MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: BCHoopster on April 29, 2011, 10:56:30 AM
-
So you like cutting a kid after one year if it does not work out? I am not a fan of that, supposedly
a player thinks he is signing for 4 years, not one. If you are recruiting a marginal player they normally
do not work out anyway. Ask the last coach, he signed a few late and they could not cut it, or they
were cut.
-
I don't like cutting players either. But who knows what could happen? We have had unexpected transfers in each of the previous two years.
-
So you like cutting a kid after one year if it does not work out? I am not a fan of that, supposedly
a player thinks he is signing for 4 years, not one. If you are recruiting a marginal player they normally
do not work out anyway. Ask the last coach, he signed a few late and they could not cut it, or they
were cut.
I don't like cutting either if it's a surprise to the kid.
On the other hand, tell a kid that if he works hard and steps his game up he'll have a permanent spot on the team but if not we'll find someone that can cut it. If expectations are aligned beforehand I could see a young man wanting to test his mettle in a situation he might otherwise not be able to experience.
-
So you like cutting a kid after one year if it does not work out? I am not a fan of that, supposedly
a player thinks he is signing for 4 years, not one. If you are recruiting a marginal player they normally
do not work out anyway. Ask the last coach, he signed a few late and they could not cut it, or they
were cut.
Unlike the current coach who does not cut kids or take kids that cannot cut it: Read: Newbill, Roseboro, Smith, Maymon. Face it, a lot coaches do this/have this problem. Not defending Crean here.
-
Unlike the current coach who does not cut kids or take kids that cannot cut it: Read: Newbill, Roseboro, Smith, Maymon. Face it, a lot coaches do this/have this problem. Not defending Crean here.
To say that Smith or Maymon was "cut" is totally, 100% false, but don't let that get in the way of a conclusion you would prefer.
-
We know that Maymon's dad got in the way here. I think he would have been a decent player by mid soph year. Smith just wanted playing time. Think Wilson will be fine and look what Cadougan did. Things really lit up when he got in the near the end of the season. Hope he shoots better. Let's sign Chris Bryant. He is 6-8, needs weight but according to espn evaluation he needs to hone his skills. He has them. Hope his academics are good. An MU type player. Still wanted God's Gift.
-
What does banking the scholarship get Marquette?
There's no reason not to take a flyer on a young man. If he doesn't work out then we can easily free up the scholarship for the 2012 season.
It get's you an extra scholarship for 2012 and a possibility of securing a better player than you can at this stage in the game.
-
Anyone hear if Jeremy Jones (6-2 Juco Player) is considering MU?
-
Anyone hear if Jeremy Jones (6-2 Juco Player) is considering MU?
Signed with Kansas State.
-
It get's you an extra scholarship for 2012 and a possibility of securing a better player than you can at this stage in the game.
No, it doesnt.
You have the same amount of one year renewablee scholarships this year as you will next year.
Never, ever bank a scholarship.
-
To say that Smith or Maymon was "cut" is totally, 100% false, but don't let that get in the way of a conclusion you would prefer.
My understanding is that Maymon was asked to leave based on the actions of his father and that he begged to stay with the team. Not sure I agree with your conclusion that its "totally, 100% false" to say he was cut.
So you like cutting a kid after one year if it does not work out? I am not a fan of that, supposedly
a player thinks he is signing for 4 years, not one. If you are recruiting a marginal player they normally
do not work out anyway. Ask the last coach, he signed a few late and they could not cut it, or they
were cut.
My question is why you singled out "the last coach" when you know that Buzz also had several signed late that couldn't cut it or were cut?
You have the same amount of one year renewablee scholarships this year as you will next year.
Never, ever bank a scholarship.
This is correct.
If there is a year that should demonstrate exactly why we have to fill every scholarship, we need to go back no further than 2009-2010. Out of 13 scholarship players at the start of the year:
--one left before the start of play (Roseboro)
--three were injured and out of the lineup for much of the year (Mbao, Otule and Cadougan)
--one more left mid-season (Maymon).
--one more wasn't ready and needed development (Williams)
That left us with a rotation of seven scholarship players.
-
To say that Smith or Maymon was "cut" is totally, 100% false, but don't let that get in the way of a conclusion you would prefer.
Hey lenny--once again you shot your mouth off without engaging the brain. The original premise, which somebody else made, was players" who were cut or could not cut it". Well, that applies to all whom I mentioned; Newbill, Roseboro, Maymon and Smith. If you read the posts, I never said they were cut--that is your lame interpretation, Read and comprehend, Lenny. Must be your MU education.
-
Hey lenny--once again you shot your mouth off without engaging the brain. The original premise, which somebody else made, was players" who were cut or could not cut it". Well, that applies to all whom I mentioned; Newbill, Roseboro, Maymon and Smith. If you read the posts, I never said they were cut--that is your lame interpretation, Read and comprehend, Lenny. Must be your MU education.
Just reading that one line in bold coming from you of all people made me laugh out loud. Thanks for the laughs, willie.
