For Silky - 2006 versus 2010 comparision

[Lennys Tap]

A bit disingenuous.  Burke started over Barro in 17 games, which included some cupcakes, but also included games against Oklahoma State, Duke, Wisconsin, Louisville, Notre Dame, WVU, Seton Hall, Providence, Seton Hall & Cincinnati (page 115 of the 2008 media guide).  Those don't sound like cupcakes to me.

Barro started 15 games, and that included Rutgers, Florida Gulf Coast and Savannah State.




If such a comparison is "inherently flawed and unfair" how can you conclude that Buzz is a better coach and recruiter? 

Barro was in Crean's doghouse early but was the starter for the stretch run, the Big East tournament and the NCAA tournament. Anyone interested in a fair discussion would concede he was the better player and played more when it mattered. Someone with an agenda would argue technicalities.

Again, I conclude Buzz is the better coach by comparing the way he and Crean coached the SAME players not players with made up and subjective similarities. Crean had two great recruiting classes in his nine years at MU while Buzz is one for one. I like his batting average better.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I swore I wouldn't get in this discussion... but one thing jumps out at me:

If "person A" likes Tom Crean and thinks he was a good coach, person A probably going to point to evidence that supports that.

If "person B" likes Buzz Williams and thinks he's a better coach, person B is going to look at the same evidence and say that Buzz Williams is better.

The Barro thing is a good example.

All of these accusations about "agendas" is hypocrisy at its finest. TC is the most polarizing figure in recent MU history, everybody has an agenda or a bias for and/or against TC.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Barro was in Crean's doghouse early but was the starter for the stretch run, the Big East tournament and the NCAA tournament. Anyone interested in a fair discussion would concede he was the better player and played more when it mattered. Someone with an agenda would argue technicalities.

Again, I conclude Buzz is the better coach by comparing the way he and Crean coached the SAME players not players with made up and subjective similarities. Crean had two great recruiting classes in his nine years at MU while Buzz is one for one. I like his batting average better.

I'm just curious, but doesn't it matter when in their careers they were coached?  In other words, coaching DJ, Wes, and McNeal as Freshmen-Juniors is different than coaching them as Seniors....or is it?

[ChicosBailBonds]

I swore I wouldn't get in this discussion... but one thing jumps out at me:

If "person A" likes Tom Crean and thinks he was a good coach, person A probably going to point to evidence that supports that.

If "person B" likes Buzz Williams and thinks he's a better coach, person B is going to look at the same evidence and say that Buzz Williams is better.

The Barro thing is a good example.

All of these accusations about "agendas" is hypocrisy at its finest. TC is the most polarizing figure in recent MU history, everybody has an agenda or a bias for and/or against TC.

+1

84 is making legit arguments and seems to have stumped some other people that seem to have the agendas (i.e....they hate Crean...that's fine, lots of people do).   84 asks some legit questions which never seem to be answered.

[bamamarquettefan]

You make a good argument, however I disagree on one key point.  Even if the three new guards are in fact better than the Three Amigos, I do not expect any of them to have the freshman year that DJ had.  If you read the various draft predictions, etc., you will see comments such as that after DJs freshman year everyone just assumed he would work out a few shooting kinks and be a lottery pick in a couple of years.  His numbers actually went down each year after that freshman year so it may well be that any or all of the three new guards have a better career than DJ did, but I don't believe any of them will have a better freshman year than DJ did in 2006.

I mean, you throw a freshman on the court to run the point with two other freshman guards playing with him, and he puts in 473 points, 140 rebounds, 167 assists and 50 steals, even blocks 12 shots?  Jerel steps on the court and is one the top 50 steals guys in the country despite playing in a league that commits very few turnovers (see www.kenpom.com), and all three would have been classified as "Major Contributors" if Matthews hadn't broken his foot.

I agree with some of the ways Lazar can be better than Novak was in 2006, but again looking at kenpom.com, Novak was actually rated as the No. 1 offensive player in the country that year.

