Buzz one of most successful 3rd year coaches ever; reloaded roster gives MU shot tonight at 1st Sweet 16 since 2003Written by: jpudner@concentricgrasstops.com (bamamarquettefan1)Eleven of the greatest coaches of all-time combined to win two NCAA tournament games in their first three years at a major program. Tonight Buzz can top their combined efforts with an upset of Syracuse to send MU to its first Sweet 16 since 2003.
Wonder why Buzz is among the hottest coaches in the country? Quite simply, he has accomplished more in his first three years than almost any of the all-time great coaches.
With the help of Mark Henderson (Class of 1992), I've compiled the records of 12 of the all-time great coaches. This list includes every coach who has 1) won 800 games, 2) taken a major team to the last 10 NCAA tournaments, or 3) is named John Wooden or Al McGuire. Through the first three years at a major program, Buzz has a better record than the 12 combined (.673 to .644). Tonight Buzz can tie the 12th coach on the list, Bobby Knight, with three NCAA wins in his first three years. Only tonight's opponent Jim Boeheim matched Buzz by being invited his first three years. Here are the numbers:
table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
|
Coach
1st 3 years
NCAA Ws
NCAAs
NITs
Career W
Career L
Notes
[/tr] | Adolph Rupp, Kentucky | 0.864 | NA | NA | NA | 876 | 190 | Helms Champ 3rd year |
| Jim Boeheim, Syracuse | 0.841 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 855 | 300 | Buzz's opponent today |
| Bob Knight, Indiana | 0.765 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 661 | 240 | 3 titles 4th-16th season |
| Eddie Sutton, Ark/KY/OkSt | 0.756 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 716 | 265 | 4th year 1st of 11 Sweet 16s |
| John Wooden, UCLA | 0.730 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 620 | 147 | 1st Elite 8 in 14th season |
| Buzz Williams, Marquette | 0.673 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 66 | 32 | 3 bids; goes for 1 Sweet 16 |
| Tom Izzo, Michigan St. | 0.604 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 383 | 159 | Bids 3rd-16th seasons |
| Rick Barnes, Prov/Clem/Tex | 0.600 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 321 | 122 | 1st 9 seasons 0 NCAA wins |
| Dean Smith, UNC | 0.565 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 879 | 254 | 1st 5 yrs=0 bids, next 3 Final 4s |
| Jay Wright, Nova | 0.531 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 203 | 98 | 4th year 1st of 10 straight bids |
| Al McGuire, Marquette | 0.524 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 295 | 80 | 1st of 8 Sweet 16s in 4th year |
| Jim Calhoun, UConn | 0.505 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 601 | 228 | 2 National titles |
| Mike Krzyzewski, Duke | 0.447 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 826 | 224 | 4 National titles |
Most Marquette fans in Cleveland this weekend volunteered shock over the handful of vocal Buzz critics on the blogs, and the occasional blind assertion such as "Buzz obviously isn't a good coach," are truly laughable in light of the record.
The fact that ANYONE could still have any doubts about Steve Cottingham's first major decision three years ago in hiring Buzz is baffling at best. How good did the prospects look for three straight NCAA bids when Buzz took the helm three years ago? Are you kidding me?
table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
|
|
Outlook when Buzz hired
What actually happened
[/tr] | 2009 | It appeared Crean left Buzz with one year in the tank with Lazar and the Three Amigos back for a finale. | Buzz was often mentioned as a potential National Coach of the Year and took MU into the Top 10 until Dominic James broke his foot. Even with that injury, MU came within one bucket of the first Sweet 16 since 2003. |
| 2010 | With Crean's recruits scattering, it appeared Buzz would have Lazar and no other 3-stars or better - a recipe for dropping to the bottom of the Big East. | Instead Buzz coached up two senior guards (Acker and Cubillan) and shocked everyone by reloading immediately with JUCOs (Butler, Buycks, DJO) to make a shocking run to a bid. |
| 2011 | With no known 3-star or better slated for the 2011 roster when Crean left it appeared this could really be the end. | Consecutive top 25 recruiting classes in his first two years and another huge JUCO in POY Jae Crowder, MU is even better than last year according to the computers, and one game from the Sweet 16. And Buzz has developed our first two centers since 2003! |
| 2012 | It appeared 2012 would be the earliest MU could possibly rebuild to return to the NCAA tournament post Three Amigos. | Crowder and DJO will join four players rated among the top freshman and sophomores next year in the country by www.nbadraft.net. |
Prospects for win tonight
Will Buzz be outcoached by Boeheim tonight? Could be, as Boeheim is one of the all-time greats. But it's hard to find a 4th year coach who has ever been more prepared.
