[Cracked Sidewalks] Above Expectations

[CrackedSidewalksSays]

Above Expectations

Written by: noreply@blogger.com (Henry Sugar)

The most recent Cracked Sidewalks post about the Buzz hiring seems to have re-opened a nerve in the comments section here at Cracked Sidewalks and on MUScoop.  Personally, I was also fairly critical about the decision to hire Buzz, but I said my piece and then waited to see what happened.    My position was not one where I wanted him to be the wrong choice, so that every setback (like the Tyshawn Taylor situtation) was judged harshly.  However, it was also not one where Buzz received automatic acceptance that he was the right person for the job.  My position?

Prove it.

I've seen some suggestions that Buzz deserves 2-3 years to grow into the job.  I totally disagree.  In my opinion, Buzz gets exactly one year to prove that he's the right choice for a program coming off of three straight NCAA appearances / Top 25 finishes.  One.  Year.  Buzz managed to convince Cracked Sidewalks punching bag Steve Cottingham he was the right choice, but I want to see him prove he's a Big East coach this year.

Buzz gets graded this year based on six areas:

• Roster Continuity (5%)
  
• Coaching Staff Selection (5%)
• Representative of Marquette (10%)
  
• 2009 (or 2010) Recruiting (25%)
  
• Regular Season Success (25%)
  
• NCAA Success (30%)
  

I think that the percentages are fair, but certainly the opinions of CS readers are welcome.  Thus far, only two of those areas are even complete, and a third (Representative of Marquette) has only limited information.  However, I have to say that Buzz has been Above Expectations in all three areas.

Roster Continuity - (4 out of 5)
When we look at what the worst case scenario could have been (losing all four recruits for this year, Erik Williams, Scott Christopherson, Trevor Mbakwe, and Dominic James), I've got to say that Buzz did a pretty good job here.  Once Crean left, Nick Williams was never going to set foot on Marquette's campus.  Plus, Jimmy Butler was an upgrade over Scott Christopherson.  The only area that could have been better would have been if Tyshawn Taylor stuck with MU.  There was some definite ugliness, but in reading the outstanding Blog from Rosiak, I believe that Buzz handled the situation pretty well and kept the high road.

Coaching Staff Selection - (4 out of 5)
Unlike his employer, Buzz took his time filling out his coaching staff (gratuitous dig!).  With a realistic view of things, I think he did pretty well.  Tony Benford is experienced, well regarded, and has worked with big men in the past.  "Aki" Collins is unproven, but appears to be the hungry young coach with East Coast connections.  It's a bit odd that Dale Layer is now working for his former employee, but that's their relationship.  Layer also brings experience to the bench and the recruiting trail.  Add to that the positions for Autry and (almost certainly) Monarch, and the staff has real promise.  I think the only thing really keeping this from being a five is if Buzz had hired someone like Josh Pastner.

Representative of Marquette - (4 out of 5)
I keep thinking about a quote from Billy Gillespie about Buzz (which you can find on his Marquette home page).

   Everyone likes him. If they don't start out liking him, he forces them     to like him.

I've heard several interviews with Buzz, and I've got to say that I like the guy.  If you haven't listened, check them out yourself on his home page.  There's a refreshing honesty and candor about him.  Certainly, there's considerably less coach-speak than the previous coach, and I don't think I've heard him say phenomenal once.  Heck it even seems like Murff is warming up to Buzz.

In summary, the proof will be when we start getting to 2009 recruits and when the season kicks off.  Until then, Buzz has been Above Expectations.  Keep on proving it, Buzz!

http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2008/05/above-expectations.html

[downtown85]

I think we need to grade Buzz after the end of next season (to see his Coaching ability) and the end of the season after next season to see if his recruiting is as good as advertised. 

That is part of the problem, we will not know whether how good Cottingham's decision was until a couple of years from now.  We can ony criticize the process of hiring right now rather than the outcome. 

[THEGYMBAR]

Buzz needs to be graded every month. In my mind he has ten months to prove it. I am not as impressed with roster continuity or recruiting. Basically on the roster the only player of substance that could transfer was Mbakwe. Other were non factors or upperclassmen. The recruiting front he kept the two guys that really have nowhere else to go. They would have hard time getting D1 scholarships at a program similar to MU. They had nowhere to go.

I agree Buzz seems like a nice guy, far nicer than TC. I am disappointed in the fact that Anderson's coach implied MU did not push, that we lost Williams and Taylor and no early commits other than E. Williams. If indeed EW comes here I think it would go a long way. Until it is a done deal I will keep my fingers crossed.

We cannot afford to give Buzz 2-3 to learn on the job. Look at Dukiet and Deanne and see how fat the tide can turn. Buzz has to be held to same standard TC would be held to if he remained.

[Nukem2]

Wow, you folks are way off base.  Maybe your posts need to be evaluated daily.  Come on now, you people have some grandiose expectations.

[farmdaddy]

We need to take it one day at a time! Sweet Jesus...midnight madness will not come soon enough!