In short, I think all your arguments are valid for why this class can achieve much more than the 2006 class over the course of their careers, but I would really be shocked if they finished in the Top 4 in the Big East.  I think they could be anywhere between the 2006 year and the 1991 year, which was also an excellent set of newcomers in Key, McIlvaine, Curry and Logterman, but still went 11-18 out of the gates, followed by 16-13, 20-8 (NCAA bid) and 24-9 (Sweet 16).  I certainly hope we don't start 11-18, but we need to be prepared for the logical progression of great freshman making a lot of mistakes and getting better and better over time.  I really don't think we can expect anyone to step on the court and do what DJ did as a freshman, and I do expect a lot of early season turnovers from the three new guards.  My hope is that the team hits stride by January, and improves enough as the season goes on to sneak into the tourney and by then has improved enough to pull a couple of upsets by the end of the year.  But still, I expect a middle of the pack Big East season due to some early losses.

Hope I'm wrong and you are right and the gel immediately.

[Marquette84]

Again, I conclude Buzz is the better coach by comparing the way he and Crean coached the SAME players not players with made up and subjective similarities. Crean had two great recruiting classes in his nine years at MU while Buzz is one for one. I like his batting average better.

You state once again that Buzz has proven himself a better coach.  You think he's a better recruiter.

Yet is is somehow unfair to expect that he would merely match the performance of his predecessor in a similar situation.  Too subjective you say.

So the question becomes--if it is too subjective to set expectations based on past performance, what rational basis will you have to know whether Buzz meets expectations?

[Marquette84]

You make a good argument, however I disagree on one key point.  Even if the three new guards are in fact better than the Three Amigos, I do not expect any of them to have the freshman year that DJ had.  If you read the various draft predictions, etc., you will see comments such as that after DJs freshman year everyone just assumed he would work out a few shooting kinks and be a lottery pick in a couple of years.  His numbers actually went down each year after that freshman year so it may well be that any or all of the three new guards have a better career than DJ did, but I don't believe any of them will have a better freshman year than DJ did in 2006.

I mean, you throw a freshman on the court to run the point with two other freshman guards playing with him, and he puts in 473 points, 140 rebounds, 167 assists and 50 steals, even blocks 12 shots?  Jerel steps on the court and is one the top 50 steals guys in the country despite playing in a league that commits very few turnovers (see www.kenpom.com), and all three would have been classified as "Major Contributors" if Matthews hadn't broken his foot.

I agree with some of the ways Lazar can be better than Novak was in 2006, but again looking at kenpom.com, Novak was actually rated as the No. 1 offensive player in the country that year.

In short, I think all your arguments are valid for why this class can achieve much more than the 2006 class over the course of their careers, but I would really be shocked if they finished in the Top 4 in the Big East.  I think they could be anywhere between the 2006 year and the 1991 year, which was also an excellent set of newcomers in Key, McIlvaine, Curry and Logterman, but still went 11-18 out of the gates, followed by 16-13, 20-8 (NCAA bid) and 24-9 (Sweet 16).  I certainly hope we don't start 11-18, but we need to be prepared for the logical progression of great freshman making a lot of mistakes and getting better and better over time.  I really don't think we can expect anyone to step on the court and do what DJ did as a freshman, and I do expect a lot of early season turnovers from the three new guards.  My hope is that the team hits stride by January, and improves enough as the season goes on to sneak into the tourney and by then has improved enough to pull a couple of upsets by the end of the year.  But still, I expect a middle of the pack Big East season due to some early losses.

Hope I'm wrong and you are right and the gel immediately.

I think the consideration you're overlooking is that we aren't putting three frosh in the backcourt. 

We are putting one frosh (Cadougan), one soph (DJO) and one junior (Buycks). 

If we have freshman-like performance from DJO and Buycks, I'll be very disappointed.  They ought to be able to gel more quickly than the amigos did on the basis that two of them have already stepped up to a higher level of play.

KenPom's offensive rankings is an interesting tool, did you know Jimmy Butler was ranked 4th nationally last year?  I think I've underestimated him in the direct comparison with Joe Chapman. 

[Lennys Tap]

You state once again that Buzz has proven himself a better coach.  You think he's a better recruiter.

Yet is is somehow unfair to expect that he would merely match the performance of his predecessor in a similar situation.  Too subjective you say.

So the question becomes--if it is too subjective to set expectations based on past performance, what rational basis will you have to know whether Buzz meets expectations?