In just three years Buzz has transformed MU from basically a 4-man rotation of 6-foot-5 and under stars to a team of 11 players who can all contribute and give any combination from tall to fast:
table.tableizer-table {border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;} .tableizer-table td {padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #ccc;}
.tableizer-table th {background-color: #104E8B; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold;}
|
Player(s)
Contribution
[/tr] | Darius Johnson-Odom | 2nd team all-Big East DOMINATED Xavier |
| Jimmy Butler, Jae Crowder, Davante Gardner, Joe Fulce | Rated in top 3% of all players in offensive efficiency accordinging to Pomeroy. |
| Dwight Buycks and Junior Cadougan | Rated in top 10% of all players in assists. |
| Vander Blue and Chris Otule | Emerged as two of the top defenders in the league, as Vander steals and Otule is best shot blocker in Big East. |
| Erik Williams | Move to starting line-up has shored up MUs defense by giving 6-foot-7, 6-foot-11 defense at rim. |
| Jamail Jones | Top rated NBA prospect on the team according to draftnet. |
| Robert Frozena | Even the 4-year walk on took the court in opening round. |
The fact that MU has a 32% chance to go to the Sweet 16 less than three years after learning that recruits were bailing in the wake of Tom Crean's move to Indiana is a tribute to Buzz and the great group he has put together.
Take a look at the final records put together by those 12 great coaches, and how many of them didn't even start to have any real success until their fourth year or later, and it will quickly become apparent that Buzz could build a truly fantastic run at MU.
An upset of Syracuse tonight would put Buzz that much further ahead most of 12 of the greatest coaches of all-time.
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2011/03/buzz-one-of-most-successful-3rd-year.html
Does this article take into effect starting points for any of those coaches? Seems that would be appropriate.
For example, UCLA when John Wooden took over UCLA they didn't even have a practice gym. They had to practice on the 3rd floor of the gymnasium building with only ONE basket. They couldn't even run a full court practice when he started. UCLA was a complete joke of a program.
This is why these comparisons, though nice for fans, I believe tell only one small part of the story.
Coach K was at Army for example.
Coach Calhoun built UCONN...they never had any success...it's totally his doing.
On and on. It's like saying Steve Fischer is the greatest coach ever because his first 5 wins of his life were NCAA wins that included a national championship. It's ALL ABOUT what you inherited and what the launch point is.
Buzz has done a nice job of stewarding a program he inherited with fine players (3 of which have appeared in the NBA in the last 2 years). That's a much different launch point, however, than any of those other guys had.
Feel free to do the counter article. If you do, I suggest you also include the coaches that did inherit established programs and failed. But, the article is all up to you.
Quote from: MUMac on March 20, 2011, 11:43:53 AM
Feel free to do the counter article. If you do, I suggest you also include the coaches that did inherit established programs and failed. But, the article is all up to you.
No thanks, that's obvious and so stipulated. Why do you think I've said for so long to wait 5 years and given many examples over the years that addresses the same point you have....the Bruiser Flint example is one of many.
Nothing in the original article is inaccurate. Nothing in my counterpoint is inaccurate. I guess that's the point. Articles can be written anyway one wishes with any type of intent. I enjoyed the original article and I'm sure most MU fans would as well. However, I think it's accurate to point out that every situation is different, and some are RADICALLY different. I'm happy to provide that balance but don't need to do it in an entire article. It seems from your comments that you at least agree that there is MORE to the story.
Someone said in another thread that the roster was in tatters. I can't imagine a more absurd statement when comparing to other programs that TRULY had a roster in tatters. Perspective is often lacking on this board with comments like that.
