For Silky - 2006 versus 2010 comparision

[Marquette84]

I'll start a new thread on this, since it was getting off the original topic--I think a comparision of situations between 2006 and 2010 is valid.

Sikly, PRN and other think that it's an "agenda" if we compare the two seasons and hold Crean and Buzz to similar results. 

As I'll discuss below, there are reasons why we are much better positioned from a talent and competitive perspective.

While some accuse me of holding an "agenda" for expecting similar results as we had in 2006, those people just haven't taken the time to actually compare the situation.  They're showing THEIR own agenda by making excuses in advance.  They downplay 2010 expectations because they dont' want to hold Buzz to the same standards that Crean was held to. 

Whatever your agenda is, I think its fair to compare Crean's results in what is a very similar environment in 2006 to what Buzz will deliver this year.  In short, I think it's entirely reasonable to be optimistic that in 2010 we can equal our 2006 season.

No, you aren't fooling anyone.  You clearly stated that if we don't finish better than 4 years ago, it's a disappointment.  Never mind the fact faulty comparisons like that never take into consideration the schedule, injuries and competition of the league or not having 3 experienced seniors from a Final Four team. 

You have an agenda and you know it.  And everyone else is figuring it out also. 

Let me start by asking three questions:

1.  Do you think we are better coached now than we were in 2006? 

2.  Do we have a quality big that we lacked in 2006?

3.  Have we recruited more Big East quality talent?
 
I'm guessing, but I think you'd answer yes to all three.

Personally I would say yes to #2 and #3, and that the jury is out on #1. 



***Never mind the fact faulty comparisons like that never take into consideration the schedule, injuries and competition of the league

I actually did take these into account--I'm wondering if you did, or this is just excuse making in advance.

In 2006 the Big East had two #1 seeds in the NCAA tournament, and eight teams in overall.  You probably forgot that Villanova and UConn were both #1 seeds, and tied for the league championship with 14-2 records.

For 2010, I only see Villanova as a potential #1 seed, and West Virginia as a 2 or a 3 seed.  Syracuse, UConn, Louisville and Pitt all lost too much to be projected as top 4 seeds, and I see only Cincy now with Lance Stephenson that perhaps improved enough to move up.  Providence, ND, and Georgetown didn't improve themselves to warrant a top 16 ranking.   

Andy Katz only has four big east teams in his final pre-summer top 25--only Villanova in the top 8 (WVU 9, Georgetown 18, and UCOnn 25).  I think that's fair.  The league is simply not as strong as it was in 2006.

Injuries?

In 2006 Wes Matthews missed 11 games because of a broken foot (after starting the first 13 games of the season) and Kinsella only played 14 games because of his injuries.  And we STILL finished tied for 4th.

If your angle was that we have to give Buzz a pass because he MIGHT have some injuries this coming season, you're barking up the wrong tree.  He would have to have two players (including a starter) miss significant time before he gets to use the injury card as an excuse.



*** 3 experienced seniors from a Final Four team. 

Hmm.  I thought the only reason we were in the Final Four was Dwayne Wade.     

Now, all of a sudden, Grimm, Chapman and Novak were also important.

Seriously, though, I do take returning talent into consideration.  Did you?  Really?

1.  Chris Grimm.  I can't even believe you brought him up.  Really, do you honestly expect me to believe that Grimm was a significant contributor to our final four run?   I believe that Maymon is going to prove to be a better player in his first game than Grimm was as a senior.  I also think he'll be better as a frosh than Amo and Barro were as sophs. 

2.  Joe Chapman.  Joe is a nice player, but he was not quite where Jimmy Butler is at right now.  Butler is a better shooter, better scorer and better rebounder.  I'd give Chapman the edge on defense.  Season long, Butler's stats compare favorably with Chapman's junior season, and if you compare just Butler's last 10 games, it's not even close--Butler is just a more complete player.