Next year TC returns a bunch of starters (all 5?) and welcomes a top 5 recruiting class. Buzz returns one starter and an outstanding class regarded as almost Indiana's equal. Slight edge to IU, but wouldn't this result in a better comparison of Crean vs Buzz than the bizzare back to the future scenario you propose? Of couse it would, but it might not fit your agenda as well.

[Lennys Tap]

I swore I wouldn't get in this discussion... but one thing jumps out at me:

If "person A" likes Tom Crean and thinks he was a good coach, person A probably going to point to evidence that supports that.

If "person B" likes Buzz Williams and thinks he's a better coach, person B is going to look at the same evidence and say that Buzz Williams is better.

The Barro thing is a good example.

All of these accusations about "agendas" is hypocrisy at its finest. TC is the most polarizing figure in recent MU history, everybody has an agenda or a bias for and/or against TC.

84 was the one who said Buzz had the entire 2007 starting lineup back. Everyone that follows MU basketball knows that Barro was our starting center and played the majority of the minutes in the games that counted the most. This has nothing to do with TC for me. It has to do with 84 making misleading statements that put TC in the most favorable light and Buzz in the least favorable.

As a fence straddler who leans heavily to the pro TC side, what do you consider a fair characterization of the Barro/Burke situation in 2007? While your at it, please point out any examples of the hypocrisy (at its finest) in my posts. Thanks.

[Lennys Tap]

+1

84 is making legit arguments and seems to have stumped some other people that seem to have the agendas (i.e....they hate Crean...that's fine, lots of people do).   84 asks some legit questions which never seem to be answered.

Which "legitimate questions" remain unanswered? If your asking do I think Buzz has to coach next year's team to a 4th place finish in the BEast to be the equal of TC, the answer is obviously an emphatic NO. His apples to tangerines, back to the futre scenario is as absurd as it is disingenuous. Is there anything else I missed?

[Silky]

I will be glad to answer those questions if you can give me some clarity on a few things:
-can you please share and come clean on what your relationship with Tom Crean or the Harbaugh family is?
-By better coach, are you saying X's and O's?  Player relationships?  Development of players?

As far as recruiting, Tom Crean has 10 years of a track record, so I would say he is better.  But that's like saying a 15 year boy can throw the ball faster than a 5 year old due to him being older and doing it longer.  It's way too early to give a fair assessment.

How about a comparison of Tom Crean's first year and 2nd year vs. Buzz's?  Crean was obviously a better coach in year 9  than year 1, correct?

Thanks.

I keep asking you this, but you won't answer.  I'll try again--two simple questions:

• Do you think Buzz is a better coach?
• Do you think Buzz is a better recruiter?

These are pretty simple yes-or-no questions.  

I am directing this argument to the significant number of people on this board who answer YES to both questions If you're not one of them, I don't understand why you keep debating the point.

I want THOSE people to explain how they can simultaneously think that Crean underachived, but Buzz shouldn't perform at least as well.


This seems to be the general consensus on this board, doesn't it?   According to many (generally, those who think Buzz is a significant upgrade in both coaching and recruiting), Crean vastly underachieved -- and they say it is because he's a poor coach and a poor recruiter.

I disagree with their premise. But for the sake of argument, I'll accept it.

With that assumption, if you think 4th/5th place in the Big East was underachieving due to poor coaching and poor recruiting, and we get a new coach with better coaching and better recruiting--then shouldn't we expect better performance?

The logical answer is "yes."



Well it is a stupid argument on your part because its based on a false assumption.

I am not forecasting 4th place.  I'm questioning why those who said Crean underachieved haven't adopted Crean's performance as their minimum standard.

Big difference.  

 

[Marquette84]

I will be glad to answer those questions if you can give me some clarity on a few things:
-can you please share and come clean on what your relationship with Tom Crean or the Harbaugh family is?

I have absolutely no relationship with Tom Crean or the Harbaugh family aside from sitting in the audience at several coaching luncheons over the years.  Sorry to disappoint you. 
 
Why do you think I would be here if I did have any relationship?  I can't imagine a place I would care about less than this board if I weren't an MU fan. 

Apparently, because I never developed the same level of hatred toward Crean as others, I have an "agenda'. 

