MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: madtownwarrior on November 19, 2013, 03:46:20 PM
-
I keep hearing this and Buzz mentioned this at the fish fry. People also said Buzz has not installed the out-of-bounds plays yet.
Not being a basketball guru like all of you - why would a coach want to enter a game of major magnitude (or any game for that matter) with out an offense or OOB plays installed? Seems like you are severely hindering your chance to win. Seems like OSU and Wisconsin have installed offenses and OOB plays - does Buzz know something that Matta and Bo do not?
-
Buzz has always put in his defense first. It is one of his idiosyncrasies. I don't know why.
-
- does Buzz know something that Matta and Bo do not?
Yes, he does. The way to the Elite 8 is not to show your hand on OOB plays too early--and by too early I mean during the regular season. The plan is to have 3-4 turnovers off of inbounds plays early in the year and come March those backdoor OOB plays work to perfection cuz no one has seen them all year! That is 3-4 less turnovers in the tourney before the game even starts.
-
He better work on that in bounds play, because Derrick was having a hard time finding someone open. One 5 second count a number of close calls. Someone (I think Juan) threw it away on 2nd half inbounds play.
-
We were lucky to make it to the Elite 8. It's not like we plowed our way through the tournament!
-
We were lucky to make it to the Elite 8. It's not like we plowed our way through the tournament!
So now we are going to denigrate last year? ::)
-
So now we are going to denigrate last year? ::)
(http://www.newyorker.com/images/2012/01/16/cartoons/120116_cartoon_045_a16237_p465.gif)
-
So now we are going to denigrate last year? ::)
Of course. Then we need to decide if Scoopers will focus next on denigrating the BE Champ Men's Soccer, or BE Champ Women's Soccer. We need to decide quick before we get distracted by the New Hampshire results.
-
(http://www.newyorker.com/images/2012/01/16/cartoons/120116_cartoon_045_a16237_p465.gif)
love it, haha
-
Yes, he does. The way to the Elite 8 is not to show your hand on OOB plays too early--and by too early I mean during the regular season. The plan is to have 3-4 turnovers off of inbounds plays early in the year and come March those backdoor OOB plays work to perfection cuz no one has seen them all year! That is 3-4 less turnovers in the tourney before the game even starts.
Remember how Buzz had his team defend the final inbound play by Butler? In a way that saint Brad had never seen or prepped for? Pretty sure that one was not in the bag the first time MU played Butler. Buzz has said he tries to teach his team how he wants them to play, and then installs an offense.
-
Remember how Buzz had his team defend the final inbound play by Butler? In a way that saint Brad had never seen or prepped for? Pretty sure that one was not in the bag the first time MU played Butler. Buzz has said he tries to teach his team how he wants them to play, and then installs an offense.
Our downfall will be too many cupcakes
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dqXIF9MH3lk/TL7aKkiBZhI/AAAAAAAALQk/3JJa1NhDpjA/s1600/101025_cartoon_kingkong.gif)
-
So now we are going to denigrate last year? ::)
I think the serious point is here is that you can refute the argument that "odd coaching moves in November make us solid in March" with the fact that we weren't that solid in March:
Take a look at our March games:
Nearly lost to Rutgers
nearly lost to St. Johns
Blown out by Notre Dame in the BET--a team we handled solidly a few weeks before
Nearly lost to Davidson, a 14 seed.
Barely escaped Butler.
Lost badly to Syracuse, a team we easily defeated a few weeks before.
We had two solid wins in eight games in March--Notre Dame at home, and Miami in the tournament.
AND against Notre Dame Jack Cooley was sick. Against Miami Reggie Johnson (their leading rebounder) blew out his knee the game before.
Speaking facturally about our March play isn't denigrating the team--its pointing out the falacy that Buzz's odd coaching moves in November and December made us a stronger team in March.
-
I think the serious point is here is that you can refute the argument that "odd coaching moves in November make us solid in March" with the fact that we weren't that solid in March:
Take a look at our March games:
Nearly lost to Rutgers
nearly lost to St. Johns
Blown out by Notre Dame in the BET--a team we handled solidly a few weeks before
Nearly lost to Davidson, a 14 seed.
Barely escaped Butler.
Lost badly to Syracuse, a team we easily defeated a few weeks before.
We had two solid wins in eight games in March--Notre Dame at home, and Miami in the tournament.
AND against Notre Dame Jack Cooley was sick. Against Miami Reggie Johnson (their leading rebounder) blew out his knee the game before.
Speaking facturally about our March play isn't denigrating the team--its pointing out the falacy that Buzz's odd coaching moves in November and December made us a stronger team in March.
(http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/60/6002/IOQQG00Z/posters/roz-chast-desk-with-two-signs-one-for-complaints-and-the-other-for-constructive-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg)
(http://www.newyorker.com/images/2012/07/23/p465/120723_cn-complaints_p465.jpg)
(http://antiwar.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/cartoon-New-Yorker-1965-Pentagon-complains-leave-peace-to-experts.jpg)
-
Take a look at our March games:
Nearly lost to Rutgers
nearly lost to St. Johns
Blown out by Notre Dame in the BET--a team we handled solidly a few weeks before
Nearly lost to Davidson, a 14 seed.
Barely escaped Butler.
Lost badly to Syracuse, a team we easily defeated a few weeks before.
We had two solid wins in eight games in March--Notre Dame at home, and Miami in the tournament.
AND against Notre Dame Jack Cooley was sick. Against Miami Reggie Johnson (their leading rebounder) blew out his knee the game before.
But we beat Rutgers....and St. Johns...and Davidson...and Butler...
So this is the new thing? Not only do we have to win games, but we have to blow people out to be satisfied? Wins come with an asterisk if they aren't "solid" wins?
-
Yes, if 84 can find a way to turn against Buzz. It takes a special talent to tear down an Elite 8 run. Well done, sir, you are indeed a special talent.
-
these threads are too funny. must have missed the thread thanking buzz for the 30 some game winning streak at home???
there are 500 in-bounds plays that will produce at the tip of buzz's fingers anytime he wants them. teams change it up throughout the year, but that has nothing to do with what buzz is doing right now. he's talked about this at length, and the point is defense first, and when they have that they'll worry about offense. he's often talked about how he's willing to lose a game early in order to be stronger at the end of the year. i think it has very little to do with "showing your hand" and everything to do with how he spends the valuable practice and preparation time he has with his players. his success in the tourney has been solid, and the same people who claim we have been lucky, would be saying that "we should make our own luck" if MU had been eliminated in many of those same scenarios. so argue all you want, i guess that's what the message board is for, but in the end realize no one on here is qualified to assess his job performance other than wins/losses and the conduct of the program.
-
Hey, somebody else has been paying attention to what Buzz says. This is not something new.