3.  Steve Novak. I'll admit this is a close comparision, but I think one can make the argument that Lazar Hayward is every bit as valuable as Novak.  While Novak was a better pure shooter, it might surprise you that Hayward actually shot better than Novak from beyond the arc during their junior years: 46.9% versus 46.1%.   Novak was clearly the better FT shooter (93% to 82%).   However, Novak was arguably worse on defense and rebounding, not as quick, and certainly and not as versatile.  Hayward can play the 3, the 4, or the 5.  Novak was a 3 or a 4--but could not play the 5.  Novak was a 2nd rounder in the NBA draft, and that's where Hayward is projected to be.   

The other returning players?  Barro and Amo, both sophs, and Kinsella, who was a junior.  As compared to Otule, Fulce and Cubillan.  Not much difference, in my opinion.  Probably more upside on 2010 based on the early reports on Otule.

You are clearly overplaying the "returning talent" argument--we started 3 freshman in 2006, and will probably start 3 newcomers in 2010.   The other returning starters for 2010 of Butler & Hayward are no worse than Chapman & Novak from 2006.


Newcomers?

No comparison--the 2010 newcomers are better as a group than 2006. 

We had 7 in 2006, just like we have this year:
Burke, McNeal, James, Matthews, Fitzgerald (transfer), Mortensen (redshirt) and Lott (JC transfer).

Buycks, Cadougan and DJO are on paper equal to the three amigos.  The question is whether Buzz can get them ready early in the year for significant roles.  The advantage he has is that Buycks and DJO have already played a season at a higher level.  All 3 frosh in 2006 were brand new to the college game.

Maymon is easlily better than Burke or Lott.  From day 1.

Erik Williams is easily better on paper than Fitzgerald was.

Mbao and Roseboro don't have to do much to give us more than Mortenson did.

We have a stronger group of newcomers, period, no comparison.


***You have an agenda and you know it.  And everyone else is figuring it out also. 

Its not called an "agenda".  Its called an opinion.  I guess if my opinion differs, then it's an agenda.

At least I'm upfront about my opinion, and can defend it:  Crean was a better coach than many give him credit for being, and that the jury is still out on Buzz. 

I think your opinion is that you don't like Crean and thus find it impossible to give him credit--even begrudgingly-- for the job he did in 2006.  I further think that making excuses in advance for Buzz is simply because you want him to seem better by comparison and not hold him to the same level of accomplishment we saw with Crean.

If you strip away all personal feelings for Buzz and Crean, and actually look at the overall situation--the talent coming back, the quality of the newcomers, and the talent in the league overall--I see no reason to think that expectations shouldn't mirror the 2006 results.
 

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Seriously...what are you talking about?

People aren't accusing you of holding an "agenda" for expecting similar results as 2006. They're accusing you because EVERY FREAKING POST YOU MAKE IS A DESPERATE PLEA FOR ATTENTION FOR CREAN!!

Please, SHUT UP!!

[SaintPaulWarrior]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQiJdf-ebIs

[Marquette84]

Seriously...what are you talking about?

People aren't accusing you of holding an "agenda" for expecting similar results as 2006. They're accusing you because EVERY FREAKING POST YOU MAKE IS A DESPERATE PLEA FOR ATTENTION FOR CREAN!!

Please, SHUT UP!!

Honestly, is your agenda any different? Every freaking post you make is a desperate plea for attention for Crean.  The only difference is that you want it to be negative attention and I don't.

I put a very simple premise out there--which you conveniently sidestepped:

--We have significantly stronger talent this year than in 2006. 
--We play in a slightly weaker league this year than in 2006.
--You seem to think we have better coaching now than in 2006.

For some reason you have lower expectations this year.  What possible factor explains that?  Can you explain yourself?

For the record, I actually do have lower expectations for 2010--but that's because I don't think Buzz has proven that he is as good of a coach as Crean.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Honestly, is your agenda any different? Every freaking post you make is a desperate plea for attention for Crean.  The only difference is that you want it to be negative attention and I don't.

Fantastic response. I just checked my history. Of my last 25 posts, the only ones that reference our former coach are responses to your breathless Penthouse Forum postings.

"I'm a fan of a Big East college basketball program and I never thought I'd be writing to you..."

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

ummm... you posted this 2 hours earlier. I think this qualifies, right?

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=15056.msg140674#msg140674

I think the shreik of frustration occured when one of his brothers-in-law stopped sodomizing him.