-
Just reading that one line in bold coming from you of all people made me laugh out loud. Thanks for the laughs, willie.
You are welcome. I'll be here all week!
-
You are welcome. I'll be here all week!
<sigh>....we know willie...
-
Hey, Kevin Ware is available again and Trevor Lacey hasn't signed yet.
-
I would think the last thing we would need is another shooting guard...which is what both Ware and Lacey are.
-
No, it doesnt.
You have the same amount of one year renewablee scholarships this year as you will next year.
Never, ever bank a scholarship.
Ah, sorry, but yes it does. If you use it this year you have to either boot someone or someone leaves next year or you do not have one more to give next year. As I said, it gains you an extra one next year - currently there is one not spoken for that is available from the graduating class. Push this to next year and it adds one. Not that difficult a concept to understand.
-
MUMac...you are not understanding what Hards is saying. He is saying that since they are all one year renewables, you have the option to have as many open as you want.
-
MUMac...you are not understanding what Hards is saying. He is saying that since they are all one year renewables, you have the option to have as many open as you want.
O k, so he felt compelled to point out the obvious? Really, what was the purpose of his post? It should be clear to anyone with a brain that I was talking about scholarships to give in 2012. Unless he just wants to pick fights with everyone, that is what I see more from him than anything of substance. Geez. ::)
-
No, I think his point was that we don't need to worry about what happens in 2012. If we sign Bryant now, he may turn out great, and it still wouldn't prevent us from signing multiple studs should they want to come here.
-
No, I think his point was that we don't need to worry about what happens in 2012. If we sign Bryant now, he may turn out great, and it still wouldn't prevent us from signing multiple studs should they want to come here.
I don't think there's any real debate over that, more so if there's an ethical dilemma if you take Bryant, for example, and then sign three additional players for 2012. Sure, we could add Alex Poythress, Kris Dunn, and Shaquille Cleare, but that would mean we need to not renew two players. Are people fine with telling Bryant and Derrick Wilson (or Mayo, or Williams, or Jones, or whomever) that they need to move on? It will certainly bring criticism of Buzz on this board, and we'll hear more about "Buzz-cutting".
I'm not sure where I stand. I'm not a fan of bringing someone in and sending them out, but I recognize it happens. I know that it would feel a lot cleaner if we simply added Poythress and Dunn in 2012 without having to ship off the last 2011 guy to make the numbers work.
-
Like I keep saying, if everyone is returning and the newcomers appear to be qualified and Buzz should have a pretty good handle on this by now, we'll have Otule and Gardner in the post and Jae Crowder, Jamil Wilson, Erik Williams, Jamail Jones and Juan Anderson at the 3 and 4. At least to me, unless you are recruiting someone with a higher ceiling than these players, why sign a player to just sign a player.
I'd much rather go into next year with 12 scholarship players and armed with 3 scholarships for the 2012 class than give one out to a player just to have 13 on scholarship. Now, if a player surfaces this spring or summer that has outstanding potential, I have no problem with Buzz going hard after him, but until I hear of a player like this, I say hold.
-
At this time, there is probably no one worth taking in the senior class. If a transfer still
happens during the summer there will be room to take that person. Otherwise, move on.
12 kids are enough. The 13th player can never be happy, secondly, MU will need to take
another shooter in 2012 to take the place of DJO. Ferguson looks like a slasher, much like
Vander. Enough of those types. 2 openings to start in 2012. High school seniors like the
idea they maybe able to start as a frosh. I do not think it will happen, but PF has a great
opportunity.
-
if MU is going to sign someone it better be quick. Its May 1st and most of the recruits signed for this year are getting ready to report to their school for summer classes.
-
if MU is going to sign someone it better be quick. Its May 1st and most of the recruits signed for this year are getting ready to report to their school for summer classes.
Freshman typically come in for the second summer session that usually starts the first week of July. Plenty of time if there is someone out there.
-
A lot of us are in basketball season withdrawal. The absence of real news creates a heck of a vacuum. What do we really know right now? The corp of returning players are deep and show promise. I think most on the message board underrate the value of having that open scholarship. Buzz is not going to be outworked on the recruiting front. I don't see a track record of signing someone just to take a crazy gamble. While Crean had success at Marquette he did gamble that way. An example is Pat Hazel. That will not happen under Buzz. Roseboro was an abberation and a product of the situation Buzz and Company found themselves with in that first year. All programs will have transfers. It's just the times we are in.
Does Marquette bank the scholarship? My gut says it's 50/50. So much can and will happen in the next few months at D1 schools -- mystery foreign player like the one mentioned in the past few days, a one year transfer who is registered for the NBA Draft but pulls out, or someone who has or will get out of an LOI.
Even if Marquette doesn't sign anyone the program is in good shape. Buzz has demonstrated in his first three seasons that he knows how to play the hand he is dealt. The weight room and on the court player development will probably have more of an impact on 11-12 success than any late signee who arrives on campus before the start of the school year. In the meantime I hope you saved some Marquette games on the DVR.