-
Nearly lost arguments only count with LIU-Brooklyn
-
So this is the new thing? Not only do we have to win games, but we have to blow people out to be satisfied? Wins come with an asterisk if they aren't "solid" wins?
If you're going to make the argument argue that a particular action makes a team stronger in March, then, yes, the team actually has to be stronger in March for your argument to hold.
-
If you're going to make the argument argue that a particular action makes a team stronger in March, then, yes, the team actually has to be stronger in March for your argument to hold.
Do you believe the team from last year would have been good enough in november to win the same games with did in March?
-
Yes, if 84 can find a way to turn against Buzz. It takes a special talent to tear down an Elite 8 run. Well done, sir, you are indeed a special talent.
Wrong. I tore down the agruments of those who made the baseless claim that what Buzz did in November made the team stronger in March.
If you had any intellectual honesty, you might have at least tried to make some evidence-based counter argument.
Instead, you resorted to the cheap and dirty personal attack.
-
Instead, you resorted to the cheap and dirty personal attack.
Much like you have done with regard to Buzz the last 6 years....anything and everything you can do to tear down/minimize his achievements. Still waiting for your husband to take IU to an Elite 8 - I mean come on 84 - It's Indiana, It's Indiana...a blueblood program, in a hoops hotbed state, with a ton of talent....6 years in and they are picked for 6th in the Big 10. Wow...talk about something you can be critical of...
-
Do you believe the team from last year would have been good enough in november to win the same games with did in March?
What are you asking? Do I think a November Marquette team would have been able to beat the March Davidson team? Or been able to beat the November Davidson team?
Let me ask you this: Do you think Davidson would have been capable of playing us to a last posession game in November? Keep in mind they had six non-conference losses--including UWM, Drexel and Charlotte. Think St. Johns would take us to OT in November? At about the same time they were losing to Murray State and getting blown out by San Fran? Think Rutgers in November would be good enough to have the Big East champ up by just 2 with the ball and 30 seconds to go? When they weren't capable of beating St. Peters?
Whats amusing about your question is the seeming lack of awareness that EVERY team is subject to the same start date and season length.
-
What are you asking? Do I think a November Marquette team would have been able to beat the March Davidson team? Or been able to beat the November Davidson team?
Let me ask you this: Do you think Davidson would have been capable of playing us to a last posession game in November? Keep in mind they had six non-conference losses--including UWM, Drexel and Charlotte. Think St. Johns would take us to OT in November? At about the same time they were losing to Murray State and getting blown out by San Fran? Think Rutgers in November would be good enough to have the Big East champ up by just 2 with the ball and 30 seconds to go? When they weren't capable of beating St. Peters?
Whats amusing about your question is the seeming lack of awareness that EVERY team is subject to the same start date and season length.
My lack of awareness? Thanks for the personal attack.
-
My lack of awareness? Thanks for the personal attack.
If you were truly aware that the other teams had the same chance over the course of the season to improve, then why did you specify a hypothteical matchup between MU in November, but held the other teams in March?
Was it an honest mistake--a lack of awareness--that you asked me to make the comparision that way?
Or did I spoil an intentional attempt to play "gotcha" when i shifted your question back to a fair comparison of MU in November to Davidson, St. Johns or Rutgers in November (instead of March)?
-
If you were truly aware that the other teams had the same chance over the course of the season to improve, then why did you specify a hypothteical matchup between MU in November, but held the other teams in March?
Was it an honest mistake--a lack of awareness--that you asked me to make the comparision that way?
Or did I spoil an intentional attempt to play "gotcha" when i shifted your question back to a fair comparison of MU in November to Davidson, St. Johns or Rutgers in November (instead of March)?
It was not a mistake. Nor was it any attempt at anything. I was genuinely curious whether you thought our team in november could have beaten Davidson, butler, Miami, etc.
You made the assumption I was asking about our November team beating others' march teams.
-
2011. Sweet 16
2012. Sweet 16
2013. Elite 8
-
Is Equalizer 84/Joanie?? I should have figured that out. Must have morphed into the new personae when I was in Nepal for 10 months.
-
If you're going to make the argument argue that a particular action makes a team stronger in March, then, yes, the team actually has to be stronger in March for your argument to hold.
I never made that argument. I just don't understand tearing down last year's accomplishments and saying "well, it really wasn't that impressive."
Yeah honestly it was. Perhaps I have too long a history dealing with bad Marquette basketball, but last March was fun.
-
I think the serious point is here is that you can refute the argument that "odd coaching moves in November make us solid in March" with the fact that we weren't that solid in March:
Take a look at our March games:
Nearly lost to Rutgers
nearly lost to St. Johns
Blown out by Notre Dame in the BET--a team we handled solidly a few weeks before
Nearly lost to Davidson, a 14 seed.
Barely escaped Butler.
Lost badly to Syracuse, a team we easily defeated a few weeks before.
We had two solid wins in eight games in March--Notre Dame at home, and Miami in the tournament.
AND against Notre Dame Jack Cooley was sick. Against Miami Reggie Johnson (their leading rebounder) blew out his knee the game before.
Speaking facturally about our March play isn't denigrating the team--its pointing out the falacy that Buzz's odd coaching moves in November and December made us a stronger team in March.
Using the available Kenpom data:
2013: We were ranked 58 on January 1, finished the season ranked 24 after losing in the elite 8 and winning the conference regular season.
2012: We were ranked 27 on January 4, finished the season ranked 18 after losing in the sweet 16 and finishing #2 in the conference.
2011: We were ranked 42 on January 1, finished the season ranked 30 after losing in the sweet 16 and going .500 in a conference that sent 11 teams to the dance after losing literally every game of significance in the pre-conference season.
2010: We were 2-4 in conference on January 20. There are not historical rankings by game listed, but we ended up 11-7 in conference play. After the DePaul loss, I recall KenPom had us ranked 50+ and predicted our conference record at well below .500. Made the tournament as a 6 seed.
So, "facturally" speaking, we play better in the second half of the season than the first half of the season. Not only relative to ourselves, but relative to the rest of college basketball. Your cherry-picked examples could not be less convincing. God you suck at being a negative, contrarian douchebag.
-
Using the available Kenpom data:
Your cherry-picked examples could not be less convincing. God you suck at being a negative, contrarian douchebag.
I think that about nearly all of his posts. Glad someone said it so succinctly.
-
God you suck at being a negative, contrarian douchebag.
I think you meant that he excels at being a negative, contrarian douchebag. Or did you really mean that he is a negative contrarian douchebag, but his negative contrarian douchebaggery is performed in a substandard manner?
-
Is Equalizer 84/Joanie?? I should have figured that out. Must have morphed into the new personae when I was in Nepal for 10 months.