*Now back you your regularly scheduled pissing match*

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

ummm... you posted this 2 hours earlier. I think this qualifies, right?

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=15056.msg140674#msg140674



*Now back you your regularly scheduled pissing match*

Oh yeah...that's one out of 25. And that was clearly a joke. Or was it?

[MuMark]

A couple of thoughts.

1. I'm not sure any big on our current roster is better or has proven to be better then Barro was in 2006. It could turn out that way but as of right now we have no proven commodity at the 5.

What we have is 2 big guys with potential.



2. Hayward did not shoot 46.9 beyond the arc last year.....53-148  .358 were his actual numbers.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Oh yeah...that's one out of 25. And that was clearly a joke. Or was it?

I dunno man, I'll let you guys fight this one out.

I just read you post minutes earlier... so I pointed it out.

I have no comment on this argument, I don't really think anybody is going to win this one (which technically is a comment, so I'm going to stop typing).

[ChicosBailBonds]

Oh yeah...that's one out of 25. And that was clearly a joke. Or was it?

Make it 2 of 25.   

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=15041.msg140620#msg140620

[rocky_warrior]

While some accuse me of holding an "agenda" for expecting similar results as we had in 2006, those people just haven't taken the time to actually compare the situation.  They're showing THEIR own agenda by making excuses in advance.  They downplay 2010 expectations because they don't' want to hold Buzz to the same standards that Crean was held to. 

Whoa.  I've read your posts on this matter several times.  Perhaps I lost a year of my life, but I don't remember anybody expecting Crean to win in 2006.  Most expected it to be a long year, with a good group of recruits with a ton of potential.

I do expect the same this year - that we'll be inconsistent, with flashes of big talent.  Thats where my expectations end though.  To expect the same record/position in conference is crazy.   To come up with that answer I'd need to see you do a detailed comparison of each big east team, and whether we have the same, better, or worse chance of beating them this coming year.  Basketball isn't just about the team you put on the floor, but also includes variables such as the other team, and locations of the game.  Your comparison of MU's team (and coach) only is too simplistic.

Perhaps an interesting exercise, but I don't have the ambition to do it now.  I'd rather just enjoy the games, and hope 2010 is as (or more) successful than 2006.

I'm sure you'll say I'm being easier on Buzz.  But I think I had the same expectation of Crean in 2006.  I guess I was making excuses for him too - huh?  Show me proof that people expected a 4th place finish, and I'll understand why your making this argument.  Otherwise, I just don't understand what you're getting at.

[NotAnAlum]

84 This is how I would answer your questions

1.  Do you think we are better coached now than we were in 2006?
TC was entering his 5th year as head coach after just winning 4 games in the NCAA tournament.  With only 1 year under his belt in which he coached a senior dominated team there is no way anyone could argue that Buzz has proven he is a better coach.  He may prove that later but to state it as fact now is crazy.  

2.  Do we have a quality big that we lacked in 2006?
I can't say that Otule has proven he is any better than Barro.  Given the 06 team also had Amo and a 6'10" Novak I'd have to give the edge (starting the season) to the 06 team.  Freshman big men nearly always struggle and the kid from Senegal may not even be cleared to play.

3.  Have we recruited more Big East quality talent?
You could argue that there is more incoming talent in the Fall 09 class.  However prospective talent does not always translate into immediate college success.  The fact that all 3 amigos played GREAT as freshman is very, very unusual.  Also while its nice to have depth 2 good players do not = 1 great player.  In Novak and the 3 amigos you had 4 great players.  Having 1 great (Lazar) + 6 good players may not give you as good initial results because you can only have 5 guys on the court at once.  Long term if all those players develop you will be better off BUT we're talking about 09-10 results not long term.

A lot of stuff had to go right for that 06 team to finish 4th.  Is it possible for it to happen again OF COURSE!  Is it very likely to the point that we should be disappointed if it doesn't. NO WAY.

[Marquette84]

Whoa.  I've read your posts on this matter several times.  Perhaps I lost a year of my life, but I don't remember anybody expecting Crean to win in 2006.  Most expected it to be a long year, with a good group of recruits with a ton of potential.