Come on Chicos. Once the amigos left, all Crean left us was Lazar, Cubillan, Acker, and Hazel. Possibly Otule depending on who recruited him.
The cupboard was empty yet we havent missed the tourney yet.
Chicos - the records included are the coach's records and NCAA results in the first three years AT THEIR FIRST MAJOR PROGRAM.
So I don't include Coach K and Knight at Army, these are the numbers they compiled in their first three years at Duke and Indiana, repectively.
If Steve Fisher is your counter example, I would note that even he after inheriting a team for the NCAA title run was not able to match Buzz's ability to make the NCAAs his first three years - going to the NIT in year 3 and compiling a .651 winning percentage over the first three years even with the 6-0 headstart of the NCAA tourney, so even he failed to match Buzz in 3-year record and tournament bids.
I understand your point on Calhoun, but I didn't say, "Buzz's first three years proves he will be the greatest coach of all time." Sure, Calhoun, for example, will probably be a greater coach. But as you have rightly noted in past posts, modern fans tend to eat up their coaches if they don't win on day 1, and my suggestion is that while that is the common practice, it is not a good one. This practice wouldn't have given the young John Wooden (14 years until his first Elite 8) or Dean Smith (no tourney wins for 5 years) a chance to develop their programs.
If Marquette takes more of a family approach - not to dismiss some of the very valid CONSTRUCTIVE criticism you have offered of specific short comings, I believe it will offer a nice contrast to cut throat programs that can drive coaches and perhaps even players away.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on March 20, 2011, 11:57:37 AM
Come on Chicos. Once the amigos left, all Crean left us was Lazar, Cubillan, Acker, and Hazel. Possibly Otule depending on who recruited him.
The cupboard was empty yet we havent missed the tourney yet.
So the cupboard was empty having a first round NBA player, 2 senior guards that stepped up as a number of seniors do, plus Fulce and Otule ... That is hardly bare. I can give you an example of truly bare.
Chico's counterpoint
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 11:35:10 AM
Buzz has done a nice job of stewarding a program he inherited with fine players (3 of which have appeared in the NBA in the last 2 years). That's a much different launch point, however, than any of those other guys had.
Followup post
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 11:54:37 AM
Nothing in the original article is inaccurate. Nothing in my counterpoint is inaccurate.
Pray tell...who are the three players from that inherited roster that have appeared in the NBA? And by "appeared" I assume you mean "actually played...even a single minute".
1) Wesley Matthews
2) Lazar Hayward
3) ??
Quote from: bamamarquettefan on March 20, 2011, 12:42:56 PM
Chicos - the records included are the coach's records and NCAA results in the first three years AT THEIR FIRST MAJOR PROGRAM.
So I don't include Coach K and Knight at Army, these are the numbers they compiled in their first three years at Duke and Indiana, repectively.
Fair enough on the major program comments.
My concern is that a number of the examples don't reflect on the launch points nor does it factor in the NCAA Tournament today vs back then. For example, as you stated you didn't take Army into the equation for Coach Knight. So let's look at IU when Coach Knight got there.
IU's previous six seasons before he got there were 9th, 1st, 9th, 10th (dead last), 10th (dead last), and 4th. It took Knight a few years to get things going...the launch points were totally different.
Wooden inherited a team that had a losing record 2 of the 3 years prior to him. There were only 8 NCAA teams invited back then when he started, so it's not an apples to apples comparison. In his third year, the tournament expanded to 16 teams...still a far cry from the opportunities that exist today to get in. In fact, in Wooden's entire career, it was only his LAST year that 32 teams were invited. The most prior to that was 25 teams.
I think this is a major omission in the analysis. When Knight took over for IU, there were 22 NCAA spots. There are now 68 and MU was one of the last 6 teams into the field this year. Same situation with Rupp and just about every other coach you have on your list sans Izzo who started when there were 64 teams. Simply put, the ability to get into the NCAA tournament back then was a LOT different than it is today.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 12:53:07 PM
So the cupboard was empty having a first round NBA player, 2 senior guards that stepped up as a number of seniors do, plus Fulce and Otule ... That is hardly bare. I can give you an example of truly bare.
