MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: RubyWiscy on January 06, 2010, 11:34:49 PM
-
that this is a very good basketball team? Forget wins and losses, MU just played 3 straight games vs. the 6th, 8th and 12th ranked teams and except for a total of maybe 4 or 5 minutes out played each of them. They are a very unselfish group of men who understand via Buzz that their only chance for success is to play as a team. There doesn't seem to be any egos out there.
The other thing that is very apparent is that Buzz knows how to coach. He makes mistakes, yes, but the game plans in each of the last 3 games have put the team in position to win.
-
that this is a very good basketball team? Forget wins and losses, MU just played 3 straight games vs. the 6th, 8th and 12th ranked teams and except for a total of maybe 4 or 5 minutes out played each of them. They are a very unselfish group of men who understand via Buzz that their only chance for success is to play as a team. There doesn't seem to be any egos out there.
The other thing that is very apparent is that Buzz knows how to coach. He makes mistakes, yes, but the game plans in each of the last 3 games have put the team in position to win.
Agreed that this team has overachieved X100. Also agreed that Buzz has done better than expected in getting them ready to play extremely well sooo quickly
Not so sure I agree that he knows how to fully coach just yet- as u said we controlled many of the games we lost this season, and coaching is most important down the stretch. Also, its his tremendous recruiting, which few will doubt, that brought in those 3 jucos that are currently saving us. Buzz cant 'coach' making 11 threes per game
That said, I still say if this team makes the field of 65 itll be a coaching job worthy of BE coach of the year... Had we had gotten 1 of the 3 vs wvu, fsu, or nova i think we would be in great shape to be on that path
Long way to go, but I am starting to think MU may have a shot at the dance. Id warn against being fooled into thinking this team is good enough to be a lock- they will def lose some more games they should prob win like they did vs NC state
Coach your tail off Buzz, its about time you got off the blowing close games schnyde
-
I agree.... Final four. Punch Villanova in the jaw Buzz!!!!!!
-
that this is a very good basketball team? Forget wins and losses,
No, can't agree.
I think this is a good basketball team, not a very good basketball team. A VERY good basketball team doesn't lose the games we did. They are playing hard, playing smart, very unselfish, but that doesn't make them a very good basketball team, but certainly a good one. I don't consider Nova or WVU to be two of the top 10 teams in the country.
The Big East is good this year, but not great and I don't think any of those three teams are great. Actually, the best team we've played all year is Wisconsin, in my opinion.
-
that this is a very good basketball team? Forget wins and losses, MU just played 3 straight games vs. the 6th, 8th and 12th ranked teams and except for a total of maybe 4 or 5 minutes out played each of them. They are a very unselfish group of men who understand via Buzz that their only chance for success is to play as a team. There doesn't seem to be any egos out there.
The other thing that is very apparent is that Buzz knows how to coach. He makes mistakes, yes, but the game plans in each of the last 3 games have put the team in position to win.
I believe only some of the griefers had lost hope. This team has been solid in the last 3 games. Just too many close ones!
-
No, can't agree.
I think this is a good basketball team, not a very good basketball team. A VERY good basketball team doesn't lose the games we did. They are playing hard, playing smart, very unselfish, but that doesn't make them a very good basketball team, but certainly a good one. I don't consider Nova or WVU to be two of the top 10 teams in the country.
The Big East is good this year, but not great and I don't think any of those three teams are great. Actually, the best team we've played all year is Wisconsin, in my opinion.
Almost seems like a Buzz comment :D
But as for Wisconsin being the best we've played this year, it might be pretty accurate as much as I hate to say it. I'm not sure they're better than Villanova but playing in Madison is a much tougher matchup than playing at home against Nova. As for West Virginia, they're a good team but not the sixth best in the country.
-
That Leuer kid was the best we have faced this year. However, we could take them right now.
-
Very good is a stretch in my opinion. We are not strong enough defensively. I don't know about everyone else, but I feel like I am hoping the other team misses when MU is on D rather than watching for a good defensive stop.
We are a bubble team for the rest of the season with wins at Syracuse or at UConn or 11-12 conference wins probably being the only things to take us off of the bubble before March 1.
Last year I thought we were a very good team when healthy. I would have given us at least a chance against UNC since we had the firepower and perimeter defense. This year, Kentucky or Kansas wipe the floor with us.
We have guys who can score and we play hard.
-
Yeah, the Badgers actually are probably the toughest team we've played. However, I would say Nova and WVU are "very good" teams that edged an almost-as-good team.
We are a very overachieving team, not great yet, but almost there.
We do have something great: Buzz.
-
No, can't agree.
I think this is a good basketball team, not a very good basketball team. A VERY good basketball team doesn't lose the games we did. They are playing hard, playing smart, very unselfish, but that doesn't make them a very good basketball team, but certainly a good one. I don't consider Nova or WVU to be two of the top 10 teams in the country.
The Big East is good this year, but not great and I don't think any of those three teams are great. Actually, the best team we've played all year is Wisconsin, in my opinion.
I used to think you made some sense at times, some I am going to turn the other cheek on this one
Dont be 'that guy'- You can at times make valid points, but dont let others getting on your case about being anti MU and pro crean actually cloud your judgement into saying things that make it seem that way
The Big East is GREAT- maybe not as good as last year, but nonetheless an OUTSTANDING conference that is one of the top 2 or 3 in the country.