I do expect the same this year - that we'll be inconsistent, with flashes of big talent.  Thats where my expectations end though.  To expect the same record/position in conference is crazy.   To come up with that answer I'd need to see you do a detailed comparison of each big east team, and whether we have the same, better, or worse chance of beating them this coming year.  Basketball isn't just about the team you put on the floor, but also includes variables such as the other team, and locations of the game.  Your comparison of MU's team (and coach) only is too simplistic.

Perhaps an interesting exercise, but I don't have the ambition to do it now.  I'd rather just enjoy the games, and hope 2010 is as (or more) successful than 2006.

I'm sure you'll say I'm being easier on Buzz.  But I think I had the same expectation of Crean in 2006.  I guess I was making excuses for him too - huh?  Show me proof that people expected a 4th place finish, and I'll understand why your making this argument.  Otherwise, I just don't understand what you're getting at.

I don't think anybody expected us to do well in 2006.  But we didn't have anything to compare to, as we do now.  We had not previously played in the Big East, and we didn't have a a comparable recruiting class.

Now we do. 

In isolation you can argue that a team with two returning starters and a highly ranked group of newcomers might raise questions.

But when you compare the 2006 team to the 2010 team, the opposite side of the argument can be made.

84 This is how I would answer your questions

1.  Do you think we are better coached now than we were in 2006?
TC was entering his 5th year as head coach after just winning 4 games in the NCAA tournament.  With only 1 year under his belt in which he coached a senior dominated team there is no way anyone could argue that Buzz has proven he is a better coach.  He may prove that later but to state it as fact now is crazy.   

2.  Do we have a quality big that we lacked in 2006?
I can't say that Otule has proven he is any better than Barro.  Given the 06 team also had Amo and a 6'10" Novak I'd have to give the edge (starting the season) to the 06 team.  Freshman big men nearly always struggle and the kid from Senegal may not even be cleared to play.

3.  Have we recruited more Big East quality talent?
You could argue that there is more incoming talent in the Fall 09 class.  However prospective talent does not always translate into immediate college success.  The fact that all 3 amigos played GREAT as freshman is very, very unusual.  Also while its nice to have depth 2 good players do not = 1 great player.  In Novak and the 3 amigos you had 4 great players.  Having 1 great (Lazar) + 6 good players may not give you as good initial results because you can only have 5 guys on the court at once.  Long term if all those players develop you will be better off BUT we're talking about 09-10 results not long term.

A lot of stuff had to go right for that 06 team to finish 4th.  Is it possible for it to happen again OF COURSE!  Is it very likely to the point that we should be disappointed if it doesn't. NO WAY.

Those are fair responses.  It means you'll probably be accused of being a Crean apologist.   

All kidding aside, the purpose of this argument is to take a shot at all those people out there who have been saying for months how much better our recruiting is under Buzz and how much better our coaching is under Buzz. 

Well if both recruiting and coaching have improved, and the competition hasn't, shouldn't the W/L record follow?






 

[Lennys Tap]

84 thinks we should EXPECT Buzz to match the RESULTS from the ONE year in TEN as a head coach that TC's regular season RESULTS wildly exceeded EXPECTATIONS. Certainly no agenda here, folks.

[Silky]

You are one strange guy 84.  Ever leave the basement?  Who in the world expected that 2006 team to finish 4th?  I didn't.  They were picked 12th!  

Didn't Grimm shut down Tucker in a non-conf game vs UW?  Steve Novak was known as one of the top shooters in the country that year.   Anyone this year have that skill or another dominant skill like that?  Did anyone expect the Amigos to have as much success as they did?  Anyone predict one of them would be the all-time leader scorer at MU?  My point is that they were even better than advertised, which is kudos to the kids and Crean for finding them.  I'm sure someone of your Rainman like abilities knows that recruiting means nothing until the players step on the court (see MU's class of Christian, etc).  We know nothing if this class will be as great as the Amigos or will flame out.

I have nothing against Tom Crean.  I supported him when he was here and was glad he was our coach.  I have something against you because you have a wierd agenda of consistently trying to trump up Crean's accomplishments by tearing down Buzz or anyone else associated with MU not named Tom Crean.  