Yes Keefe....Equalizer is the reincarnation of Marquette 84/Joanie Crean.
-
But we beat Rutgers....and St. Johns...and Davidson...and Butler...
So this is the new thing? Not only do we have to win games, but we have to blow people out to be satisfied? Wins come with an asterisk if they aren't "solid" wins?
Didnt know this was BCS football where you had to win games by 30?
-
Using the available Kenpom data:
2013: We were ranked 58 on January 1, finished the season ranked 24 after losing in the elite 8 and winning the conference regular season.
2012: We were ranked 27 on January 4, finished the season ranked 18 after losing in the sweet 16 and finishing #2 in the conference.
2011: We were ranked 42 on January 1, finished the season ranked 30 after losing in the sweet 16 and going .500 in a conference that sent 11 teams to the dance after losing literally every game of significance in the pre-conference season.
2010: We were 2-4 in conference on January 20. There are not historical rankings by game listed, but we ended up 11-7 in conference play. After the DePaul loss, I recall KenPom had us ranked 50+ and predicted our conference record at well below .500. Made the tournament as a 6 seed.
So, "facturally" speaking, we play better in the second half of the season than the first half of the season. Not only relative to ourselves, but relative to the rest of college basketball. Your cherry-picked examples could not be less convincing. God you suck at being a negative, contrarian douchebag.
+ 10,000. Perfect, except for the final sentence. He's great at being those things - a 1st team All American.
-
Your cherry-picked examples could not be less convincing.
The argument I responded to was that our performance last March demonstrated we got stronger at the end of the year.
If you're going accuse me of "cherry picking" data, please answer these two simple questions:
1. Which game in March did I leave out?
2. Which of the 8 games do you think I described incorrectly.
I know its a lot easier for you to simply call me a douchebag and try to change the argument. But perhaps for once in your life you could actually, you know, make an intelligent response.
-
After Christmas break, Buzz usually has the team playing at a different level and a lot more wrinkles in the offense.
-
2011. Sweet 16
2012. Sweet 16
2013. Elite 8
First, i'm not sure what 2011 or 2012 has to do with how we played in March 2013. Can you explain the relevance?
Second, nobody is disputing we won the games that got us to the Elite Eight. I'm simply pointing out that we didn't play stronger during that 8 game stretch in March.
I know its a lot easier for you to try to change the argument, but could you tell me WHY you disagree with the assessment I provided for the 8 games in March 2013 that I described.
-
+ 10,000. Perfect, except for the final sentence. He's great at being those things - a 1st team All American.
In your first post, you claimed to be a 1970 grad. Assuming you were 22 on graduation, that makes you around 65 years old.
Its a shame that the years have turned you into a bitter old man incapable of accepting any perspective other than your own.
Perhaps you should scroll through your old posts--half of them are either outright attacks on me, or egging on someone else for doing the same.
-
I agree with Equalizer here in that it's very silly to claim that losing in November somehow makes us stronger in March.
I also agree with the idea that MU wasn't particularly strong most of last March. They did win a lot of games and most of the time it was fun (except the Davidson game for me at least - I was too angry about the first 38 minutes to be too happy about the last 2), but to say they were playing their best is not accurate.
-
I think you meant that he excels at being a negative, contrarian douchebag. Or did you really mean that he is a negative contrarian douchebag, but his negative contrarian douchebaggery is performed in a substandard manner?
Haha the first one. just worded it poorly. too early.
-
I never made that argument. I just don't understand tearing down last year's accomplishments and saying "well, it really wasn't that impressive."
Yeah honestly it was. Perhaps I have too long a history dealing with bad Marquette basketball, but last March was fun.
Yes, it was fun--but only because we won. I think you would admit that it would have been a lot less fun had we not pulled off wins against Rutgers, St. Johns, Davidson or Butler. It would have been a lot more fun ahd we not been blown out by Notre Dame or stuffed by Syracuse.
Please accept my apologies--I misinterpeted your comment--probably becuase it was interspersed with all the other crap I put up with. I'm sorry--from my perspective it seemed like you were piling on with the others. I accept your explanation that you were really just asking about our chances against the same opponents in November.
The answer to your question is yes, I think we would have beat the same teams in November as we did in March. The only exception may be Miami becuase they didn't lose Reggie Johnson until the NCAA tournament. Keep in mind that early in the year, before his injuries he pulled a double-double in their victory against MSU, and would have been a force in keeping Gardner in check.
I think we would have beat Rutgers, St. Johns and Davidson--probably by more substantial margins than we did in March. I don't think we would have sufferd a blowout to Notre Dame (as we did in the BET) earlier in the year.
-
I agree with Equalizer here in that it's very silly to claim that losing in November somehow makes us stronger in March.
I also agree with the idea that MU wasn't particularly strong most of last March. They did win a lot of games and most of the time it was fun (except the Davidson game for me at least - I was too angry about the first 38 minutes to be too happy about the last 2), but to say they were playing their best is not accurate.
No one said that losing in November makes a team stronger in the March. The point is that Buzz isn't going to install every play and every set that he has right away because 1) it would be overwhelming, especially for the frosh, 2) he stresses defense first and 3) he doesn't want all of his sets on film this early in the season, if at all. Advanced scouting and film study are MAJOR aspects of modern sports. Buzz obviously knows that so he's not going to draw up and show his "best" plays in a November non-conf game. If using one of those plays meant the difference between winning and losing, sure, he's going to use it. But burning a play in order to cut a 10-point lead to 8 with 2 minutes left isn't something that Buzz, or any other successful D1 coach is going to do.
Teams typically get better as seasons progress and a big part of that is the coach figuring out his rotations and who plays well together and another important part is a coach using those rotations to install more of what he thinks will be the most beneficial down the stretch.
-
Please accept my apologies--I misinterpeted your comment--probably becuase it was interspersed with all the other crap I put up with. I'm sorry--from my perspective it seemed like you were piling on with the others. I accept your explanation that you were really just asking about our chances against the same opponents in November.
I am so sorry you have to "put up" with all the crap. Guess what, you do not have to post here.
-
Yes, it was fun--but only because we won. I think you would admit that it would have been a lot less fun had we not pulled off wins against Rutgers, St. Johns, Davidson or Butler. It would have been a lot more fun ahd we not been blown out by Notre Dame or stuffed by Syracuse.
Please accept my apologies--I misinterpeted your comment--probably becuase it was interspersed with all the other crap I put up with. I'm sorry--from my perspective it seemed like you were piling on with the others. I accept your explanation that you were really just asking about our chances against the same opponents in November.
The answer to your question is yes, I think we would have beat the same teams in November as we did in March. The only exception may be Miami becuase they didn't lose Reggie Johnson until the NCAA tournament. Keep in mind that early in the year, before his injuries he pulled a double-double in their victory against MSU, and would have been a force in keeping Gardner in check.