Nova and wvu ARE top 10 teams, or very close. Both teams return solid depth from extremely good squads last season. I believe u are a KenPom guy so Im assuming you will throw out his having wvu at #10 and nova at #29 with sconnie at #4, but save the energy.
Wisconsin is NOT better than wvu or nova, in my opinion. You arguing the case makes u seem like u downplay a teams ability because they struggle vs MU (nova and wvu) and makes it seem that u are saying they are weaker than wisconsin because they struggled vs MU. Nova lost to a good temple team in a rivalry game and wvu to a very good purdue team, both away if im not mistaken. Sconnie lost to another wisconsin state university
-
saying Wisconsin is a better overall team than both WVU and Nova I think is foolish.
Madison is a top 5 hardest place to win in college, but saying they're the best team we've played, idk about that.
I love how we compete. Buycks still scares me somewhat.
-
I used to think you made some sense at times, some I am going to turn the other cheek on this one
Dont be 'that guy'- You can at times make valid points, but dont let others getting on your case about being anti MU and pro crean actually cloud your judgement into saying things that make it seem that way
The Big East is GREAT- maybe not as good as last year, but nonetheless an OUTSTANDING conference that is one of the top 2 or 3 in the country.
Nova and wvu ARE top 10 teams, or very close. Both teams return solid depth from extremely good squads last season. I believe u are a KenPom guy so Im assuming you will throw out his having wvu at #10 and nova at #29 with sconnie at #4, but save the energy.
Wisconsin is NOT better than wvu or nova, in my opinion. You arguing the case makes u seem like u downplay a teams ability because they struggle vs MU (nova and wvu) and makes it seem that u are saying they are weaker than wisconsin because they struggled vs MU. Nova lost to a good temple team in a rivalry game and wvu to a very good purdue team, both away if im not mistaken. Sconnie lost to another wisconsin state university
Well, we will just agree to disagree. The conference has now slipped to 4th best. It's a solid conference, but not great this year. Last year was not only great, but arguably the best ever. Perhaps I'm too harsh on the conference because last year was so outstanding.
Ken Pom will tell you that his data is strong, but not mature enough, yet. Need a few more weeks.
I do not think WVU is a top 10 team at all. Poor guard play is going to be their downfall. I would not be surprised to see them finish 4th or worse in the conference. They are good, but not a top ten team. I am not "downgrading" WVU because they struggled against MU. They struggled against Cleveland State (won by 2), Seton Hall (won in OT), got annihilated by Purdue by 25, barely beat a good MU team by 1 at home.
It's the body of work, not one game.
I think Wisconsin is an outstanding team. Beat Duke, beat Marquette, beat Maryland, absolutely crushed Penn State on the road the other day (PSU isn't that good, but to beat them that badly in Happy Valley was pretty good), etc. They are a tough team that would be WVU and Nova, in my opinion.
-
Well, we will just agree to disagree. The conference has now slipped to 4th best. It's a solid conference, but not great this year. Last year was not only great, but arguably the best ever. Perhaps I'm too harsh on the conference because last year was so outstanding.
Ken Pom will tell you that his data is strong, but not mature enough, yet. Need a few more weeks.
Real Time has BE #1 and B11 at 5th. Their Power Rankings have BE #2 and B11 @ 4th. Early as you say, but not so clear cut. I counted 47 sheep tonight during the Badgers game. Who won?
http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_conf_Men.html
-
Real Time has BE #1 and B11 at 5th. Their Power Rankings have BE #2 and B11 @ 4th. Early as you say, but not so clear cut. I counted 47 sheep tonight during the Badgers game. Who won?
http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_conf_Men.html
MSU won. I missed the game, but the final score looked like a snoozer for sure.
Ken Pom has Big East 4th
Sagarin has Big East 3rd
RPI....Big East 1st
Right now WVU is number 1 overall in the country in the RPI, how...I don't know. It has Purdue at number 3, a team it lost to by 25 points. MU is 79th in the RPI...I think we're better than that.
-
Well, we will just agree to disagree. The conference has now slipped to 4th best. It's a solid conference, but not great this year. Last year was not only great, but arguably the best ever. Perhaps I'm too harsh on the conference because last year was so outstanding.
Ken Pom will tell you that his data is strong, but not mature enough, yet. Need a few more weeks.
I do not think WVU is a top 10 team at all. Poor guard play is going to be their downfall. I would not be surprised to see them finish 4th or worse in the conference. They are good, but not a top ten team. I am not "downgrading" WVU because they struggled against MU. They struggled against Cleveland State (won by 2), Seton Hall (won in OT), got annihilated by Purdue by 25, barely beat a good MU team by 1 at home.
It's the body of work, not one game.
I think Wisconsin is an outstanding team. Beat Duke, beat Marquette, beat Maryland, absolutely crushed Penn State on the road the other day (PSU isn't that good, but to beat them that badly in Happy Valley was pretty good), etc. They are a tough team that would be WVU and Nova, in my opinion.
Fair enough. Last year, there were some saying that the Big Ten was better top to bottom than the BE... I felt the BE had one of the best conferences of all time as well
I strongly disagree with you on this season however. In my opinion Nova is a Final 4 caliber team, especially if that Wayns kid continues to play the way he has the last few games.