Why do you constantly have to belittle the accomplishments of OUR current head coach? You keep citing the Year 1 example...no crap...Buzz inherited a great team. Years 2 and 3 would be far more challenging. He's done a phenomanl job thus far. Inheriting 2 midget guards who were 2 star talents is hardly a great situation...but Mo and Cooby played phenomanally to their credit (and perhaps Buzz's for getting numbers out of them that were roughly 400% better than any they'd put up in their previous years at MU.)
Sure you make the occasional token - I like Buzz, want him to stay, think he's done a good job....but then you tirelessly argue in threads such as this - discounting his accomplishments. Why?
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on March 20, 2011, 01:07:40 PM
Chico's counterpoint
Followup post
Pray tell...who are the three players from that inherited roster that have appeared in the NBA? And by "appeared" I assume you mean "actually played...even a single minute".
1) Wesley Matthews
2) Lazar Hayward
3) ??
Jerel McNeal....played in the NBA the last two weeks. He was just cut on Friday night.
I mean MADE an NBA team...APPEARED on a NBA Roster. APPEARED in a NBA Uniform...Earned a NBA check.
That is what I mean
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 01:11:09 PM
Jerel McNeal....played in the NBA the last two weeks. He was just cut on Friday night.
I mean MADE an NBA team...APPEARED on a NBA Roster. APPEARED in a NBA Uniform...Earned a NBA check.
That is what I mean
You are so full of it. Can't stand that your man Tommy might not get every last shred of credit for what MU is now accomplishing that you throw out all kinds of BS to discredit any serious effort that suggest otherwise. You really need to let it go. It's getting to the point where I think you have a serious problem.
Quote from: Ners on March 20, 2011, 01:09:37 PM
Why do you constantly have to belittle the accomplishments of OUR current head coach? You keep citing the Year 1 example...no crap...Buzz inherited a great team. Years 2 and 3 would be far more challenging. He's done a phenomanl job thus far. Inheriting 2 midget guards who were 2 star talents is hardly a great situation...but Mo and Cooby played phenomanally to their credit (and perhaps Buzz's for getting numbers out of them that were roughly 400% better than any they'd put up in their previous years at MU.)
Sure you make the occasional token - I like Buzz, want him to stay, think he's done a good job....but then you tirelessly argue in threads such as this - discounting his accomplishments. Why?
I'm not belittling, I'm adding context. So far, Buzz has done a very good job. This year, I thought it was ok, last year I thought he was fantastic. 9th place and an 11 seed this year...meh. 68 teams this year, we were one of the last 6 in, played the perfect team in Xavier in the first round for us (a team that can't shoot the 3's and has one stud player)....Buzz game planned it PERFECTLY and I stated that. Huge tip of the hat for recognizing that and having the boys execute. Very well done. There's a reason we were favored by Ken Pom, Ners, we were the better team and we showed it.
As for the comparison to those other coaches...well, I just feel there was a lot of context missing in my opinion. There was nothing factually incorrect with it, but in my opinion comparing what a coach does today with far more NCAA appearances given out than in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's needs a major * to it. Also factor in the launch points....I don't think my counter arguments are incorrect and can all be proven factually.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on March 20, 2011, 01:15:48 PM
You are so full of it. Can't stand that your man Tommy might not get every last shred of credit for what MU is now accomplishing that you throw out all kinds of BS to discredit any serious effort that suggest otherwise. You really need to let it go. It's getting to the point where I think you have a serious problem.
So you're taken to the woodshed on the 3rd NBA player and then your answer is to start the name calling because you got trounced when I provided the factual evidence that there was a 3rd player.
Cool, that really strengthens your hand. As does your absurd charge. Keep it going. ::)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 11:35:10 AM
Coach Calhoun built UCONN...they never had any success...it's totally his doing.
Hey junior, you've never heard of Dom Perno and Cornelius Thompson have you? Those two helped lay the groundwork for the UConn program along with the entrance to the Big East and ESPN.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 12:53:07 PM
So the cupboard was empty having a first round NBA player, 2 senior guards that stepped up as a number of seniors do, plus Fulce and Otule ... That is hardly bare. I can give you an example of truly bare.