[THEGYMBAR]

Nukem--Why off base? When do evaluate? We have done this before and history indicates short ropes are in order. This is not a "lets Buzz get his feet wet" job. The school wanted him and he wanted the job. He should be judged fairly as a coach of a top 25 program. His experience or lack of shortens the rope. As long as he cashes the $1 million paycheck he should be judged as a $1 million coach, nothing more nothing less.

[farmdaddy]

As long as he cashes the $1 million paycheck he should be judged as a $1 million coach, nothing more nothing less.

Nicely put

[Henry Sugar]

A few additional points:

• The grade for Buzz is really "Incomplete" more than anything
• In the areas where Buzz can be judged, he's been above expectations
• Those three areas combined only amount to 20% of my grading criteria, so it's like being a four star movie (out of five stars) based on the trailer and the first 20 minutes
• Grading Buzz every month is silly.  What would we grade him on?  Personally, I'll hold off until we see who the '09 recruits are
• Totally agree that Buzz should be treated with the expectations of a $1M coach

[nola03]

Henry--

How do you definitively decide that Butler is an upgrade over Christopherson?

[THEGYMBAR]

Henry---Of course you can grade Buzz every month. My point is he needs to be monitored closer than saying lets see where are next year at this point. Too much happens too quickly today. If nothing materializes on recruiting front than we need to watch Fall recruting that much closer.

[Murffieus]

There are two areas to monitor. First, can Buzz coach? Second, can Buzz recruit for his own program. Have to give him the preseason to install HIS stuff------but a well coached team improves as the season goes on----will that  happen-----have to wait and see, but that's what to look for.

On recruiting, IMO his first class will be indicative of  what he is capable of------he has plenty of immediate BE playing time to dangle in front of people.                     

[bleedbluegold03]

in my opinion the NCAA success is around 15-20% while the recruiting is 35-40%. (WOW that is really high!) Is it? As we all know by now Tom Crean is not a good game time coach, plain and simple. This was evident from the team's lack of success in the tournament for the greater majority of his tenure here (besides Dwyane Wade). This being said I don't think that a third of Buzz' success relies on how well he does in the tournament because the bar was set low by Tom Crean. The only way this happens is if we fail to get into the tournament all together which then I think it is back up to 30%.

In regards to why recruiting is insanely high, we all know that 2009 looks very very murky right now. The signing of Buzz was under the idea that the guy could recruit. Coming off a hopefully successful campaign Buzz is offering what few others can: immediate starting time in a big conference with plenty of tv time for publicity (See Tom Crean at IU). Buzz needs to set a precident, otherwise we will fall to the third tier of the Big East with the likes of Depaul and Cincinnati. It looks like Buzz assembled his team of assistants to recruit across the nation which i hope he succeeds in. I dont think it is out of the question to call him a failure or at least a dissappointment in recruiting if we don't get another one or two four stars along with Erik Williams.

Is my bar high on recruiting? Yes. But Buzz is getting paid ALOT of money for a big program and that is where his level of competition has set the bar and if he fails to reach it, we are in for a few long years.

[bleedbluegold03]

How do you definitively decide that Butler is an upgrade over Christopherson?

Anything is anupgrade over Scotty C and his height alone intriges me: He is a 6'6 shooting guard and shoots 43% from three. I understand that jc isn't the same level of play as the Big East but we all can agree that Scotty looked plain lost last year.

[Henry Sugar]

in my opinion the NCAA success is around 15-20% while the recruiting is 35-40%.

I think your perspective is certainly valid, and I respect the line of thinking you included.  Recruiting probably should be weighted more.

I guess part of the reason I made NCAA success so high is because that is and should be the definition of our program, so I don't agree with dropping it down to 15%-20%.  There's no excuse for this team to not make the NCAA tournament and win the first day.

Maybe:
Recruiting: 35%
Regular Season Success: 20%
NCAA Success: 25%

[mviale]

Buzz is undefeated in my book - thanks cracked SW for the opinion.

[bleedbluegold03]

I think your perspective is certainly valid, and I respect the line of thinking you included.  Recruiting probably should be weighted more.

I guess part of the reason I made NCAA success so high is because that is and should be the definition of our program, so I don't agree with dropping it down to 15%-20%.  There's no excuse for this team to not make the NCAA tournament and win the first day.

Maybe:
Recruiting: 35%
Regular Season Success: 20%
NCAA Success: 25%

thanks for the love and youre probably more accurate with your percentages here

[ChicosBailBonds]

I think we need to grade Buzz after the end of next season (to see his Coaching ability) and the end of the season after next season to see if his recruiting is as good as advertised. 

That is part of the problem, we will not know whether how good Cottingham's decision was until a couple of years from now.  We can ony criticize the process of hiring right now rather than the outcome. 

Grading him next year will be difficult, Barry Switzer could get our team to the NCAAs next year.  It will be the year after that he's truly put to the test.

[muwarrior87]

That is why imo the NCAA section of his grading is important.  That would be the time when he could separate himself as a quality coach.