From what I have seen of Syracuse, I would say that they are definitely a Final 4 caliber team- Johnson is the real deal and they are 'dynamite' down low as dickie v would say, to go along with some good shooters and that defense they play (ya boy boeheim needs to find some depth though).
Although we disagree, I think WVU is atleast an Elite 8 type team, esp if truck bryant or mazzula can play the point effectively and especially since huggie knows how to coach.
UConn is very good and a Sweet 16 team if not better- Dyson and Walker in the backcourt with Robinson and Edwards down low is a pretty solid core
Pitt is much better than many expected, and I know it must make your little heart smile to hear that since they lost to ya boy tan tommy (jk IU alum). Anytime u can win at Syracuse and at Cincy you must have something good
Georgetown might be a big overrated at this point, but is still very good and plenty capable of being a sweet 16 team- Monroe can be that good on any given day and wright and freeman are excellent complements
Louisville, Cincinnati, and ND you cannot sleep on- Louisville always gets better and overachieves by seasons end. Cincy is much better than people think and will go dancing this year and may surprise and make it into the second weekend with stephensen and vaughn. ND has shrek, although with the high school defense they've played they will be in trouble
We know who MU is- we have overachieved thus far and seem much better than our preseason predictions
Providence, SH, USF, and SJU, Rutgers and Depaul i cant comment on cause I really havent seen, but these are obviously not tourney teams
So I have got 10 possible tourney teams, with likely 7-8 of those dancing (I would guess 8). Ive got 3 final 4 caliber, or atleast elite 8 caliber teams (Nova, Cuse, WVU). The rest that get in I think have legit sweet 16 chance, with UConn, Gtown, Louisville, Pitt being the top 4 in that next level (I would say the same of MU if they gets in and i think they would be one of the last in from the conference)
I would like to see your thoughts on the Big 11, since I dont follow that as much (minus U of Illinois) On my limited knowledge I would say Purdue and MSU are the only Final 4 caliber teams, with UW being in the sweet 16 category (I have major doubts they get outta the first weekend because if Leuer or hughes struggles they are in huge trouble). I also think minnesota, osu, and illinois are no better than that 2nd level that I spoke of from the BE. The big 11 could possibly only get 5 teams in the dance
-
Not so sure I agree that he knows how to fully coach just yet- as u said we controlled many of the games we lost this season, and coaching is most important down the stretch. Also, its his tremendous recruiting, which few will doubt, that brought in those 3 jucos that are currently saving us. Buzz cant 'coach' making 11 threes per game
OK...let me get this straight. We have lost games down the stretch because of missed free throws and somehow that is Buzz's fault. However when we make a bunch of three pointers, it is not relevant because well "you can't coach making three pointers."
To me, this is an incredible coaching performance this year. They are short-handed and undersized, have had to deal with heartbreaking losses, injuries and transfers, yet they come out with a ton of energy and effort and have been in every game so far. They are well prepared and run an offense that gets them good looks.
I'm not an anti-TC guy. I thought he was great for our program, but he got blown away in a lot of games (like he is at IU this year.) I think Buzz has these guys mentally more ready to play in games like the WVU and UW games and frankly it has been surprising to me that we have been in these games.
I'm not calling him the next John Wooden or Coach K, but between what he has done on the recruiting trail, what I have seen on the court this year, and what I hear about him as a person, I am very happy with who we have coaching the Warriors right now.
-
This is a poor team talent wise relative to the Big East. I'm very surprised we are not getting blown out by top 15 teams with superior talent.
Has me encouraged for the future.
-
If we are competitive at Nova - where we got blown out last year - I will say this could be a very good team!
-
saying Wisconsin is a better overall team than both WVU and Nova I think is foolish.
Madison is a top 5 hardest place to win in college, but saying they're the best team we've played, idk about that.
I love how we compete. Buycks still scares me somewhat.
I agree with this.
Wisconsin played their best 15 minutes of basketball the entire season to start the Marquette game. It was always going to be that way when they got embarrassed just three days earlier in Green Bay. Playing their first true road game, certain kids weren't exactly ready for that and the hole ended up too deep to play out. Play that game 10 times and MU would win two of them.
I think Villanova is the best team we've played because they have the best pieces -- especially when they get Yarou -- but Georgetown played the best defense against us yet this season.
-
This is a very YOUNG team.
Good teams win close games. The first two BE games were close, but a good team wins close games and ones where they have the opportunity to win at the end. That's why good teams have more wins than losses.
This will become a good team over time as the youngsters learn how to win. They had no problem blowing out the cupcakes and they have played the good teams really tough. But that step from being a team that's tough to beat to being a team that can consistently win games against good teams is much bigger than it seems.
It took the Jordan era Bulls 3 years to overcome the Pistons and go from a tough team to beat to a great one. It's a big step.
But at this point these guys have so far exceeded my expectations and have me very encouraged for the future. It looks like they have the talent to win, they just need to learn how.
-
I agree with this.
Wisconsin played their best 15 minutes of basketball the entire season to start the Marquette game.
Well, they played really well versus Duke and crushed Ohio State on New Year's Eve. I'm not sure this is an accurate statement.