I'll start a new thread on this, since it was getting off the original topic--I think a comparision of situations between 2006 and 2010 is valid.

Sikly, PRN and other think that it's an "agenda" if we compare the two seasons and hold Crean and Buzz to similar results. 

As I'll discuss below, there are reasons why we are much better positioned from a talent and competitive perspective.

While some accuse me of holding an "agenda" for expecting similar results as we had in 2006, those people just haven't taken the time to actually compare the situation.  They're showing THEIR own agenda by making excuses in advance.  They downplay 2010 expectations because they dont' want to hold Buzz to the same standards that Crean was held to. 

Whatever your agenda is, I think its fair to compare Crean's results in what is a very similar environment in 2006 to what Buzz will deliver this year.  In short, I think it's entirely reasonable to be optimistic that in 2010 we can equal our 2006 season.


Let me start by asking three questions:

1.  Do you think we are better coached now than we were in 2006? 

2.  Do we have a quality big that we lacked in 2006?

3.  Have we recruited more Big East quality talent?
 
I'm guessing, but I think you'd answer yes to all three.

Personally I would say yes to #2 and #3, and that the jury is out on #1. 



***Never mind the fact faulty comparisons like that never take into consideration the schedule, injuries and competition of the league

I actually did take these into account--I'm wondering if you did, or this is just excuse making in advance.

In 2006 the Big East had two #1 seeds in the NCAA tournament, and eight teams in overall.  You probably forgot that Villanova and UConn were both #1 seeds, and tied for the league championship with 14-2 records.

For 2010, I only see Villanova as a potential #1 seed, and West Virginia as a 2 or a 3 seed.  Syracuse, UConn, Louisville and Pitt all lost too much to be projected as top 4 seeds, and I see only Cincy now with Lance Stephenson that perhaps improved enough to move up.  Providence, ND, and Georgetown didn't improve themselves to warrant a top 16 ranking.   

Andy Katz only has four big east teams in his final pre-summer top 25--only Villanova in the top 8 (WVU 9, Georgetown 18, and UCOnn 25).  I think that's fair.  The league is simply not as strong as it was in 2006.

Injuries?

In 2006 Wes Matthews missed 11 games because of a broken foot (after starting the first 13 games of the season) and Kinsella only played 14 games because of his injuries.  And we STILL finished tied for 4th.

If your angle was that we have to give Buzz a pass because he MIGHT have some injuries this coming season, you're barking up the wrong tree.  He would have to have two players (including a starter) miss significant time before he gets to use the injury card as an excuse.



*** 3 experienced seniors from a Final Four team. 

Hmm.  I thought the only reason we were in the Final Four was Dwayne Wade.     

Now, all of a sudden, Grimm, Chapman and Novak were also important.

Seriously, though, I do take returning talent into consideration.  Did you?  Really?

1.  Chris Grimm.  I can't even believe you brought him up.  Really, do you honestly expect me to believe that Grimm was a significant contributor to our final four run?   I believe that Maymon is going to prove to be a better player in his first game than Grimm was as a senior.  I also think he'll be better as a frosh than Amo and Barro were as sophs. 

2.  Joe Chapman.  Joe is a nice player, but he was not quite where Jimmy Butler is at right now.  Butler is a better shooter, better scorer and better rebounder.  I'd give Chapman the edge on defense.  Season long, Butler's stats compare favorably with Chapman's junior season, and if you compare just Butler's last 10 games, it's not even close--Butler is just a more complete player.

3.  Steve Novak. I'll admit this is a close comparision, but I think one can make the argument that Lazar Hayward is every bit as valuable as Novak.  While Novak was a better pure shooter, it might surprise you that Hayward actually shot better than Novak from beyond the arc during their junior years: 46.9% versus 46.1%.   Novak was clearly the better FT shooter (93% to 82%).   However, Novak was arguably worse on defense and rebounding, not as quick, and certainly and not as versatile.  Hayward can play the 3, the 4, or the 5.  Novak was a 3 or a 4--but could not play the 5.  Novak was a 2nd rounder in the NBA draft, and that's where Hayward is projected to be.   