I think we would have beat Rutgers, St. Johns and Davidson--probably by more substantial margins than we did in March. I don't think we would have sufferd a blowout to Notre Dame (as we did in the BET) earlier in the year.
Going way out on a limb here - you are a lawyer, correct?
-
Using the available Kenpom data:
2013: We were ranked 58 on January 1, finished the season ranked 24 after losing in the elite 8 and winning the conference regular season.
2012: We were ranked 27 on January 4, finished the season ranked 18 after losing in the sweet 16 and finishing #2 in the conference.
2011: We were ranked 42 on January 1, finished the season ranked 30 after losing in the sweet 16 and going .500 in a conference that sent 11 teams to the dance after losing literally every game of significance in the pre-conference season.
2010: We were 2-4 in conference on January 20. There are not historical rankings by game listed, but we ended up 11-7 in conference play. After the DePaul loss, I recall KenPom had us ranked 50+ and predicted our conference record at well below .500. Made the tournament as a 6 seed.
So, "facturally" speaking, we play better in the second half of the season than the first half of the season. Not only relative to ourselves, but relative to the rest of college basketball. Your cherry-picked examples could not be less convincing. God you suck at being a negative, contrarian douchebag.
+1 to all of this
and this
2011. Sweet 16
2012. Sweet 16
2013. Elite 8
F*** the trend line, let's discuss the couple outlier points. That's just good
solid analysis.
-
You know who was playing really well at the end of last year?
Davidson
They were beating an Elite 8 team for 39:30!
-
In your first post, you claimed to be a 1970 grad. Assuming you were 22 on graduation, that makes you around 65 years old.
Its a shame that the years have turned you into a bitter old man incapable of accepting any perspective other than your own.
Perhaps you should scroll through your old posts--half of them are either outright attacks on me, or egging on someone else for doing the same.
1. I actually graduated at 21, but I did recently turn 65.
2. I am old but not bitter. I have a beautiful wife, four wonderful children and two awesome granddaughters (and look forward to many more). I'm active (I can still run a 5K in 21 minutes), healthy and think living in the USA in 2013 is terrific. You can find bitter, turn back the clock 60 years to the "good old days" folks here but I'm not one of them. I'm open to multiple perceptions on a myriad of topics and have even agreed with you a time or two. What I'm not open to is a guy who massages the facts to fit a false narrative. Too often you are that person.
3. Half? Really? That would be over 2300 posts, (aren't you an auditor?) which is, of course, preposterous. I do plead guilty to swapping personal insults with you from time to time. That's on both of us.
-
Lenny, you're not eatin' many grains or sugars, are you?
-
Lenny, you're not eatin' many grains or sugars, are you?
Way too many, Doc. I run to get rid of them.
-
No one said that losing in November makes a team stronger in the March. The point is that Buzz isn't going to install every play and every set that he has right away because 1) it would be overwhelming, especially for the frosh, 2) he stresses defense first and 3) he doesn't want all of his sets on film this early in the season, if at all. Advanced scouting and film study are MAJOR aspects of modern sports. Buzz obviously knows that so he's not going to draw up and show his "best" plays in a November non-conf game. If using one of those plays meant the difference between winning and losing, sure, he's going to use it. But burning a play in order to cut a 10-point lead to 8 with 2 minutes left isn't something that Buzz, or any other successful D1 coach is going to do.
Teams typically get better as seasons progress and a big part of that is the coach figuring out his rotations and who plays well together and another important part is a coach using those rotations to install more of what he thinks will be the most beneficial down the stretch.
Please don't interpret this as trying to put words in your mouth, but do you think that Ohio State will be suffering in March because they played better than us on Saturday?
Did Thad share too much and gave other teams a gameplan on how to beat them? Did it look like he was still struggling to get his players ready to play?
The two arguments that people keep making--Buzz hasn't had time to fully install his system, and it takes a while for freshmen to contribute--don't make sense when you realize that Buzz had exactly as much time as Thad Matta to install his system, and Buzz went with a lineup that included a 6th year senior, two 5th year seniors, one true senior, two juniors and a soph.
--Yes, we'll get better over the course of the year. But that's the case for all 347 D1 teams.
--No, Buzz doesn't have everying perfected in November. But neither do any other coaches.
--Yes, Buzz wants to hide some aspects of his offense--but other coaches have exactly the same motivation.
What's different about Buzz and Marquette than any other coach and/or team?
One more thing--I agree that that game film and analysis is a big part of the game--but do you really think coaches dig back to November when they're gameplanning for March? For example, wouldn't you think that Davidson relied far more heavily on the Notre Dame BET and St. Johns games to learn how to beat us, than anything that happened in November?
-
Some people here don't understand all of the kenpom formula apparently, at least the way they are using the results.
Through the first of January, you typically play cupcakes and a few tough opponents. For high major teams playing tough schedules, they typically will improve their rating if they play about .500 ball due to the schedule strength portion of the formula. You can lose, and move up is one way to put it. Now, if you lose too many, it will go the other way, but from a calendar perspective, comparing to first of January to end of March has a few issues. One is strength of schedule. Two is the number of games played is small (smaller sample size).
Feel free to email Ken Pom on this if you wish.
To be clear, I am not saying we don't play better at the end of the year IN SOME YEARS, but the way the data is used here has some biases that have not been stated. Happy to have done so for everyone. Carry on.
-
1. I actually graduated at 21, but I did recently turn 65.
2. I am old but not bitter. I have a beautiful wife, four wonderful children and two awesome granddaughters (and look forward to many more). I'm active (I can still run a 5K in 21 minutes), healthy and think living in the USA in 2013 is terrific. You can find bitter, turn back the clock 60 years to the "good old days" folks here but I'm not one of them. I'm open to multiple perceptions on a myriad of topics and have even agreed with you a time or two. What I'm not open to is a guy who massages the facts to fit a false narrative. Too often you are that person.
3. Half? Really? That would be over 2300 posts, (aren't you an auditor?) which is, of course, preposterous. I do plead guilty to swapping personal insults with you from time to time. That's on both of us.
What false narrative are you talking about here?
Someone said we were playing stronger in March. I listed the 8 games we played in March. The results of those games (even those we won) sugggest that those games did not characterize "strong play."
So what part was false?
Did we squeak by bottom-half teams like St. Johns & Rutgers? Well, that's true.
Did we lose matchups to Notre Dame and Syracuse--teams we beat earlier in the season? True again.
Did we require 14th seed Davidson to make a mistake in their last play in order for us to avoid a first round upset? Yes again.
Did we have exactly the same game end situation with Butler as we had at the beginning of the season? yes.
