post that you quoted was pretty stupid.  I'm not going to try to defend my college basketball watching resume, but I do know that GU was better than I said here and a very quality win.  UConn was talented, but they weren't a very good team, and everyone admits that, so I don't think what I said was exactly wrong however we were talking about talent and you are right they always have talent.  But I didn't really want to comment on other teams' talent in all of this.  Really, all I wanted was to say, and hopefully get people to agree, that MU's team last year was as talented as their record indicates, and not a 7-9 win team that got lucky.

Also, I meant to do all of this in the other thread, but got confused and quoted a post in the wrong one.

[Marquette84]

Really? Georgetown ... a team with a lottery pick (Monroe) and this year's preseason favorite for POY (Freeman) weren't more talented than MU last year?

If you made the comparison at the start of the year based on 2009 performance, it is by no means obvious that Freeman was source of a significant talent advantage for Georgetown.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=lazar-hayward&austin-freeman=2008-2009&i=1&lazar-hayward=2008-2009&p1=austin-freeman

Did Georgetown have more talent?  Or did Freeman just overachive more than Hayward did?

As for UConn, the issue, I believe, wasn't who had a better team or season (if it were, we'd never have such discussions, we'd just look at records), but rather who was more talented. I'm not sure who in their right mind would argue UConn's roster last year was less talented than MU's. Calhoun certainly got less from his talent than Buzz got from his, but that doesn't change the level of talent. Much as MU overachieved last year, UConn underachieved.

To make this claim, you have to first assume that we didn't have that talent in the first place.

In other words, you can't say a player "overachieved" until you've defined his normal achievement.  

For example, on what basis do you support your implied claim that DJO and Buycks delivered more on the court than their talents were capable of delivering?   By definition, you set an artificially (and erroneously) low expectation for them.  

What's interesting is that even now, when we have perfect hindsight and know EXACTLY what type of players DJO and Buycks both turned out to be--you're still putting forth the proposition that those players never had the talent or skill to do what they did--they simply "overachieved."

[ErickJD08]

I give up.  I admit my post that you quoted was pretty stupid.  I'm not going to try to defend my college basketball watching resume, but I do know that GU was better than I said here and a very quality win.  UConn was talented, but they weren't a very good team, and everyone admits that, so I don't think what I said was exactly wrong however we were talking about talent and you are right they always have talent.  But I didn't really want to comment on other teams' talent in all of this.  Really, all I wanted was to say, and hopefully get people to agree, that MU's team last year was as talented as their record indicates, and not a 7-9 win team that got lucky.
Also, I meant to do all of this in the other thread, but got confused and quoted a post in the wrong one.

Yeah, I don't agree with any of that.  "Talented" in my mind means that there is some qualities that the kid possesses that comes without practice or good coaching.  Like being lightening fast, a good decision maker, a big man with great coordination, etc.  Many teams in the BE, like UConn, get great talent every year so that they have talent IN EVERY POSITION.  Marquette does not have that.  We don't.  We are talented in some positions, but not all.  But don't get this twisted.  It's not to say we were a garbage team that got lucky.  We played to our strengths very well and executed better than the other team on most nights.  Just because we won, doesn't mean we were pound for pound the better team.  Teams like UConn didn't execute properly every night.  And I give alot of that credit to Buzz.  Not all, but a lot.