The other returning players?  Barro and Amo, both sophs, and Kinsella, who was a junior.  As compared to Otule, Fulce and Cubillan.  Not much difference, in my opinion.  Probably more upside on 2010 based on the early reports on Otule.

You are clearly overplaying the "returning talent" argument--we started 3 freshman in 2006, and will probably start 3 newcomers in 2010.   The other returning starters for 2010 of Butler & Hayward are no worse than Chapman & Novak from 2006.


Newcomers?

No comparison--the 2010 newcomers are better as a group than 2006. 

We had 7 in 2006, just like we have this year:
Burke, McNeal, James, Matthews, Fitzgerald (transfer), Mortensen (redshirt) and Lott (JC transfer).

Buycks, Cadougan and DJO are on paper equal to the three amigos.  The question is whether Buzz can get them ready early in the year for significant roles.  The advantage he has is that Buycks and DJO have already played a season at a higher level.  All 3 frosh in 2006 were brand new to the college game.

Maymon is easlily better than Burke or Lott.  From day 1.

Erik Williams is easily better on paper than Fitzgerald was.

Mbao and Roseboro don't have to do much to give us more than Mortenson did.

We have a stronger group of newcomers, period, no comparison.


***You have an agenda and you know it.  And everyone else is figuring it out also. 

Its not called an "agenda".  Its called an opinion.  I guess if my opinion differs, then it's an agenda.

At least I'm upfront about my opinion, and can defend it:  Crean was a better coach than many give him credit for being, and that the jury is still out on Buzz. 

I think your opinion is that you don't like Crean and thus find it impossible to give him credit--even begrudgingly-- for the job he did in 2006.  I further think that making excuses in advance for Buzz is simply because you want him to seem better by comparison and not hold him to the same level of accomplishment we saw with Crean.

If you strip away all personal feelings for Buzz and Crean, and actually look at the overall situation--the talent coming back, the quality of the newcomers, and the talent in the league overall--I see no reason to think that expectations shouldn't mirror the 2006 results.
 

[The Lens]

Joanie, get off the Internet, your kids need a Mom.

[Marquette84]

Who in the world expected that 2006 team to finish 4th?  I didn't.  They were picked 12th!  

Nobody predicted it, but we did finish tied for 4th.  In my mind it means we must have had either some outstanding recruiting or some excellent coaching.  Maybe both.  

This board is filled with statements like this one from Lenny's Tap: "Recruiting and coaching were the most important factors in determining this success. Buzz has proven to my satisfaction he is TC's superior in both of these."

So that certainly leaves the impression that we should be better than we were under Crean.  If we fail, it can only be due to two things:  Talent, or Coaching.

If we lack the talent to duplicate the performance, then Buzz didn't recruit as well as Crean did.  

If we lack the coaching , well then the 2006 team was better coached.

I just cannot understand those who claim that we've improved our recruiting, that Buzz is a better coach, but we'll be hard pressed to hit .500.

I have nothing against Tom Crean.  I supported him when he was here and was glad he was our coach.  I have something against you because you have a wierd agenda of consistently trying to trump up Crean's accomplishments by tearing down Buzz or anyone else associated with MU not named Tom Crean.  

And I have nothing against Buzz Williams.

In fact, I was among his first defenders on this board:
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=9116.msg77093#msg77093

Check the date--back in May of 2008 I was defending MU's hire of Buzz, and stating that he was my pick ahead of Brad Brownell, Jim Less, Chris Lowery and all the other names that were bandied about.  

So for you to accuse me of trying to undercut Buzz shows you have no clue as to what you're talking about.

I supported Buzz long before most here did. I said flat out he was a better choice than the mid-major retreads many seemed to be in love with.

But I'm not ready to annoint him as Crean's superior--at least not until he demonstrates that he can match or surpass Crean's performance.  

That's not a pro-Crean agenda.  That's not an anti-Buzz agenda.  That's just common sense.

This year Buzz has circumstances VERY SIMILAR to what Crean had in 2006.   Let's see what Buzz can do with it.  If he's everything he's supposed to be, we should have no problem equalling what Crean did in 2006.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'll vouch for that.  84 took me and others to task for questioning the Buzz hire, he hasn't been anti-Buzz at all.  And his comments just now in light of so many people saying how much better Buzz is as a coach and recruiter are dead on.  If that's the case, no reason why he shouldn't be light years (or at the very worst, EVEN) with what Crean (the HORRIBLE recruiter and terrible game coach .... plus douche) did.