Did Miami lose a key player the game before we played them? Absolutely.
I look at all of that and conclude we weren't plaing "strong" at the end of the season.
Good enough? Yes
Strong? Don't think so.
So please explain what facts were massagd to make this a "false narrative."
If anything, the facts make this a "true but unpleasant" narrative.
Sorry, but I don't see it as Buzz's finest coaching job that we were in so many near-loss sitations in March, and didn't improve on any of our rematches (Butler was the same, ND and Syracuse we performed far worse).
-
Real question... does any of this matter? Does it matter if we're stronger in March vs. November? Does it matter when Buzz implements things for the team? Does it matter if we're blowing out teams or winning by close margins? Does it matter whatever argument you're making? No. Most of these are just dumb, meaningless arguments. Unless, of course, you've got an agenda and are trying to paint Buzz in a good/bad light.
What does matter? Winning. And, regardless of how it's done, Marquette is doing that. And doing it at a pretty impressive level. All the rest is background noise.
-
Please don't interpret this as trying to put words in your mouth, but do you think that Ohio State will be suffering in March because they played better than us on Saturday?
Did Thad share too much and gave other teams a gameplan on how to beat them? Did it look like he was still struggling to get his players ready to play?
The two arguments that people keep making--Buzz hasn't had time to fully install his system, and it takes a while for freshmen to contribute--don't make sense when you realize that Buzz had exactly as much time as Thad Matta to install his system, and Buzz went with a lineup that included a 6th year senior, two 5th year seniors, one true senior, two juniors and a soph.
--Yes, we'll get better over the course of the year. But that's the case for all 347 D1 teams.
--No, Buzz doesn't have everying perfected in November. But neither do any other coaches.
--Yes, Buzz wants to hide some aspects of his offense--but other coaches have exactly the same motivation.
What's different about Buzz and Marquette than any other coach and/or team?
One more thing--I agree that that game film and analysis is a big part of the game--but do you really think coaches dig back to November when they're gameplanning for March? For example, wouldn't you think that Davidson relied far more heavily on the Notre Dame BET and St. Johns games to learn how to beat us, than anything that happened in November?
Why would OSU suffer in March because they beat MU in November? Not sure where you pulled that one.
Do you think OSU played well? Do you think Matta pulled out all the stops in that game? How many sets did you see OSU run offensively? Do you think Matta is pleased with shooting 3-18 on 3s and 5-15 from the free throw line? How about allowing 18 offensive rebounds? Think that was part of the gameplan?
OSU returned 4 starters and played 7 upperclassmen (6 of whom saw significant minutes last season), 1 soph and 1 freshman. MU returned 2 starters and their two new guards are in completely different roles than they were previously. Think any of that makes a difference early in the season?
Buzz's teams have a history of playing better late in the season. No, that's not true of every team but it's true for most of the good teams. All successful coaches save plays and sets for more crucial games. That's not a secret.
I'm sure coaches pay more attention to more recently played games, but yes, coaches go back to November when reviewing game film in March. They even go back to previous seasons when reviewing film. The way that MU plays against OSU in November isn't the same as they'd play against Creighton in January or Davidson in March. No coach is going to watch film of the MU-OSU game and think, "Wow! OSU doesn't guard the 3 at all! That's where we can get them!" They look at teams similar to theirs. If OSU's opposing team in March has a strong post presence but can't shoot from the outside, they'll look at the OSU-MU game film to see where the OSU D could be exploited, among other hours and hours of film.
I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand.
-
So please explain what facts were massagd to make this a "false narrative."
If anything, the facts make this a "true but unpleasant" narrative.
Sorry, but I don't see it as Buzz's finest coaching job that we were in so many near-loss sitations in March, and didn't improve on any of our rematches (Butler was the same, ND and Syracuse we performed far worse).
1. Miami did not lose a "key" player. They lost a guy who was playing less and less as the season went on. Miami fans celebrated the fact that it meant more minutes for the better guy who replaced him. the Vegas line didn't even move 1/2 point due to his absence.
2. No coach and no team has been as good at upping their level of play in March during the past 5 years as Brad Stevens and Butler. "Staying the same" with them would have have been awesome. We didn't. We outdid them, winning in March after losing in November.
-
Some people here don't understand all of the kenpom formula apparently, at least the way they are using the results.
Through the first of January, you typically play cupcakes and a few tough opponents. For high major teams playing tough schedules, they typically will improve their rating if they play about .500 ball due to the schedule strength portion of the formula. You can lose, and move up is one way to put it. Now, if you lose too many, it will go the other way, but from a calendar perspective, comparing to first of January to end of March has a few issues. One is strength of schedule. Two is the number of games played is small (smaller sample size).
Feel free to email Ken Pom on this if you wish.
To be clear, I am not saying we don't play better at the end of the year IN SOME YEARS, but the way the data is used here has some biases that have not been stated. Happy to have done so for everyone. Carry on.
Except the improvement comparison was a non-parametric statistic...a ranking, so thus valid. No adjusted measures were being compared directly, just their ranks, for example Pomeroy adjusted Offensive efficiency went from 101 to 108 would not be totally correct, but a team rank of 50 to 13 is okay because it is relative (other teams face similar conditions).
But if just a raw Point per Possession Statsheet metric, which is unadjusted, one could compare that like I did the other day with the Mother of All Stinkers Orating for the tOSU game. A point is a point, and a possession is a possession....no matter the opponent.
non-parametric statistics (in the sense of a statistic over data, which is defined to be a function on a sample that has no dependency on a parameter), whose interpretation does not depend on the population fitting any parameterised distributions. Order statistics, which are based on the ranks of observations, are one example of such statistics and these play a central role in many non-parametric approaches.
-
Except the improvement comparison was a non-parametric statistic...a ranking, so thus valid. No adjusted measures were being compared directly, just their ranks, for example Pomeroy adjusted Offensive efficiency went from 101 to 108 would not be totally correct, but a team rank of 50 to 13 is okay because it is relative (other teams face similar conditions).
But if just a raw Point per Possession Statsheet metric, which is unadjusted, one could compare that like I did the other day with the Mother of All Stinkers Orating for the tOSU game. A point is a point, and a possession is a possession....no matter the opponent.
Precisely. Happy to have cleared up Chicos' erroneous correction. The overall rank is relative to all other teams in Division I.
-
I think it is safe to say that all teams in March are significantly better than they were in November. The question is whether team A will improve more than team B. Also, style of play matters. Crean's one and one dribble drive offense is very hard for teams to defend in November. By time March rolls around team defenses are much more sound and Crean's offensive style becomes less successful even though the Indiana team is better at running it.
-
So what advantage does Buzz really have to limiting the offense in the early season. Losing games in Nov count as much as losing in February / early March. Impact to RPI likely the same.