Then let's compare year three to year three. TC and Buzz both got their jobs in April 2008. By the time the dust settled, both had lost their entire sophmore classes. Crean had Pritchard and Roth as incoming freshmen who stuck with IU. Buzz had Otule and (jc) Fulce. That's the point at which they started building THIS YEAR'S team - so it's fair to say they were on even ground. Crean got Verdell Jones III late, a top 10 class the following year, and pretty much whiffed the year after that. He also recruited a transfer (Rivers) who wasn't any good and an untalented, eventually ineligible junior college player (Mikel sp?). The result in year 3? 3-16 in conference games, last place, no tournament. Buzz got Jimmy Butler late and had back to back top 25 recruiting classes. The result in year 3? 11-10 in conference games and the second round in the NCAA tournament. Any remotely fair assessment of what TC and Buzz did in the almost 3 years they both had to build THIS YEAR'S teams gives a HUGE edge to Buzz - and he did it without all the built in advantages of a place like Indiana.
Quote from: TedBaxter on March 20, 2011, 01:27:15 PM
Hey junior, you've never heard of Dom Perno and Cornelius Thompson have you? Those two helped lay the groundwork for the UConn program along with the entrance to the Big East and ESPN.
Sure I've heard of them....coach Hugh Greer...they were a nice, regional program from the old Yankee conference. 1950's and 1960's they had a nice regional program like Holy Cross and others. From 1968 to 1989...2 NCAA appearances. Calhoun took them from a regional program to a national power. Yes, nice ground work by Hugh Greer...Calhoun took it to another level. Just as Al McGuire took MU to another level from Tex Winter, Eddie Hickey, etc, etc
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 01:19:07 PM
I'm not belittling, I'm adding context. So far, Buzz has done a very good job. This year, I thought it was ok, last year I thought he was fantastic. 9th place and an 11 seed this year...meh. 68 teams this year, we were one of the last 6 in, played the perfect team in Xavier in the first round for us (a team that can't shoot the 3's and has one stud player)....Buzz game planned it PERFECTLY and I stated that. Huge tip of the hat for recognizing that and having the boys execute. Very well done. There's a reason we were favored by Ken Pom, Ners, we were the better team and we showed it.
As for the comparison to those other coaches...well, I just feel there was a lot of context missing in my opinion. There was nothing factually incorrect with it, but in my opinion comparing what a coach does today with far more NCAA appearances given out than in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's needs a major * to it. Also factor in the launch points....I don't think my counter arguments are incorrect and can all be proven factually.
Fair enough..though I do wish you would refrain from always pointing out a "flaw" with our good wins - such as when we beat UCONN on the road..you had to bring up Calhoun wasn't coaching. Now on the Xavier win..we got the PERFECT draw...in our close game with Vandy - Vandy was playing without one of its starters who averaged 4ppg, etc. There's just really no need to minimize our teams accomplishments by adding some of the additional negative context. We beat UCONN with Calhoun on the sidelines last year..Xavier won the A-10 who has performed very well in the tourney, etc.
Quote from: Ners on March 20, 2011, 01:34:14 PM
Fair enough..though I do wish you would refrain from always pointing out a "flaw" with our good wins - such as when we beat UCONN on the road..you had to bring up Calhoun wasn't coaching. Now on the Xavier win..we got the PERFECT draw...in our close game with Vandy - Vandy was playing without one of its starters who averaged 4ppg, etc. There's just really no need to minimize our teams accomplishments by adding some of the additional negative context. We beat UCONN with Calhoun on the sidelines last year..Xavier won the A-10 who has performed very well in the tourney, etc.
Is it a flaw or is it factual? Why are you always so concerned about the obvious? Let's put the shoe on the other foot. If we lost a game and Buzz wasn't coaching, you wouldn't say that played a role? Please...of course you would.
If we lost a close game at home to someone and we were missing one of our starters, you wouldn't point that out as in the case of Vandy? Please, of course you would. That starter, by the way, averages 7ppg and 7 rebounds per game. Andre Walker had missed the 3 previous games to us because of Mononucleosis. Again, you wouldn't mention this? Please.