-
Solid team, but in no way a very good team. They have some talent and unquestionably play extremely hard, but have very little depth and will be over matched at the PG position most nights. I see .500-ish in the Big East...not sure how that qualifies them as a very good team.
-
I do not think WVU is a top 10 team at all. Poor guard play is going to be their downfall. I would not be surprised to see them finish 4th or worse in the conference. They are good, but not a top ten team.
I agree that WV is not a top ten team after watching the Purdue game and MU play them, their ballhandling is poor. Yes they have height but every team with an intelligent game plan will press them into turnovers.
Marquette is a good team, and beating Gtown is a monkey off of their backs. I personally think we are going to have to steal a game against a ranked Big East team away from home to make the tournament, since there are many reasons for voters to point out why we shouldn't make the tourney. The games we have lost are to good teams, but there are no moral victories.
Yes Georgetown is ranked 12th in the nation but their depth may be poorer than ours. The style of basketball they play has always been suceptable (spelling) to losing to good outside shooting teams, they usually just play slow. I think that ranking is a little high.
-
Well, they played really well versus Duke and crushed Ohio State on New Year's Eve. I'm not sure this is an accurate statement.
Ohio State has been w/o Evan Turner who was on a tear at the beginning of the season. He was on player of the year pace until he got hurt, and was out for that game.
-
MSU won. I missed the game, but the final score looked like a snoozer for sure.
Ken Pom has Big East 4th
Sagarin has Big East 3rd
RPI....Big East 1st
Right now WVU is number 1 overall in the country in the RPI, how...I don't know. It has Purdue at number 3, a team it lost to by 25 points. MU is 79th in the RPI...I think we're better than that.
West Virginia only lost by 15 to Purdue, you're kind of skewing the facts. Still a bad loss nonetheless, but it was at Purdue on New Years Day and could have been a different story in Morgantown.
-
We can only be "very good" if Ewill gets minutes. I am guessing Buzz reads the boards, if he does he would know Mu is 7-0 when Ewill plays and 3-5 when he does not. We cannot be "very good" unless Ewill plays!
-
that this is a very good basketball team? Forget wins and losses, MU just played 3 straight games vs. the 6th, 8th and 12th ranked teams and except for a total of maybe 4 or 5 minutes out played each of them. They are a very unselfish group of men who understand via Buzz that their only chance for success is to play as a team. There doesn't seem to be any egos out there.
The other thing that is very apparent is that Buzz knows how to coach. He makes mistakes, yes, but the game plans in each of the last 3 games have put the team in position to win.
They are fun to watch.
They are better than I thought.
I am optimistic for the future (both immediate and long term).
I don't want to get into semantics like "very good" vs "good" vs "average" etc. etc.
-
Well, they played really well versus Duke and crushed Ohio State on New Year's Eve. I'm not sure this is an accurate statement.
I respect your opinion and its no surprise someone would see things differently.
To me, it was the best they played all season for those 15 minutes. They made every free throw. They got three of their four blocks in the game to stymie MU offense. They raced to a double digit lead (that got up to 17). Throw in a couple steals and great Madison-style positional defense as well as the heat they had from losing to Green Bay and it was as impressive a stretch as they'll have all season.
I understand they were good with Duke but seeing what the Blue Devils have done this season the evidence points more to a poorer performance from Duke then it being the Badgers best performance of the season.
And Ohio State was covered above by someone but all the games the Bucks play without Turner will have an asterisk. He's one of the 15 best players in America and its no surprise OSU would lose without him.
-
saying Wisconsin is a better overall team than both WVU and Nova I think is foolish.
Madison is a top 5 hardest place to win in college, but saying they're the best team we've played, idk about that.
Agreed. Villanova and WVU, IMO, are both better than Bucky.
What Bucky is, however, is the worst matchup MU has had all season. That, combined with the fact the game was in Madison, made it MU's toughest game of the season. But not best opponent.
-
I suppose "very good" is a bit subjective. My view is this is supposed to be a rebuilding year especially with all the injuries and defections, so any game against a good team where we play well is a plus.
Now, if we play well against one top team, that's nice. Two top teams, looking promising. Three top teams, all in a row, that cannot be a fluke. There is something going on here and it bodes well for for MU's season and future.
I am back to having raised expectations that this team will play well night in and night out. How that translates to wins-losses, I don't know. But they are a "very good" team that can compete with anyone IMO.
-
This is a very YOUNG team.
Our seven man rotation consists of three seniors, three juniors, and one soph.
There are many ways to describe our team, "YOUNG" however, is not one of them.
-
That Leuer kid was the best we have faced this year.
Was this supposed to be in teal. I really don't know if I can post on here anymore if my counterparts seriously believe things like this.
-
Can we all now agree that anyone who starts a post with 'can we all now agree' has to wear a dunce cap for the rest of the afternoon and hold a sign that says "NO".
-
MSU won. I missed the game, but the final score looked like a snoozer for sure.
Ken Pom has Big East 4th
Sagarin has Big East 3rd
RPI....Big East 1st
Right now WVU is number 1 overall in the country in the RPI, how...I don't know. It has Purdue at number 3, a team it lost to by 25 points. MU is 79th in the RPI...I think we're better than that.
This is the second time in this thread you claim Purdue beat (or annihilated, ifyou will) WVU by 25. If I recall correctly it was a 5 point game at halftime and the final was 15 or 17.