And by limiting the offense in early season, is it not more likely that he could play freshman? That's what puzzles me about the OSU game.
The only good answer so far is - that's just how Buzz does it....
-
So what advantage does Buzz really have to limiting the offense in the early season. Losing games in Nov count as much as losing in February / early March. Impact to RPI likely the same.
And by limiting the offense in early season, is it not more likely that he could play freshman? That's what puzzles me about the OSU game.
The only good answer so far is - that's just how Buzz does it....
The answer is that he devotes a great deal of limited practice time to defense.
-
The answer is that he devotes a great deal of limited practice time to defense.
And he also tailors each squad's style of play to the talent at hand. It's pretty clear that this team has some troubles shooting the ball, so we will have to hang our hats on the defensive end this year to have the success that is expected. If the current returns in that department hold up (#7 overall in defenive efficiency) and the offense starts to come around, we will be where we want to be in March. Until it proves out otherwise, my bet is on Buzz to get this done.
-
1. Miami did not lose a "key" player. They lost a guy who was playing less and less as the season went on. Miami fans celebrated the fact that it meant more minutes for the better guy who replaced him. the Vegas line didn't even move 1/2 point due to his absence.
He was their leading rebounder, one of only three players in thier rotation over 6'6", and in their top six scoring and minutes. Put that in the context of 25 combined points from Otule and Gardner (nearly 10 points above their combined average), which suggests Jackson was missed.
I put less credence in the Vegas Line or fan bravdo than actual stats and results.
2. No coach and no team has been as good at upping their level of play in March during the past 5 years as Brad Stevens and Butler. "Staying the same" with them would have have been awesome. We didn't. We outdid them, winning in March after losing in November.
I think you're mistaken.
They started 16-2 last year including wins over North Carolina, Gonzaga and Indiana. After that point, they were only 15-7, without a single win over a team in Pomery's top 50.
Maybe in past years they were stronger late in the year. Not in 2013. Their ranking peaked in January, and by season's end they were out of the top 25.
-
I'd just love to hear what Equalizer thinks Buzz has done well since he's been at MU. Can't recall 1 post that hasn't been critical, or downplaying his achievements..
-
I think you're mistaken.
They started 16-2 last year including wins over North Carolina, Gonzaga and Indiana. After that point, they were only 15-7, without a single win over a team in Pomery's top 50.
Maybe in past years they were stronger late in the year. Not in 2013. Their ranking peaked in January, and by season's end they were out of the top 25.
Duh, that's the point. We improved from the November meeting while Butler did not. Exactly what people have been saying about Buzz's teams in general and last year specifically this entire thread. As a lawyer, is arguing just so ingrained in every fiber of your being that you end up confused and argue for your opponent's side? A shoddy barrister indeed.
-
Except the improvement comparison was a non-parametric statistic...a ranking, so thus valid. No adjusted measures were being compared directly, just their ranks, for example Pomeroy adjusted Offensive efficiency went from 101 to 108 would not be totally correct, but a team rank of 50 to 13 is okay because it is relative (other teams face similar conditions).
But if just a raw Point per Possession Statsheet metric, which is unadjusted, one could compare that like I did the other day with the Mother of All Stinkers Orating for the tOSU game. A point is a point, and a possession is a possession....no matter the opponent.
Like I said, a simple email to Ken Pom is always good.
-
I'd just love to hear what Equalizer thinks Buzz has done well since he's been at MU. Can't recall 1 post that hasn't been critical, or downplaying his achievements..
That's because you have a bias. Click on his name and his posts, there is plenty to be found.
For example, "I thought Crean did a great job. I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."
-
Like I said, a simple email to Ken Pom is always good.
Insufferable. And I will take you up on that. Just to be clear - you're saying that a team ranked 100 at one point in the season then ranked 20 at another point in the season did not improve on a relative basis to the rest of DI college basketball? Utterly brain dead.
-
He was their leading rebounder, one of only three players in thier rotation over 6'6", and in their top six scoring and minutes. Put that in the context of 25 combined points from Otule and Gardner (nearly 10 points above their combined average), which suggests Jackson was missed.
I put less credence in the Vegas Line or fan bravdo than actual stats and results.
I think you're mistaken.
They started 16-2 last year including wins over North Carolina, Gonzaga and Indiana. After that point, they were only 15-7, without a single win over a team in Pomery's top 50.
Maybe in past years they were stronger late in the year. Not in 2013. Their ranking peaked in January, and by season's end they were out of the top 25.
1.if you think you know more than Vegas there's big money to be made. Anyone can belittle MU's win over Miami as a big underdog AFTER it's already happened, but I bet you didn't liquidate your assets to take the 7 points or, better yet, get almost 3-1 even on the money line.
2. Read my post. I said last 5 years. In 3 NCAA tournaments with his own players, Brad Stevens was 11-2 with both losses coming in championship games when he played Marquette. At freaking Butler. Please name a coach in recent times who has been better when the stakes were highest. Beating them was a big deal (as was beating Miami). You minimizing the accomplishment speaks to your bias.
-
I'd just love to hear what Equalizer thinks Buzz has done well since he's been at MU. Can't recall 1 post that hasn't been critical, or downplaying his achievements..
Careful, don't victimize him again.
-
Like I said, a simple email to Ken Pom is always good.
I email him from time to time. What's your point? There is no need to ask him such a simple question. On his home page, in the very first column, he labels it "rank". It is a sort of his adjusted ratings. The majority of the top ranked teams stay in the same "rank" range most of the season. You don't think those top teams aren't the best in the land? Louisville, Ok St., OSU, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan St.? And barring injury, they will be there at the end.
Rank is a relative comparison and worthy of a valid argument. Ken Pomeroy did not invent the metric called "rank". But if it didn't matter, I am sure he wouldn't feel the need to label it in his adjusted ratings. Lame.
-
And by limiting the offense in early season, is it not more likely that he could play freshman? That's what puzzles me about the OSU game.
Or if the offense Buzz plans on installing is not entirely new from last year, none of the freshmen are playing and the veteran players either should have some familiarity and be able to execute to some extent, or they have rather short memories.
Anyhoo, despite circular talk history shows us how we play is certainly different later in the season...we'll soon all forget about the horror until we go to OSU or have some other bad OOC performance next year.
-
It's hard to believe Buzz hasn't installed the offended yet. Not very bright. Although after watching the OSU game it appears to be the case. If true it's fair to say that Buzz is a young coach who is still learning D1 competition. C'mon Buzz it's time to play ball.