-By better coach, are you saying X's and O's?  Player relationships?  Development of players?

Sounds like you have doubts.  Welcome to the club. 

Let me warn you though--because you didn't instantly say that Buzz is a better recruiter and coach, you obviously have an agenda.

As far as recruiting, Tom Crean has 10 years of a track record, so I would say he is better. 

Gee--do you have a relationship with Tom Crean or the Harbaugh family?  Only someone with an agenda would make this claim, or so I'm told.

I'l note that this puts you at odds with guys like Lenny and plenty of others on this board, who have already concluded that Buzz is better. 

 But that's like saying a 15 year boy can throw the ball faster than a 5 year old due to him being older and doing it longer.  It's way too early to give a fair assessment.

That's exactly my position--"Jury is still out" were the words I used in a previous posts--and thats proof that I have an "agenda."  I guess you share it.

How about a comparison of Tom Crean's first year and 2nd year vs. Buzz's?  Crean was obviously a better coach in year 9  than year 1, correct?

Thanks.

I think I made it pretty clear why I chose the 2006 versus 2010 comparison.

Same league:  The Big East
Same quality based on projections for 2010.
Same number of Starters returning:  2
Same number of potential NBA draft picks:  1
Similar quality in a direct comparison of Novak versus Hayward
Similar quality in a direct comparison of Chapman versus Butler
Same number of newcomers:  7
Same number of newcomers who were top 100 ranked freshmen:  3
Same number of transfers (from Juco/4 year programs) 2

I don't think we'll see



***How about a comparison of Tom Crean's first year and 2nd year vs. Buzz's?  Crean was obviously a better coach in year 9  than year 1, correct?


I'm assuming that anyone who feels Buzz is ALREADY better than Crean was in his 9th season would also feel Buzz is better than Crean was in his first or second season. 

I choose 2006 versus 2010 because it will probably be as close as a comparison as we're ever likely to see.  Same makeup of the team.  Roughly the same quality of returning players.  Same numbers of returning and newcomers.  You can't ask for a closer comparision.

[bilsu]

Since the Crean & Buzz will never coach the exact same team, you can only judge who is better after five years or so. Even then the better recruiter might have more success, but not be the better game coach. The reality is in the next 10 years Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina are going to win most of the NCAA championships.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

84 was the one who said Buzz had the entire 2007 starting lineup back. Everyone that follows MU basketball knows that Barro was our starting center and played the majority of the minutes in the games that counted the most. This has nothing to do with TC for me. It has to do with 84 making misleading statements that put TC in the most favorable light and Buzz in the least favorable.

As a fence straddler who leans heavily to the pro TC side, what do you consider a fair characterization of the Barro/Burke situation in 2007? While your at it, please point out any examples of the hypocrisy (at its finest) in my posts. Thanks.

This is the hypocrisy that I see.

Barro was in Crean's doghouse early but was the starter for the stretch run, the Big East tournament and the NCAA tournament. Anyone interested in a fair discussion would concede he was the better player and played more when it mattered. Someone with an agenda would argue technicalities.

Again, I conclude Buzz is the better coach by comparing the way he and Crean coached the SAME players not players with made up and subjective similarities. Crean had two great recruiting classes in his nine years at MU while Buzz is one for one. I like his batting average better.

You've already made up your mind that Buzz is a better coach, so it really doesn't matter what MU84 says about 2010, you are going to say that you think Buzz is better and find evidence that supports this belief. I'm not against your logic (it makes some sense), but you've already made up your mind, so it's hypocritical to attack somebody for having an "agenda" when you already have some strong beliefs about Buzz being a better coach.

MU84 has shown he is partial to TC, so he is going to look at that same evidence and find something that shows Crean was a good coach.

You guys are really similar, but just playing opposite sides of the fence.

I'm not against the discussion, but let's drop the whole "so and so has an agenda" bit. We all have biases and "agendas" based upon what we believe.

[Lennys Tap]

This is the hypocrisy that I see.


You've already made up your mind that Buzz is a better coach, so it really doesn't matter what MU84 says about 2010, you are going to say that you think Buzz is better and find evidence that supports this belief. I'm not against your logic (it makes some sense), but you've already made up your mind, so it's hypocritical to attack somebody for having an "agenda" when you already have some strong beliefs about Buzz being a better coach.