-
Purdue 77
W. Virginia 62
It was a 15 point game.
-
Pomeroy has BE at 3rd not 4th.......close enough that it hardly matters however.
http://kenpom.com/conf.php?c=BE
-
Our seven man rotation consists of three seniors, three juniors, and one soph.
There are many ways to describe our team, "YOUNG" however, is not one of them.
Three-sevenths of our rotation have a combined 56 games of NCAA Division 1 experience. Of those 56 games, 26 of them are from Joe Fulce. Joe played in 11 games last year for a whopping total of 62 minutes.
DJO and Buycks have played in 30 total games in their Division 1 careers, 6 of which are in Big East play.
They may be old in terms of eligibility, but not in terms of competing at this level of play.
-
Three-sevenths of our rotation have a combined 56 games of NCAA Division 1 experience. Of those 56 games, 26 of them are from Joe Fulce. Joe played in 11 games last year for a whopping total of 62 minutes.
So basically this paragraph means that five-sevenths of our rotation has a good amount of experience.
DJO and Buycks have played in 30 total games in their Division 1 careers, 6 of which are in Big East play.
They may be old in terms of eligibility, but not in terms of competing at this level of play.
But age does have something to do with how ready people are to compete. You think DJO isn't better this year than he would have been as a freshman? He's bigger and stronger. So while i agree that we are 'younger' than our team's driver licence may indicate, I have a hard time agreeing with someone who says that it is a VERY young team.
-
So basically this paragraph means that five-sevenths of our rotation has a good amount of experience.
But age does have something to do with how ready people are to compete. You think DJO isn't better this year than he would have been as a freshman? He's bigger and stronger. So while i agree that we are 'younger' than our team's driver licence may indicate, I have a hard time agreeing with someone who says that it is a VERY young team.
Agreed.
I think we just need to call it "inexperienced" or "somewhat untested".
-
This is the second time in this thread you claim Purdue beat (or annihilated, ifyou will) WVU by 25. If I recall correctly it was a 5 point game at halftime and the final was 15 or 17.
My apologies....it was a 15 point final and they were up 25 points with 11 1/2 minutes to play in the game before calling off the dogs. I watched part of the second half and it was a rout. It took WVU almost 10 minutes to score 10 points while their defense had given up 29 in that same time period.
The 25 point number was stuck in my head because that's how badly Purdue was kicking their ass in the middle of the second half.
-
Neutral court
UW beats West Virginia
Villianova beats UW
-
So basically this paragraph means that five-sevenths of our rotation has a good amount of experience.
Four sevenths actually...
-
Neutral court
UW beats West Virginia
Villianova beats UW
UW definitely beats WVU
For Nova, that would be an interesting game. They are rated so closely in the computer rankings
They've played two common opponents.
1) Maryland. And each team played Maryland on a neutral site.
Nova beat them 95-86....+9
Wisconsin beat them 78-69...+9
2) Marquette. Wisconsin played MU at home, Nova played MU on the road.
Nova beat MU 74-72....+2
Wisconsin beat MU 72-63...+9
What does Nova do to MU at Nova
-
My apologies....it was a 15 point final and they were up 25 points with 11 1/2 minutes to play in the game before calling off the dogs. I watched part of the second half and it was a rout. It took WVU almost 10 minutes to score 10 points while their defense had given up 29 in that same time period.
The 25 point number was stuck in my head because that's how badly Purdue was kicking their ass in the middle of the second half.
LOL...So you were wrong. Admit it and let it go. The two paragraphs explaining how even though you were wrong you weren't really wrong are as sad as they were expected.
-
LOL...So you were wrong. Admit it and let it go. The two paragraphs explaining how even though you were wrong you weren't really wrong are as sad as they were expected.
My goodness....I thought when I said "my apologies" that was admitting I was wrong. Good grief. I simply explained why I had said 25 points.
It was an ass kicking any way you want to describe it.....a royal ass kicking.
Journal Review...."Showdown turns into BLOWOUT"
Here's the Wa Post headline.... "Purdue rips W.Virginia"
Chicago Tribune..."Purdue DOMINATES battle of unbeatens"
Spokesman Review.... "Boilermakers HAMMER on Mountaineers"
A few others
"Purdue delivers Haymaker"
"Boilers shoot WVU into meltdown"
-
UW definitely beats WVU
For Nova, that would be an interesting game. They are rated so closely in the computer rankings
They've played two common opponents.
1) Maryland. And each team played Maryland on a neutral site.
Nova beat them 95-86....+9
Wisconsin beat them 78-69...+9
2) Marquette. Wisconsin played MU at home, Nova played MU on the road.
Nova beat MU 74-72....+2
Wisconsin beat MU 72-63...+9
What does Nova do to MU at Nova
How can you say a team that DIDN'T beat UWGB would DEFINITELY beat WVU? I don't know which team is better but I'd guess Vegas would make WVU a very slight favorite on a neutral court but it could be a pick 'em.
-
My goodness....I thought when I said "my apologies" that was admitting I was wrong. Good grief. I simply explained why I had said 25 points.
It was an ass kicking any way you want to describe it.....a royal ass kicking.