[bleedbluegold03]

Unless Buzz makes it to the sweet sixteen or farther with this team next year, most of the credit will be given to Crean. If Buzz manages to surpass what Crean could do with this team then he is given some respect as a coach. Even then though some would say that naturally players progress and get better.

[chapman]

Grading him next year will be difficult, Barry Switzer could get our team to the NCAAs next year.  It will be the year after that he's truly put to the test.

I agree completely, though couldn't find a more clever analogy.  If we win one, even two games in the NCAAs, can you really give him an outstanding evaluation?  With our roster, that should almost take care of itself and would say little about a coach playing with three of his own recruits and starting three or four seniors (unless his recruits provide a major impact).  Of course it could play out a little differently, but I think the only way you can really say coaching probably had an impact in the positive sense is playing well in or moving past the Sweet 16, and the only way you could say coaching was bad is if we miss the tournament or get a very poor seed.  

I guess in that sense, I would consider two things.  First, instead of just NCAA, I would consider all tournaments-include to a lesser extent the preseason tournament and the Big East tournament.  Does he get the team prepared, do they play well, and do they advance or lay eggs?  Second, I think if you're to give a one-year evaluation, I would agree that recruiting his own players to get a team that competes beyond next season is a hugely important factor as next year's recruiting class will determinine how successful the program is for several years to come.  He can let the players play their way to a successful season, but a Sweet 16 appearance with a recruiting class that dooms us to the cellar of the conference for years to come would have to be considered a failure from a coaching standpoint.

As far the year after being when Buzz is really put to the test, I would agree with that as well.  Even if the recruits look good on paper, do they pan out?  How does he handle a team that looks like it will bring in five new players and have up to four new starters?  It'll take much more from Buzz to be successful under those circumstances than it will this year, successful being subjective, as we don't expect a team losing the seniors we have now to put up a better record and go farther in the tournament.

[bleedbluegold03]

chapman who are you agreeing with?

[Murffieus]

You have to give a new coach some grace period his first year. If he's going to install his own stuff, it could well make the team worse early on as the players adjust. But the key indicator next year in determining if Buzz can coach will be HOW MUCH THE TEAM IMPROVES AS THE SEASON GOES ON.

[bleedbluegold03]

thats why the tournament is at the end of the year, by then the progression under buzz should be evident

[nola03]

Anything is anupgrade over Scotty C and his height alone intriges me: He is a 6'6 shooting guard and shoots 43% from three. I understand that jc isn't the same level of play as the Big East but we all can agree that Scotty looked plain lost last year.

Where did you see Jimmy Butler play?

[spiral97]

Grading him next year will be difficult, Barry Switzer could get our team to the NCAAs next year.  It will be the year after that he's truly put to the test.

unless we don't make the tourney.. then grading him will probably be VERY easy.

Now I'll go wash my mouth out with some soap.

[Murffieus]

Had SC stayed at MU, IMO he would have developed into a catch and shoot trey specialist. You need those types too!

[ecompt]

there was no indication SC was going to develop into a Big East player. Too frail, too slow. He would have been eaten alive by other BE guards.

[Murffieus]

ecompt-----every team needs niche players-----SC's niche is trey shooting (40% as a frosh). Also hustled like hell!

[Sir Lawrence]

I liked him too.  Played with heart and hustle.  Sorry to see him go. 

[bilsu]

I think you judge him after the second recruiting season. What class does he have coming in 2010. Is the program talent heading up or down. I agree that next year's team is an NCAA caliber team, but I do not think we can take this for granted. Last year 8 Big East teams made the NCAA's. The Big East is good enough this year to get 9 teams, but I do not believe that will happen. Last year Villanova got the last at large bid, so we were very close to getting only 7 bids. I think 7 bids are guaranteed with a good chance to get 8. 9 bids are possilbe, but I think that is unlikely. Last year MU finished 6th in the league and I do not see them moving up as all the teams above them have strong teams comming back. I expect Pittsburg to move ahead of us, which drops us down to 7th. I see us battling Villanova for the 7th or 8th spot. An untimely injury or bad bounce of the ball could result in this team playing in the NIT. Then everyone will be putting the blame on Buzz, but the reality is that last year's team generally was not competitive on the road against the best Big East teams. What has changed that would make you think next year's team will be any better.? How would you judge Buzz, if this team missed the NCAA tournament and won the NIT championsip?

[ecompt]

Murff -- judging him as a good shooter based on garbage time against terrible opposition (6-for-15) is foolish. He hit one shot all year that meant anything. He had a decent shot but he wouldn't have been able to get it off in the BE. He did hustle his butt off, but to project him as anything more than a 3-to-5-minute guy in this conference was wishful thinking. 

[Murffieus]

ecompt----you watch-----Christoferson will turn into a very proficient trey shooter at ISU in the Big 12-----not that much different than the BE. That's why Crean recruited him (trey shooting ability)-----he knew from the get go that he wasn't going to beat anyone to the hoop-----he's a Pieper type!

[bleedbluegold03]

Where did you see Jimmy Butler play?

no where, i am just looking at stats and thats all