MU84 has shown he is partial to TC, so he is going to look at that same evidence and find something that shows Crean was a good coach.

You guys are really similar, but just playing opposite sides of the fence.

I'm not against the discussion, but let's drop the whole "so and so has an agenda" bit. We all have biases and "agendas" based upon what we believe.

There is a difference between forming an opinion and having an agenda. A fair person forms an opinion based on the data available, applying fair and impartial principles (logic). This opinion necessarily evolves as the "facts on the ground" change. Someone with an agenda  considers his opinion inviolate and is only interested in defending it, even if it means twisting or misrepresenting the facts.

I have never been a basher of Crean the coach or recruiter. I am on record agreeing with Chicos that the Crean era was the second most successful one in MU history. Then last year I watched our new guy coach TC's players better than TC did, so I concluded that Buzz was a better coach. In his first year as a recruiter I watched our new guy equal or surpass TC's best years, and I formed an opinion about that too. I don't pretend to speak ex cathedra, and I reserve the right to change my opinions as the facts change. I also do not hide the fact that I consider Buzz to be far superior to TC as a human being. The more I know him the more I like him. Unfortunately, I found the opposite to be true about TC.

84 plays fast and loose with the facts and concocts oddball scenarios to compare TC and Buzz because he has an agenda -to put anything and everything from the Tom Crean era in the most positive light possible, even if the truth needs to be stretched or disregarded.

If you think I'm a hypocrite for recognizing 84's agenda so be it. I strongly disagree with you but it's refreshing to see you out on the limb expressing an opinion as it seems that you often twist yourself into a pretzel avoiding it.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

There is a difference between forming an opinion and having an agenda. A fair person forms an opinion based on the data available, applying fair and impartial principles (logic). This opinion necessarily evolves as the "facts on the ground" change. Someone with an agenda  considers his opinion inviolate and is only interested in defending it, even if it means twisting or misrepresenting the facts.

I have never been a basher of Crean the coach or recruiter. I am on record agreeing with Chicos that the Crean era was the second most successful one in MU history. Then last year I watched our new guy coach TC's players better than TC did, so I concluded that Buzz was a better coach. In his first year as a recruiter I watched our new guy equal or surpass TC's best years, and I formed an opinion about that too. I don't pretend to speak ex cathedra, and I reserve the right to change my opinions as the facts change. I also do not hide the fact that I consider Buzz to be far superior to TC as a human being. The more I know him the more I like him. Unfortunately, I found the opposite to be true about TC.

84 plays fast and loose with the facts and concocts oddball scenarios to compare TC and Buzz because he has an agenda -to put anything and everything from the Tom Crean era in the most positive light possible, even if the truth needs to be stretched or disregarded.

If you think I'm a hypocrite for recognizing 84's agenda so be it. I strongly disagree with you but it's refreshing to see you out on the limb expressing an opinion as it seems that you often twist yourself into a pretzel avoiding it.

Maybe hypocrisy is too strong of a term, because people have such a negative connotation to it.

MU84 believes his opinions are based in fact and conclusions just like you do. You may disagree, but he does provide the background for all of his conclusions. (his posts are notoriously long, but do provide rationale)

I bring up the Barro situation because you both are looking at the exact same thing, but forming different conclusions.

I don't think either of you have a real "agenda", I think you both just have different opinions and feelings about TC and/or Buzz, and thus it can influence each of your abilities to truly look at the situation objectively (we all have that, including me).

If you really want my opinion, well, I think you have to give Buzz 4 of 5 years before you can judge him. Also, TC really doesn't have anything to do with the Buzz Williams era. Buzz is Buzz.

Comparisons (although inevitable) are most likely unfair to both coaches as we (fans) don't have all of the inside information to truly evaluate a coach's performance.

So, in short, I think you are both crazy for debating this in July after Buzz's first year.  

[Lennys Tap]

Maybe hypocrisy is too strong of a term, because people have such a negative connotation to it.

MU84 believes his opinions are based in fact and conclusions just like you do. You may disagree, but he does provide the background for all of his conclusions. (his posts are notoriously long, but do provide rationale)

I bring up the Barro situation because you both are looking at the exact same thing, but forming different conclusions.