Journal Review...."Showdown turns into BLOWOUT"
Here's the Wa Post headline.... "Purdue rips W.Virginia"
Chicago Tribune..."Purdue DOMINATES battle of unbeatens"
Spokesman Review.... "Boilermakers HAMMER on Mountaineers"
A few others
"Purdue delivers Haymaker"
"Boilers shoot WVU into meltdown"
My goodness... Good grief...Sigh...Another admission followed by by a bunch of junk that I guess "explains" all the good reasons why you were wrong. Did anybody say it wasn't a rout? Did anybody say it wasn't an "ass kicking"? Of course not. Boy, I would have loved to have watched you argue with your 3rd grade teacher about the nuances in some true/false question back in the day.
-
How can you say a team that DIDN'T beat UWGB would DEFINITELY beat WVU? I don't know which team is better but I'd guess Vegas would make WVU a very slight favorite on a neutral court but it could be a pick 'em.
WVU took a minor miracle to beat Cleveland State. Let's see how Wisconsin does at Purdue, my guess is at no point in the game will they trail by 25 points.
I just don't like WVU's team that much. Their guard play isn't strong enough to be an elite team. I saw them play here in Anaheim in person, saw them play against MU and Purdue. They're good, but they aren't an elite team by any stretch. At least not today. Maybe they get better at the guard position.
-
My goodness... Good grief...Sigh...Another admission followed by by a bunch of junk that I guess "explains" all the good reasons why you were wrong. Did anybody say it wasn't a rout? Did anybody say it wasn't an "ass kicking"? Of course not. Boy, I would have loved to have watched you argue with your 3rd grade teacher about the nuances in some true/false question back in the day.
I see. So if I used the word rout instead of annihilate.,..the panties would not have wadded?
Dude, seek help. Really
ob·ses·sion (əb-sěsh'ən, ŏb-)
n.
1. Compulsive preoccupation with a fixed idea or an unwanted feeling or emotion, often accompanied by symptoms of anxiety.
2. A compulsive, often unreasonable idea or emotion.
ob·ses'sion·al adj., ob·ses'sion·al·ly adv.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source
-
But age does have something to do with how ready people are to compete. You think DJO isn't better this year than he would have been as a freshman? He's bigger and stronger. So while i agree that we are 'younger' than our team's driver licence may indicate, I have a hard time agreeing with someone who says that it is a VERY young team.
I still question why so many think that Juco transfers or players returning from injury are assumed to be on a par with true freshman in terms of skills development, maturity, "playing away from home," physical development, etc.
I don't see how it matters if a junior spent his first two seasons at MU or at Indian Hills CC--he's still two years more mature, has been coached and developed skills, spent time in the weight room, has learned to deal with living in a dorm, traveling to games, playing out of state, etc.
The only difference is that he has not spent two years learning one particular coach's game plan. And I have to ask if it really takes more than two or three months to become proficient? Bo Ryan managed to put together a decently coached team in just a few weeks for his university games team--I would think that two to three months would be enough for a juco to grasp
Here's the juco first team all-americans that moved on to D1 this year. (Of the 10 players, 3 were frosh who are still in JUCO). Of the 7 players, 6 are regular starters and contributors.
Casey Mitchell G 6-5 205 So. Chipola College West Virginia - 5 starts, 8 ppg
DeAndre Brown G 5-11 160 So. Navarro College La. Tech - 15 starts 11 ppg
Darius Johnson-Odom G 6-2 190 Fr. Hutchinson - MU - 5 starts - 12 ppg
Dwight Buycks G 6-3 185 So. Indian Hills - MU - 10 starts - 8 ppg
Ridge McKeither F 6-5 245 So. ND State Coll. of Science - Chattanooga - 11 starts, 9 ppg
Chris Hines F 6-8 220 So. SW Illinois College - Alabama - no starts, 3 ppg
Jarrid Famous C 7-0 235 So. Westchester C.C. - USF - 14 starts, 9 ppg
There is no reason for the assumption that a first-team Juco player would not contribute significantly.
-
WVU took a minor miracle to beat Cleveland State. Let's see how Wisconsin does at Purdue, my guess is at no point in the game will they trail by 25 points.
I love all you guys (no, not that way) but Wisconsin will never trail by 25 because the final score will be something like 43 to 41.
-
I love all you guys (no, not that way) but Wisconsin will never trail by 25 because the final score will be something like 43 to 41.
There's no reason to put that in teal.
-
I still question why so many think that Juco transfers or players returning from injury are assumed to be on a par with true freshman in terms of skills development, maturity, "playing away from home," physical development, etc.
I don't see how it matters if a junior spent his first two seasons at MU or at Indian Hills CC--he's still two years more mature, has been coached and developed skills, spent time in the weight room, has learned to deal with living in a dorm, traveling to games, playing out of state, etc.
The only difference is that he has not spent two years learning one particular coach's game plan. And I have to ask if it really takes more than two or three months to become proficient? Bo Ryan managed to put together a decently coached team in just a few weeks for his university games team--I would think that two to three months would be enough for a juco to grasp
There is no reason for the assumption that a first-team Juco player would not contribute significantly.
Nowhere in my previous post did I state that our JUCO transfers were "on par with true freshman in terms of skills development, maturity, "playing away from home," physical development, etc."