-
I email him from time to time. What's your point? There is no need to ask him such a simple question. On his home page, in the very first column, he labels it "rank". It is a sort of his adjusted ratings. The majority of the top ranked teams stay in the same "rank" range most of the season. You don't think those top teams aren't the best in the land? Louisville, Ok St., OSU, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan St.? And barring injury, they will be there at the end.
Rank is a relative comparison and worthy of a valid argument. Ken Pomeroy did not invent the metric called "rank". But if it didn't matter, I am sure he wouldn't feel the need to label it in his adjusted ratings. Lame.
Yes, he responds to emails quite frequently which is terrific.
Define "majority of top ranked teams" and define "most of the season" for me. That would help for starters. Yes, some of those teams will be there the entire year at the top, no different than RPI, Sagarin, etc. Others will slides, while others will move up because of the mathematical portions of the formula. Teams that move up tend to improve because they play tougher schedules after January, just as you will see some teams early in the top 50 that will never finish there there as they are mid majors to low majors who play "tough" teams early and build up that side of the formula to enhance their ranking until it is diluted by their very soft non-conference schedules.
-
That's because you have a bias. Click on his name and his posts, there is plenty to be found.
For example, "I thought Crean did a great job. I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."
Ahh the height of irony...I have a bias. And comes as no surprise you'd roll out a "I though Crean did a great job. I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."
You see Chicos, that would have some merit, if such a statement - which you too have made on occasion - wasn't offset about 100 to 1 skewing the other way/negative toward Buzz and his accomplishments while at MU.
But well were at it - where do you think Indiana will finish in the Big 10 this year?
-
Who are the true leaders on this team. Besides Buzz trying to get guys to play there best, you need guys actually on the team to step up and take a leadership role. This team seems rudderless, Buzz yes (trying to right the ship), and I'm sure doing all he can do to get it going, but to the guys on the team it's time to step up. Hopefully soon we can see a little passion coming out of some of the older players and light a fire under the collective asses of the team. The nice little pre-season pub we had about being the favorite in the Big East and early season ranking won't get us past ASU, Badgers, or improved and hungry Big East foes.
-
So now we are going to denigrate last year? ::)
It's no secret and you can't deny it with stats or logic: we were unusually lucky in close games last year. In that vein it was not unlike 2009-10, but even moreso.
-
I think the serious point is here is that you can refute the argument that "odd coaching moves in November make us solid in March" with the fact that we weren't that solid in March:
Take a look at our March games:
Nearly lost to Rutgers
nearly lost to St. Johns
Blown out by Notre Dame in the BET--a team we handled solidly a few weeks before
Nearly lost to Davidson, a 14 seed.
Barely escaped Butler.
Lost badly to Syracuse, a team we easily defeated a few weeks before.
We had two solid wins in eight games in March--Notre Dame at home, and Miami in the tournament.
AND against Notre Dame Jack Cooley was sick. Against Miami Reggie Johnson (their leading rebounder) blew out his knee the game before.
Speaking facturally about our March play isn't denigrating the team--its pointing out the falacy that Buzz's odd coaching moves in November and December made us a stronger team in March.
Your comments are not popular, but they speak the truth more than any excuse making or the ability to look past laying an egg in a big game. I've been a Bucks fan for awhile, and that board is seemingly the opposite of this one, thanks to the humbling all of the recent mediocre or poor seasons have done. They are mostly realists or somewhat pessimists about the team, but they are a very smart board. This is a smart, numbers oriented board as well, but I think there can be a few too many people wearing blue and gold colored glasses, just due to past success with both the school's history and Buzz's history.
-
Duh, that's the point. We improved from the November meeting while Butler did not. Exactly what people have been saying about Buzz's teams in general and last year specifically this entire thread. As a lawyer, is arguing just so ingrained in every fiber of your being that you end up confused and argue for your opponent's side? A shoddy barrister indeed.
How do you figure? We got to the end of the game in March in exactly the same situation.
"Like November's first meeting between the teams at the Maui Invitational, won 72-71 by Butler on Rotnei Clarke's buzzer-beating 3-pointer, it came down to the final shot. Only this time, Butler missed."
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=330820269
-
1.if you think you know more than Vegas there's big money to be made. Anyone can belittle MU's win over Miami as a big underdog AFTER it's already happened, but I bet you didn't liquidate your assets to take the 7 points or, better yet, get almost 3-1 even on the money line.
I'm not belittling MU's win.
I'm belittling you for suggesting that there is no impact to a team losing its leading rebounder who is also in the top 6 in both scoring and minutes--and happens to be one of only 3 players taller that 6'6".
2. Read my post. I said last 5 years. In 3 NCAA tournaments with his own players, Brad Stevens was 11-2 with both losses coming in championship games when he played Marquette. At freaking Butler. Please name a coach in recent times who has been better when the stakes were highest.
I did read your post. I was discussing 2013, and in your post you chose to attempt to bring Stevens' performance from 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 into the discussion.
You're old enough to have become familar with the statement: "past performance is not an indication of future success."
That certainly applies here. Stevens' may well have been the "best coach in the NCAA when stakes were highest" in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.
He wasn't in 2013.
Beating them was a big deal (as was beating Miami). You minimizing the accomplishment speaks to your bias.
I don't know why this confuses you so much. A team can play weaker than they did earlier in the season, yet still win games.
You're making the illogical argument that just because we won, we were a stronger team.
I'm making the argument--backed by the facts--that we didn't get stronger, even though we won 6 of 8 games.
-
Ahh the height of irony...I have a bias. And comes as no surprise you'd roll out a "I though Crean did a great job. I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."
You see Chicos, that would have some merit, if such a statement - which you too have made on occasion - wasn't offset about 100 to 1 skewing the other way/negative toward Buzz and his accomplishments while at MU.
But well were at it - where do you think Indiana will finish in the Big 10 this year?
Ners, no irony at all, I have a bias, we all have a bias. My points is that you said you haven't see the guy ever say anything positive or wasn't demeaning. Took me no time at all to find that wasn't true. Secondly, what you construe as "negative", others view as factual or simply constructive criticism. All depends how high the hurt meter is set to.
I think IU will finish 6th, outside shot at 5th. A lot of talent, but they lost so much experience. Iowa will be the surprise team in the Big Ten this year. No one is going to want to play them. I see them as top 5 Big Ten, potentially 4th spot. IU had a decent win last night over Washington, though more of a "brand" win since UW isn't that great, but they did pound them pretty good.
-
I did read your post. I was discussing 2013, and in your post you chose to attempt to bring Stevens' performance from 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 into the discussion.
You're old enough to have become familar with the statement: "past performance is not an indication of future success."
That certainly applies here. Stevens' may well have been the "best coach in the NCAA when stakes were highest" in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.
He wasn't in 2013.