I mean, that's only logic 101.   With the schedule coming out today, looks like things are setup very nicely for Buzz and MU.  9-9 looks to be about the worst of it.  Maybe another double digit wins season in the league, something we've done every year since our acceptance into the league.

[bilsu]

The biggest reason you should not expect a fourth place finish this year is that the three amigos could not finish that high the next three years after doing it their first year. This shows that their fisrt year was an outlying year. I think this occurred for two reasons. The biggest was that MU was new to the conference, so the coaches were not as familiar with MU and Crean as they were after they had coached against MU the first year. Second we were able to blow out Uconn in our fisrt game, because they had no respect for MU and expected to beat us by just showing up. MU will not be looked past by any team now.

[Lennys Tap]

Only someone with a major agenda would insist that an apples to oranges comparison (TC's 2006 team vs Buzz's 2009 team) is a fair way to measure the two coaches when we already have an apples to apples one available. Before losing DJ to injury, Buzz had MU ranked #8 in the country and tied for 1st in the Big East. With basically the same team in 2007 (+Fitz and Barro - Butler), TC had them ranked in the 20-30 range for the entire season. Oh, and by the way, Buzz did it in a vastly better version of the Big East, one Vitale and Bilas said might be the strongest conference  EVER. To anyone but those with an AGENDA, Williams clearly  coached the SAME players better than Crean did.

But 84 is not interested in comparing TC's coaching of DJ, Jerel, Wes and co. with Buzz's coaching of that same group. The results don't fit his agenda. Crean has had ONE team in TEN years as a head coach that vastly exceeded preseason conference expectations. Buzz would have accomplished that last year but for a late season injury. To suggest he needs to do it again this year to be TC's equal is nonsense. But I think 84 already knows that.

[Silky]

Where have I ever said anything about Buzz being a better coach or recruiter?

If you think the "base" was 4th place in 2006, than Crean vastly underachieved in 2007 and 2008 with 6th places finishes.  Buzz righted the ship with a 5th place finish, only after being tied for first until DJ was hurt. 

I realize that is a very stupid argument on my part as  it is different years and different moving parts within the team and competition.  But not as stupid and simple as your agenda driven forecast of 4th place of bust for Buzz this coming.

Even Murf/Gr8 one is saying a .500 record in the league is great!

Nobody predicted it, but we did finish tied for 4th.  In my mind it means we must have had either some outstanding recruiting or some excellent coaching.  Maybe both.  

This board is filled with statements like this one from Lenny's Tap: "Recruiting and coaching were the most important factors in determining this success. Buzz has proven to my satisfaction he is TC's superior in both of these."

So that certainly leaves the impression that we should be better than we were under Crean.  If we fail, it can only be due to two things:  Talent, or Coaching.

If we lack the talent to duplicate the performance, then Buzz didn't recruit as well as Crean did.  

If we lack the coaching , well then the 2006 team was better coached.

I just cannot understand those who claim that we've improved our recruiting, that Buzz is a better coach, but we'll be hard pressed to hit .500.




And I have nothing against Buzz Williams.

In fact, I was among his first defenders on this board:
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=9116.msg77093#msg77093

Check the date--back in May of 2008 I was defending MU's hire of Buzz, and stating that he was my pick ahead of Brad Brownell, Jim Less, Chris Lowery and all the other names that were bandied about.  

So for you to accuse me of trying to undercut Buzz shows you have no clue as to what you're talking about.

I supported Buzz long before most here did. I said flat out he was a better choice than the mid-major retreads many seemed to be in love with.

But I'm not ready to annoint him as Crean's superior--at least not until he demonstrates that he can match or surpass Crean's performance.  

That's not a pro-Crean agenda.  That's not an anti-Buzz agenda.  That's just common sense.

This year Buzz has circumstances VERY SIMILAR to what Crean had in 2006.   Let's see what Buzz can do with it.  If he's everything he's supposed to be, we should have no problem equalling what Crean did in 2006.