I was thrilled with the Xavier matchup, that's why I picked us to beat them. The only thing that had me nervous was playing them in Ohio but the game plan was perfect. We can't defend the 3 point shot very well and Xavier can't shoot it very well...it was a perfect matchup for us. Unfortunately, I don't feel as good today. I think we can win, but I'm picking Syracuse.
I'm just stating the factual, obvious and that irks some people. I don't know why, there is nothing infactual that I'm stating.
I used to read every word that was written on this board. Now, so many threads are unbearable to read that I ususally just do a scan. It appears some people piss and moan just to piss and moan. I really wonder what some of these people are like in real life. Seriously, there's a big game in a little over 4 hours; enjoy it for once.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 01:41:50 PM
If we lost a close game at home to someone and we were missing one of our starters, you wouldn't point that out as in the case of Vandy? Please, of course you would.
You could say, We were without our starter Reggie Smith the second half of the year.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on March 20, 2011, 02:25:20 PM
You could say, We were without our starter Reggie Smith the second half of the year.
Yes you could. One could also argue that was addition by subtraction. UNC is without starter Larry Drew III, and they are MUCH better as a result.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 01:21:28 PM
So you're taken to the woodshed on the 3rd NBA player and then your answer is to start the name calling because you got trounced when I provided the factual evidence that there was a 3rd player.
Cool, that really strengthens your hand. As does your absurd charge. Keep it going. ::)
Ha ha ha. taken to the woodshed....LOL
The phantom third NBA player who has never actually played a single freaking minute in the NBA? That's your evidence? LOL. Give me a break.
The actual fact, as is usually the case with you, is that you post all sorts of untrue BS in order to make your "points" in defense of our illustrious former coach and to belittle our current coach. When is this going to stop? Ever? I so look forward to the day.
The one thing I disagree with is that we "slid" from last year. Kenpom says we improved from 33rd to 28th, and we beat a 6 seed vs losing to an 11 seed opening round.
True, last year was a bigger surprise as this team haf more potential but much less experience, but the big difference this year was the conference was better and the non-conference foes were tougher.
Look, I love Lazar Hayward....great player and person. One of my all-time favorite MU players. But I'll guarantee he isn't a 1st round pick last year if it wasn't for Jerry Sichting working for the Timberwolves. Don't underestimate the role he played in Minny taking Lazar. If not for Jerry Sichting and the Timberowolves Lazar is a 2nd round pick and possibly a FA. So let's not act like he was a sure fire first round talent just because he got drafted there.
Quote from: Doris Burkes Thong on March 20, 2011, 03:22:40 PM
Look, I love Lazar Hayward....great player and person. One of my all-time favorite MU players. But I'll guarantee he isn't a 1st round pick last year if it wasn't for Jerry Sichting working for the Timberwolves. Don't underestimate the role he played in Minny taking Lazar. If not for Jerry Sichting and the Timberowolves Lazar is a 2nd round pick and possibly a FA. So let's not act like he was a sure fire first round talent just because he got drafted there.
Pretty much few to no mock drafts had Lazar going first round, but i don't recall any saying he'd go undrafted either. Most pegged Lazar to get picked in the upper half to the middle of the 2nd round.
As for the article itself, i don't know about comparing Buzz to HOF coaches early in their careers, but i do know that without Buzz being so successful at spotting quality JUCO kids who can play and then getting them to sign, odds are extremely high we as fans wouldn't have had a very enjoyable season to watch last year and we wouldn't be sitting here today waiting for a game to start with a Sweet 16 bid on the line.
The success of the last two years also had to help when Buzz went recruiting. Kids have been able to see that Buzz wasn't in over his head, but instead he's been able to reload on the fly and keep Marquette competitive in a very tough conference. It's also allowed for some of our big games to be broadcasted on ESPN instead of sinking to the DePaul/Providence levels where their games never get a national TV audience. For a program like Marquette, keeping our name out their as a winning team is important.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on March 20, 2011, 02:41:53 PM
Ha ha ha. taken to the woodshed....LOL
The phantom third NBA player who has never actually played a single freaking minute in the NBA? That's your evidence? LOL. Give me a break.
The actual fact, as is usually the case with you, is that you post all sorts of untrue BS in order to make your "points" in defense of our illustrious former coach and to belittle our current coach. When is this going to stop? Ever? I so look forward to the day.