So when John Wooden win 10 straight NCAA tournaments, the team and coach who beat him in year 11 get a "no big deal" from you. Sorry, great coaches are great coaches, period. And when patterns emerge "past performances ARE an indication of future success". The team and coach who break that pattern deserve major props.
-
So when John Wooden win 10 straight NCAA tournaments, the team and coach who beat him in year 11 get a "no big deal" from you. Sorry, great coaches are great coaches, period. And when patterns emerge "past performances ARE an indication of future success". The team and coach who break that pattern deserve major props.
Wooden retired after year 10, he didn't get beat for number 11.
Past performances are SOMETIMES an indication of future success, sometimes not. Just as some coaches struggle early but find nirvana later in life.
-
So when John Wooden win 10 straight NCAA tournaments, the team and coach who beat him in year 11 get a "no big deal" from you. Sorry, great coaches are great coaches, period. And when patterns emerge "past performances ARE an indication of future success". The team and coach who break that pattern deserve major props.
First, I didn't say "no big deal." I said the past results don't prove the future.
Applying your analogy on Butler would be like claiming that because John Wooden won "10 straight (sic) NCAA tournaments" from 1964 to 1975, he therefore won it in 1976 as well--any contrary facts that suggest Bobby Knight won in 1976 be dammned.
Similarly, just because Stevens teams improved in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 doesn't "prove" that the 2013 improved, any more than Wooden winning 10 championships "proves" he won the 11th.
Whats funny here is that you've used everything EXCEPT Butler's actualy record to try to "prove" Butler improved during the 2013 season.
My argument that Butler wasn't playing stronger in March 2013 is that they went from beating #1 teams (current and future) in non-conference to not being capabile of beating a team outside the top 50. They went from 13-2 in noncnference play (.867 winning percentage) early in the season to .625 in March.
Your argument that they got stronger at the end of 2013 consists mostly on Butler's performance in years OTHER than 2013, and now inexplicably, John Wooden's championshop run.
Care to make another attempt, perhaps this time citing someting Butler actually did late in the 2013 season that impressed you that they were playing even better than they did when beating #1 Indiana and future #1 Gonzaga?
-
Why is it when Brad Stevens comes up the blinders also come up? He's a wonderful coach, accomplished much at a young age, I just don't understand why the step backwards years are simply ignored.
His first year he went to the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament, the next year he lost in the first round. Now with "certain" coaches around here this is considered a step backward, but apparently in evaluating Brad it isn't.
After going to the championship game back to back, his team failed to qualify for the NCAAs. Failed to quality for the NIT. Made it to the CBI where they lost in the third round. The following year back to the NCAAs where they lost in their second game.
He's done great work and his teams will do great things just as they will fail at times. A coach isn't a machine, his players still have to perform. Why when his teams don't do that it is ignored is odd to me.
-
Why is it when Brad Stevens comes up the blinders also come up? He's a wonderful coach, accomplished much at a young age, I just don't understand why the step backwards years are simply ignored.
His first year he went to the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament, the next year he lost in the first round. Now with "certain" coaches around here this is considered a step backward, but apparently in evaluating Brad it isn't.
After going to the championship game back to back, his team failed to qualify for the NCAAs. Failed to quality for the NIT. Made it to the CBI where they lost in the third round. The following year back to the NCAAs where they lost in their second game.
He's done great work and his teams will do great things just as they will fail at times. A coach isn't a machine, his players still have to perform. Why when his teams don't do that it is ignored is odd to me.
Umm....which "certain" coach might you be referencing....and why is he even relevant to this thread?? Just can't help but defend your boy that you have the bias hard on for? What are your thoughts now 6 years in at Indiana, and you project another regression year for your boy? You think they'll finish 6th in with an outside shot at 5th in the Big 10 at a blueblood school like IU, the flagship university, in a talent rich state?? How does that happen?? But hey, it's all good when you say you think Buzz has done a great job at MU, about 1 every 50 to 100 posts that take up for your boy Crean....who left MU and hasn't been the coach here for 6 years. Let the man go. We clearly upgraded in Buzz and being the die hard MU fan you are, you should be so happy!!
-
Ners,
I said certain coaches, not a certain coach.
-
Ners,
I said certain coaches, not a certain coach.
Ahh....my bad....so which "coaches" were you referring to? And I am curious to get your thoughts on how IU could even be in a position to finish 5th or 6th in the Big 10 in Year 6 of Crean's tenure at a blueblood program?? He obviously left MU because he felt recruiting would be easier at IU...which it has been....yet now in Year 6 he's looking at 5th or 6th? Cmon Man.
-
First, I didn't say "no big deal." I said the past results don't prove the future.
Applying your analogy on Butler would be like claiming that because John Wooden won "10 straight (sic) NCAA tournaments" from 1964 to 1975, he therefore won it in 1976 as well--any contrary facts that suggest Bobby Knight won in 1976 be dammned.
Similarly, just because Stevens teams improved in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 doesn't "prove" that the 2013 improved, any more than Wooden winning 10 championships "proves" he won the 11th.
Whats funny here is that you've used everything EXCEPT Butler's actualy record to try to "prove" Butler improved during the 2013 season.
My argument that Butler wasn't playing stronger in March 2013 is that they went from beating #1 teams (current and future) in non-conference to not being capabile of beating a team outside the top 50. They went from 13-2 in noncnference play (.867 winning percentage) early in the season to .625 in March.
Your argument that they got stronger at the end of 2013 consists mostly on Butler's performance in years OTHER than 2013, and now inexplicably, John Wooden's championshop run.
Care to make another attempt, perhaps this time citing someting Butler actually did late in the 2013 season that impressed you that they were playing even better than they did when beating #1 Indiana and future #1 Gonzaga?
Past results don't prove the future? I sure hope that history didn't teach that to you because that would be quite the paradox.
-
Why is it when Brad Stevens comes up the blinders also come up? He's a wonderful coach, accomplished much at a young age, I just don't understand why the step backwards years are simply ignored.
His first year he went to the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament, the next year he lost in the first round. Now with "certain" coaches around here this is considered a step backward, but apparently in evaluating Brad it isn't.
After going to the championship game back to back, his team failed to qualify for the NCAAs. Failed to quality for the NIT. Made it to the CBI where they lost in the third round. The following year back to the NCAAs where they lost in their second game.
He's done great work and his teams will do great things just as they will fail at times. A coach isn't a machine, his players still have to perform. Why when his teams don't do that it is ignored is odd to me.
Four years with his own players. 11 NCAA tourney wins. Two final fours . Two championship games. At Butler.
Ten years with his own players. 9 NCAA tourney wins. One Final Four. Zero championship games. At Marquette and blue blood Indiana.
Want to criticize Stevens, fine. Just don't compare his career to TC's. That would be an insult to him and to anyone with a morsel of basketball IQ.