I don't think either of you have a real "agenda", I think you both just have different opinions and feelings about TC and/or Buzz, and thus it can influence each of your abilities to truly look at the situation objectively (we all have that, including me).

If you really want my opinion, well, I think you have to give Buzz 4 of 5 years before you can judge him. Also, TC really doesn't have anything to do with the Buzz Williams era. Buzz is Buzz.

Comparisons (although inevitable) are most likely unfair to both coaches as we (fans) don't have all of the inside information to truly evaluate a coach's performance.

So, in short, I think you are both crazy for debating this in July after Buzz's first year.  

OMG. You are even super nuanced regarding hypocrisy, suggesting that it's some vaguely neutral quality given a bad name because "some people have such a negative connotation to it". Please enlighten me regarding the possible positive (or neutral for that matter) connotations for hypocrisy. While you're at it, give me a positive way to spin bigotry and cruelty.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

OMG. You are even super nuanced regarding hypocrisy, suggesting that it's some vaguely neutral quality given a bad name because "some people have such a negative connotation to it". Please enlighten me regarding the possible positive (or neutral for that matter) connotations for hypocrisy. While you're at it, give me a positive way to spin bigotry and cruelty.

Woah.

Here's some clarification:

People often automatically turn defensive when the term hypocrite or hypocritical is used. It's something nobody wants to be accused of, and often will argue very vehemently against.

So, although it might be accurate (in my estimation), it was still a poor choice of words (by me) because it can create a fight rather than a discussion.

I don't want to sound like such a peace loving freak, but I'd rather have an open discussion, rather than attack and retort thread. I'm guilty of getting into plenty of those, and I've rarely found them to be worthwhile. Just turns into a pissing match.

I have stated my opinion for all to read, and I have nothing else meaningful to add.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Next year TC returns a bunch of starters (all 5?) and welcomes a top 5 recruiting class.

I hear Furman returns all five starters this year, too, so look out...they're headed to the NCAAs (despite their 7-23 record last year).      Just because a team returns all 5 starters doesn't mean a thing, especially when several of those players are not starting players but only by necessity (they needed bodies) were they starting.  If your 5 starters suck at hoops, then giving them another year doesn't mean they are great players....it means they are more experienced sucking players.  IU's starting five last year was devoid of talent.  MU still has more talent 1 through 12 then IU does and that will be the case for one more year until IU can purge and replace more players.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Which "legitimate questions" remain unanswered? If your asking do I think Buzz has to coach next year's team to a 4th place finish in the BEast to be the equal of TC, the answer is obviously an emphatic NO. His apples to tangerines, back to the futre scenario is as absurd as it is disingenuous. Is there anything else I missed?

This one, for example, which you haven't responded to yet.


"I'm just curious, but doesn't it matter when in their careers they were coached?  In other words, coaching DJ, Wes, and McNeal as Freshmen-Juniors is different than coaching them as Seniors....or is it?"

[ChicosBailBonds]

There is a difference between forming an opinion and having an agenda. A fair person forms an opinion based on the data available, applying fair and impartial principles (logic). This opinion necessarily evolves as the "facts on the ground" change. Someone with an agenda  considers his opinion inviolate and is only interested in defending it, even if it means twisting or misrepresenting the facts.

I have never been a basher of Crean the coach or recruiter. I am on record agreeing with Chicos that the Crean era was the second most successful one in MU history. Then last year I watched our new guy coach TC's players better than TC did, so I concluded that Buzz was a better coach. In his first year as a recruiter I watched our new guy equal or surpass TC's best years, and I formed an opinion about that too. I don't pretend to speak ex cathedra, and I reserve the right to change my opinions as the facts change. I also do not hide the fact that I consider Buzz to be far superior to TC as a human being. The more I know him the more I like him. Unfortunately, I found the opposite to be true about TC.

84 plays fast and loose with the facts and concocts oddball scenarios to compare TC and Buzz because he has an agenda -to put anything and everything from the Tom Crean era in the most positive light possible, even if the truth needs to be stretched or disregarded.