[Marquette84]

Where have I ever said anything about Buzz being a better coach or recruiter?

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.

If you think the "base" was 4th place in 2006, than Crean vastly underachieved in 2007 and 2008 with 6th places finishes.  Buzz righted the ship with a 5th place finish, only after being tied for first until DJ was hurt. 

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."

I realize that is a very stupid argument on my part as  it is different years and different moving parts within the team and competition.  But not as stupid and simple as your agenda driven forecast of 4th place of bust for Buzz this coming.

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]

Only someone with a major agenda would insist that an apples to oranges comparison (TC's 2006 team vs Buzz's 2009 team) is a fair way to measure the two coaches when we already have an apples to apples one available. Before losing DJ to injury, Buzz had MU ranked #8 in the country and tied for 1st in the Big East. With basically the same team in 2007 (+Fitz and Barro - Butler), TC had them ranked in the 20-30 range for the entire season. Oh, and by the way, Buzz did it in a vastly better version of the Big East, one Vitale and Bilas said might be the strongest conference  EVER. To anyone but those with an AGENDA, Williams clearly  coached the SAME players better than Crean did.

Was it coaching?  

Or would one expect that when you return your entire starting lineup that there should be some improvement?  

I'll say this much--if Crean turned in last season's results, you'd be ripping him a new one because you would have EXPECTED that a 5th place Big East team that came within a point of the Sweet 16 and returns all 5 starters to have an improved performance.

But 84 is not interested in comparing TC's coaching of DJ, Jerel, Wes and co. with Buzz's coaching of that same group. The results don't fit his agenda. Crean has had ONE team in TEN years as a head coach that vastly exceeded preseason conference expectations. Buzz would have accomplished that last year but for a late season injury. To suggest he needs to do it again this year to be TC's equal is nonsense. But I think 84 already knows that.

Lenny--get with the program.  I'm comparing Crean's 2006 team to Buzz's 2010 team--NEXT season, not LAST season.  
Here are the similarities:

--both teams had 7 newcomers
--both teams had 2 decent returning players.
--both teams play similar competition (Big East conference)

You're on record saying that Buzz is a better recruiter and a better coach.  

We know what Crean did in 2006.  

My question to you:  Do you expect Buzz to demonstrate his superior recruiting and coaching ability in 2010?   How will you know if he demonstrated it?

[Lennys Tap]

Was it coaching?  

Or would one expect that when you return your entire starting lineup that there should be some improvement?  

I'll say this much--if Crean turned in last season's results, you'd be ripping him a new one because you would have EXPECTED that a 5th place Big East team that came within a point of the Sweet 16 and returns all 5 starters to have an improved performance.


Lenny--get with the program.  I'm comparing Crean's 2006 team to Buzz's 2010 team--NEXT season, not LAST season.  
Here are the similarities:

--both teams had 7 newcomers
--both teams had 2 decent returning players.
--both teams play similar competition (Big East conference)

You're on record saying that Buzz is a better recruiter and a better coach.  

We know what Crean did in 2006.  

My question to you:  Do you expect Buzz to demonstrate his superior recruiting and coaching ability in 2010?   How will you know if he demonstrated it?

Barro was our starting center for our non cupcake games and NOBODY that has seen both he and Burke play would say Burke was better. Saying we returned our entire starting lineup is what I'd expect somrone with an agenda to say.

I've never "ripped Crean a new one" over his coaching, and I certainly wouldn't criticize him if he had the team picked to finish 6th by the coaches on the verge of a Big East championship before DJ's injury. On the contrary, I would have been praising him for his best coaching job ever. But since Buzz was the one who did that and not TC, I decided to praise Buzz instead.

Finally, I won't "get with the program" because your apples to oranges  comparison is inherently flawed and unfair. But I don't doubt for a minute that you have known that all along.

[Marquette84]

Barro was our starting center for our non cupcake games and NOBODY that has seen both he and Burke play would say Burke was better. Saying we returned our entire starting lineup is what I'd expect somrone with an agenda to say.

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.

Finally, I won't "get with the program" because your apples to oranges  comparison is inherently flawed and unfair. But I don't doubt for a minute that you have known that all along.

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