Do you remember how Jimmy Butler looked on the court at the beginning of last season? How did he look at the end of the year in comparison to the beginning? There is no way you can argue that he came in to the program as good of a player as he was at the end of last year. Whether it's adapting to the system or the level of competition is up for debate. It's likely a combination of the two. But he was a better player at the end of last year than the beginning. That is a fact.
I won't deny that playing basketball at the JUCO level will give someone added experience over a high school senior, because that is clearly the case. It also allows someone to adapt to the life of a student athlete.
But at the same time, you cannot deny that there is an adjustment period that a player will go through going from JUCO to the Big East. A couple weeks, a couple months, who knows how long it takes. A lot of that has to do with the individual. The learning curve for some players is shorter than others. And right now we have two players on the roster that are being counted on to make big contributions to this team going through this adjustment period.
It's also somewhat unfair to expect a JUCO transfer (a junior in eligibility) to come in and immediately contribute the way he would had he come in to the program as a freshman and spent the two years there, playing for the coach and against Big East opposition.
-
I see. So if I used the word rout instead of annihilate.,..the panties would not have wadded?
Dude, seek help. Really
ob·ses·sion (əb-sěsh'ən, ŏb-)
n.
1. Compulsive preoccupation with a fixed idea or an unwanted feeling or emotion, often accompanied by symptoms of anxiety.
2. A compulsive, often unreasonable idea or emotion.
ob·ses'sion·al adj., ob·ses'sion·al·ly adv.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source
No. You don't see. You made a simple misstatement of fact. No big deal really, but when you repeated it for the second time in this thread I and others pointed it out. The normal reply would have been thanks, my mistake, end of story. Instead you follow a two word acknowledgement with paragraghs absolving and mitigating your error. Throw in a little old fashioned name calling at the end and you have the Chicos version of "my mistake".
-
Nowhere in my previous post did I state that our JUCO transfers were "on par with true freshman in terms of skills development, maturity, "playing away from home," physical development, etc."
Nor did I quote you.
Many people--including you--made comments that reflect an assumption of low expectations for a host of reasons. That is evident based on the fact that they are now surprised by even a modest level of success.
My comment is that if you look at the performance of other juco 1st team all-Americans, it was wrong to have those low expectations to begin with.
Do you remember how Jimmy Butler looked on the court at the beginning of last season? How did he look at the end of the year in comparison to the beginning? There is no way you can argue that he came in to the program as good of a player as he was at the end of last year. Whether it's adapting to the system or the level of competition is up for debate. It's likely a combination of the two. But he was a better player at the end of last year than the beginning. That is a fact.
Well first, Butler wasn't a first team JUCO-AA, he was 2nd team.
Second, I disagree that Butler didn't look good early in the year. Butler's lack of participation early is more strongly infulenced by the fact that James, McNeal, Hayward, and Matthews got most of the offensive looks. Butler was a strong defender out of the gate, but was not the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th option--rightly so. Some did question why he wasn't given a bigger role in the offense earlier in the season--but its hard to argue with giving the ball and minutes to Haward and Matthews.
While you claim it was that he "adapted to the system or level of competition," the biggest factor in his contribution late in the season is that he was unleashed by the head coach in order to replace James points (which Acker could not accomplish alone).
I won't deny that playing basketball at the JUCO level will give someone added experience over a high school senior, because that is clearly the case. It also allows someone to adapt to the life of a student athlete.
But at the same time, you cannot deny that there is an adjustment period that a player will go through going from JUCO to the Big East. A couple weeks, a couple months, who knows how long it takes. A lot of that has to do with the individual. The learning curve for some players is shorter than others. And right now we have two players on the roster that are being counted on to make big contributions to this team going through this adjustment period.
The problem is that most JUCO 1st team AAs don't have this "adjustment" period you claim exists.
Here's the 2008 list. Once again, most were regular contributors on their teams right away. I've posted their 1st / 2nd year contributions:
Cory Cooperwood - Wright State - 24 mpg 9.4 ppg 33 starts / 24 mpg 9.1 ppg 16 starts
Devron Bostick - Minnesota - 11 mpg, 4.0 no starts / 11 mpg, 4.1 ppg, no starts
Bobby Maze - 25 mpg, 8.2 ppg 28 starts / 23 mpg, 7.9 ppg, 12 starts
Bryan Sherrer - So. Alabama 21 mpg, 5.3 ppg, 11 starts / 30 mpg, 11.2 ppg 16 sarts
Eric Tramiel - No. Texas 24 mpg, 12.0 ppg 19 starts / 28.2 mpg, 11.1 ppg, 11 starts.
Derwin Kitchen - FSU - 26 mpg, 7.9 ppg, 17 starts / 27 mpt, 8.3 ppg, 14 starts
Roderick Flemings - Hawaii - 35 mpg, 16.6 ppg, 29 starts / 35 ppt, 15.0 ppg, 10 starts
Mario Little, Kansas - 12 mpg, 4 ppg, only 3 starts injured / redshirt year
The interesting thing is that with only one exception, most came in and contributed right away, but did not increase their production the 2nd year. They didn't need an adjustment period.
Thus, when we look at the data, the expectations for a 1st team juco--based on the data we have available--is that they should be expected to come in and contribute near 100% their first season--and whatever we see the first season is most likely what we'll seen the 2nd year.
It's also somewhat unfair to expect a JUCO transfer (a junior in eligibility) to come in and immediately contribute the way he would had he come in to the program as a freshman and spent the two years there, playing for the coach and against Big East opposition.