If you think I'm a hypocrite for recognizing 84's agenda so be it. I strongly disagree with you but it's refreshing to see you out on the limb expressing an opinion as it seems that you often twist yourself into a pretzel avoiding it.

Good grief, he doesn't have an agenda.  He's asking pointed questions, that's all.  I come back to the same question on the statement you made....you said Buzz coached the same players that TC coached better....were they the same players?  Is coaching Wes, DJ and McNeal as seniors different than having to mold them as Freshmen through Juniors?  I think there is a big difference coaching Seniors then others, you don't seem to factor that in at all.

Let me flip the question on you....since Crean was able to coach a Sr. (Novak) and three freshman to the NCAAs as an inferior coach and recruiter, shouldn't Buzz (as a better coach and recruiter) be able to do the same thing?   I don't think the answer or question is that black and white, but that's the type of thing you're putting out there based on your statement that you've already concluded one guy is the better coach because of how he handled a senior laden class.

[bilsu]

Crean's recruiting short comings have to do with not putting together back to back classes and recruiting bigmen to go along with very talented guards. Right now Buzz has one class that is good on paper. Until they play, we will not know how good this class really is. I believe Buzz will do a good job coaching them, but success will depend on how much real talent they have, how hard they are willing to work and the injury bug. So far Buzz has not had to much luck with the injury bug. He has already lost McMorrow and problably Fulce for this year. Otule brook his foot last year. So far only Butler has made it through a season.

[Lennys Tap]

I hear Furman returns all five starters this year, too, so look out...they're headed to the NCAAs (despite their 7-23 record last year).      Just because a team returns all 5 starters doesn't mean a thing, especially when several of those players are not starting players but only by necessity (they needed bodies) were they starting.  If your 5 starters suck at hoops, then giving them another year doesn't mean they are great players....it means they are more experienced sucking players.  IU's starting five last year was devoid of talent.  MU still has more talent 1 through 12 then IU does and that will be the case for one more year until IU can purge and replace more players.

Pritchard would have been MU's starting center.

[Lennys Tap]

Good grief, he doesn't have an agenda.  He's asking pointed questions, that's all.  I come back to the same question on the statement you made....you said Buzz coached the same players that TC coached better....were they the same players?  Is coaching Wes, DJ and McNeal as seniors different than having to mold them as Freshmen through Juniors?  I think there is a big difference coaching Seniors then others, you don't seem to factor that in at all.

Let me flip the question on you....since Crean was able to coach a Sr. (Novak) and three freshman to the NCAAs as an inferior coach and recruiter, shouldn't Buzz (as a better coach and recruiter) be able to do the same thing?   I don't think the answer or question is that black and white, but that's the type of thing you're putting out there based on your statement that you've already concluded one guy is the better coach because of how he handled a senior laden class.

You're right. They weren't the same players. Wes flatlined for three years under TC, then took a quantum leap under Buzz. But don't take my word for it. Ask him. DJ's game regressed every year under Crean and he reversed that trend when Buzz got through to him that he wasn't the #1 offensive option. Only McNeal had the normal learning curve you would expect under both coaches. These guys were 4 year starters who had 100+ games under their belts when Buzz took over. The "leap" from junior to senior is largely a myth for players with that much experience.

Do I think Buzz could have coached Novak and the three amigos to the NCAA tourney? You bet. Will this year's team make it? Who knows. It's a flawed and unfair comparison. Where guys are "rated" out of high school and how they perform is not science. Brandon Bell was rated higher coming out of high school than Wade. Did Crean under achieve in his coaching of Bell? Of course not. But you guys want to compare a team with an 3rd year NBA player and three guys who are all over MU's record book with next year's group of Lazar and a group of highly rated question marks. That's insane. But I think you already knew that.

[Lennys Tap]

This one, for example, which you haven't responded to yet.


"I'm just curious, but doesn't it matter when in their careers they were coached?  In other words, coaching DJ, Wes, and McNeal as Freshmen-Juniors is different than coaching them as Seniors....or is it?"

Junior to senior doesn't matter much for players with 100+ games as a starter under their belt. If a 4 year starter "breaks out" his senior year it's most likely due to some odd situation ( Mathews taking shots away from DJ in Buzz's offense for example)