Please tell me what was untrue about my post. I said 3 NBA players. Was I accurate? Yes. I said nothing that was incorrect. I've also said 4 top 10 MU scorers in our history...also 100% correct.
You don't like it, that's fine. That doesn't make it any less factual.
Quote from: marquette99 on March 20, 2011, 03:11:09 PM
The one thing I disagree with is that we "slid" from last year. Kenpom says we improved from 33rd to 28th, and we beat a 6 seed vs losing to an 11 seed opening round.
True, last year was a bigger surprise as this team haf more potential but much less experience, but the big difference this year was the conference was better and the non-conference foes were tougher.
Very flawed. You can't compare one year of Ken Pom to another year of Ken Pom. Doesn't work that way. If you're ranked 15th this year but were ranked 20th last year, does that mean you are better than last year? Of course it doesn't. It simply means that THIS year, compared to the competition THIS year, your ranking was better. It has NOTHING to do with last year, they are totally different data sets based on different years.
Very flawed!
Quote from: Doris Burkes Thong on March 20, 2011, 03:22:40 PM
Look, I love Lazar Hayward....great player and person. One of my all-time favorite MU players. But I'll guarantee he isn't a 1st round pick last year if it wasn't for Jerry Sichting working for the Timberwolves. Don't underestimate the role he played in Minny taking Lazar. If not for Jerry Sichting and the Timberowolves Lazar is a 2nd round pick and possibly a FA. So let's not act like he was a sure fire first round talent just because he got drafted there.
Sure fire...nope. Potential NBA First Rounder? NBADraft.net had him as a first rounder at one point...later slid to the second round. http://feetinthepaint.wordpress.com/2009/07/07/lazar-hayward-2010-nba-first-rounder/
I think people here simply made the factual claim that he was a NBA first rounder...is that correct? Yes it is.
Was I surprised...yup. I thought he would go in the second round. Either way, a NBA player and one of the best to suit up for Marquette.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 20, 2011, 04:34:23 PM
Very flawed. You can't compare one year of Ken Pom to another year of Ken Pom. Doesn't work that way. If you're ranked 15th this year but were ranked 20th last year, does that mean you are better than last year? Of course it doesn't. It simply means that THIS year, compared to the competition THIS year, your ranking was better. It has NOTHING to do with last year, they are totally different data sets based on different years.
Very flawed!
My logic may be wrong, but if you compare yourself to the group of college programs as a whole, then I think you can use this as a basis of comparison. It will not be apples to apples, as all teams experience change, but as a whole, wouldn't it still be comparative?
Quote from: connie on March 20, 2011, 04:52:19 PM
My logic may be wrong, but if you compare yourself to the group of college programs as a whole, then I think you can use this as a basis of comparison. It will not be apples to apples, as all teams experience change, but as a whole, wouldn't it still be comparative?
I think the team last year was a little better, mainly because they had more stable PG play, had more experience, and were more consistent defensively.
That said, the by far more important thing for me is just making it into the NCAA Tournament. Sure, it helps a bit to have a higher seed, but last year we were a 6th seed and this year an 11th seed. When you look at most 6/11 matchups in the tournament each year, the 6th seed will only be a slight favorite. This year for example, the 6th and 11th seeds split the four games. Unless you get a 1-2-3-4 seed, i don't think it really matters all that much where else you get seeded so long as you just get in.
Well, we got in and now if we can win tonight, MU has a Sweet 16 berth at worst. So we won't have slid at all because the regular season is mainly only a means for getting to this current point, the NCAA Tournament.
Quote from: connie on March 20, 2011, 04:52:19 PM
My logic may be wrong, but if you compare yourself to the group of college programs as a whole, then I think you can use this as a basis of comparison. It will not be apples to apples, as all teams experience change, but as a whole, wouldn't it still be comparative?
The implication is that basketball in general is the same every year and thus able to compare year to year. We all know this isn't true. Hell, just about every expert has said this is the worst year in college basketball maybe ever. If that is the case, then comparing this year to last year or any other year is already fundamentally flawed. If we are 28th in the "worst year in college hoops" but 33rd in a better year, is that an improvement that can be stated? I don't think so.