Actually, now that I've provided two years of data, it is fair to expect them to contribute the first year, and unfair to expect much more after that.
I've checked the facts--two years in a row, most first team JUCO AAs are contributing at a high level--even starting--for their teams. And they are at a near 100% level from the start.
The generally held belief that we should have had low expectations because Buycks and DJO were JUCOs and needed time is simply not based on fact.
I think there is a large measure of people who set low expectations in order to avoid being disappointed later.
-
Nor did I quote you.
Many people--including you--made comments that reflect an assumption of low expectations for a host of reasons. That is evident based on the fact that they are now surprised by even a modest level of success.
My comment is that if you look at the performance of other juco 1st team all-Americans, it was wrong to have those low expectations to begin with.
Well first, Butler wasn't a first team JUCO-AA, he was 2nd team.
Second, I disagree that Butler didn't look good early in the year. Butler's lack of participation early is more strongly infulenced by the fact that James, McNeal, Hayward, and Matthews got most of the offensive looks. Butler was a strong defender out of the gate, but was not the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th option--rightly so. Some did question why he wasn't given a bigger role in the offense earlier in the season--but its hard to argue with giving the ball and minutes to Haward and Matthews.
While you claim it was that he "adapted to the system or level of competition," the biggest factor in his contribution late in the season is that he was unleashed by the head coach in order to replace James points (which Acker could not accomplish alone).
The problem is that most JUCO 1st team AAs don't have this "adjustment" period you claim exists.
Here's the 2008 list. Once again, most were regular contributors on their teams right away. I've posted their 1st / 2nd year contributions:
Cory Cooperwood - Wright State - 24 mpg 9.4 ppg 33 starts / 24 mpg 9.1 ppg 16 starts
Devron Bostick - Minnesota - 11 mpg, 4.0 no starts / 11 mpg, 4.1 ppg, no starts
Bobby Maze - 25 mpg, 8.2 ppg 28 starts / 23 mpg, 7.9 ppg, 12 starts
Bryan Sherrer - So. Alabama 21 mpg, 5.3 ppg, 11 starts / 30 mpg, 11.2 ppg 16 sarts
Eric Tramiel - No. Texas 24 mpg, 12.0 ppg 19 starts / 28.2 mpg, 11.1 ppg, 11 starts.
Derwin Kitchen - FSU - 26 mpg, 7.9 ppg, 17 starts / 27 mpt, 8.3 ppg, 14 starts
Roderick Flemings - Hawaii - 35 mpg, 16.6 ppg, 29 starts / 35 ppt, 15.0 ppg, 10 starts
Mario Little, Kansas - 12 mpg, 4 ppg, only 3 starts injured / redshirt year
The interesting thing is that with only one exception, most came in and contributed right away, but did not increase their production the 2nd year. They didn't need an adjustment period.
Thus, when we look at the data, the expectations for a 1st team juco--based on the data we have available--is that they should be expected to come in and contribute near 100% their first season--and whatever we see the first season is most likely what we'll seen the 2nd year.
Actually, now that I've provided two years of data, it is fair to expect them to contribute the first year, and unfair to expect much more after that.
I've checked the facts--two years in a row, most first team JUCO AAs are contributing at a high level--even starting--for their teams. And they are at a near 100% level from the start.
The generally held belief that we should have had low expectations because Buycks and DJO were JUCOs and needed time is simply not based on fact.
I think there is a large measure of people who set low expectations in order to avoid being disappointed later.
Congratulations, you win.
-
No. You don't see. You made a simple misstatement of fact. No big deal really, but when you repeated it for the second time in this thread I and others pointed it out. The normal reply would have been thanks, my mistake, end of story. Instead you follow a two word acknowledgement with paragraghs absolving and mitigating your error. Throw in a little old fashioned name calling at the end and you have the Chicos version of "my mistake".
Yup, and I apologized for the error. The fact also remains that you have an enormous bug up your rump of late, not sure why.
-
WVU took a minor miracle to beat Cleveland State. Let's see how Wisconsin does at Purdue, my guess is at no point in the game will they trail by 25 points.
Do they hand out trophies for that?
-
Do they hand out trophies for that?
I don't think so, but considering Wisconsin beat Purdue today by 7 points....well, let's just say I'll stick by my prediction that Wisconsin would defeat WVU with no doubt in my mind.
-
I don't think so, but considering Wisconsin beat Purdue today by 7 points....well, let's just say I'll stick by my prediction that Wisconsin would defeat WVU with no doubt in my mind.
And UWGB would beat Purdue.
Because that's how it works.
-
And UWGB would beat Purdue.
Because that's how it works.
Actually UWGB beat Wisconsin
I'm going based on common opponents
UW beat Purdue.
Purdue annhiliated West Virginia
UW beat Marquette by 9 at home
WVU beat Marquette by 1 at home on a circus shot
I'll take Wisconsin, they're better than WVU.
Whether they are better than Nova, that would be a great game to watch. Two different styles. Seems to me that UW has done a pretty darn good job against the athletic teams this year...beating MU, beating Purdue, beating Duke, beating Maryland, etc.
-
Do they hand out trophies for that?
Banners
-
Banners
Pay the man, Shirley.