-
I keep thinking they will sign Juniors Canadian friend for 1 year who is going to graduate school. Good choice
-
I don't see a track record of signing someone just to take a crazy gamble. While Crean had success at Marquette he did gamble that way. An example is Pat Hazel. That will not happen under Buzz.
Sorry--already has.
Liam McMorrow--signed June 30th, 2008
Mousopha Mbao--signed April 27th, 2009
Say what you want about Crean and Hazel, McMorrow and Mbao were every bit the gamble that Hazel was.
McMorrow is fully cleared medically and averaged just 10 mpg, 3 ppg for Tennessee Tech. Not quite the Big East talent he was hoped to be. Mbao washed out after one season at MU, where he reportedly didn't score his first basket in practice until sometime in January.
And please, this is not a criticism of Buzz--I would do EXACTLY the same thing, and I applaud him for taking a chance on a project.
My criticism is with the reality deniers who pretend that Buzz doesn't do what other coaches have done--take a chance on a project.
Roseboro was an abberation and a product of the situation Buzz and Company found themselves with in that first year.
If two weeks was sufficient time for Buzz to figure out that Jimmy Butler was a good player, then seven months (Roseboro signed November of 2008, as a 2009-10 frosh) should have been plenty of time for him to figure out Roseboro wasn't.
-
Buzz's April signings also includes JFB and DJO. The only late signing contributor I recall from the previous regime was Marcus Jackson, who was okay but not great. Too many Niv Berkowitz types.
-
Lenny Man, didn't Crean also gift us that gem, aka Trend?
-
Lenny Man, didn't Crean also gift us that gem, aka Trend?
When Lance Stemler said no Plan B was to be take the "next best" guy on that JC team - Trend Blackledge. He wasn't much of a prospect, but it was a lot less work than actually recruiting multiple "real players" simultaneously. Thankfully that's no longer our recruiting model.
-
Buzz's April signings also includes JFB and DJO. The only late signing contributor I recall from the previous regime was Marcus Jackson, who was okay but not great. Too many Niv Berkowitz types.
The point Tulsa made was that Buzz didn't miss when it came to late season signings. Clearly, that was incorrect.
BTW, Robert Jackson was also a late season get for Crean--I'd put him ahead of Butler and DJO right now. Jamil Wilson has the potential to get there, but not there yet.
I think the other observation--for what its worth--is that for as successful as Buzz has been late, Crean was more successful in the fall signing period. Buzz's best recruits (DJO, Butler, Crowder) committed late--Crean's best (Novak, Diener, Wade, the Amigos) all committed early.
-
To get back to bryant, what I am so impressed about is the fact that we seem to be in play nationally - because there just isn't enough talent in the contiguous states. If we sign bryant when he apparently has the option of playing acc ball in his home town for a team that looked great in the tourney or va tech; or go to the sec to get immediate time at auburn or play for an athletic. Up and coming georgia team, or go to houston, then recruits everywhere nust really be viewing mu very favorably. We definitely want to be able to tap into florida, having already tapped california, virginia, etc.
From a roster persepctive, we do still need fouls to give underneath with crowder and davante likely to foul some with having to guard bigger players, and otule having to foul some as all shot blockers do.
Agreed prob a year in weight room before he is a big contributor, but he could have some key contributions in certain games, just like davante did.
-
When Lance Stemler said no Plan B was to be take the "next best" guy on that JC team - Trend Blackledge. He wasn't much of a prospect, but it was a lot less work than actually recruiting multiple "real players" simultaneously. Thankfully that's no longer our recruiting model.
Sort of like taking the teammate of Joe Fulce? Hmm. Who was "next best" on Joe's team? Oh, yeah! Jimmy Butler.
Butler and Blackledge were both similarly rated out of HS.
Both were honorable mention JUCO All-Americans
Both on teams that featured other players we liked better.
Wow--that's some change in recruiting tactics.
Frankly, the only thing that has changed here is your argument. Do you recall what you wrote when you were making the case about how Buzz had less talent in 2010 than on Crean's worst team?
You were talking down Butler, telling me how terrible he was--wasn't even ranked in the top 300 out of HS.
Today your argument is that Buzz knew that Butler was a pretty good player all along.
-
Sort of like taking the teammate of Joe Fulce? Hmm. Who was "next best" on Joe's team? Oh, yeah! Jimmy Butler.
Butler and Blackledge were both similarly rated out of HS.
Both were honorable mention JUCO All-Americans
Both on teams that featured other players we liked better.
Wow--that's some change in recruiting tactics.
Frankly, the only thing that has changed here is your argument. Do you recall what you wrote when you were making the case about how Buzz had less talent in 2010 than on Crean's worst team?
You were talking down Butler, telling me how terrible he was--wasn't even ranked in the top 300 out of HS.
Today your argument is that Buzz knew that Butler was a pretty good player all along.
So TC and Buzz used the exact same recruiting tactics and signed equally talented players (according to you). Crean coached his guy into total obscurity. Buzz coached his guy to a likely NBA career. Can't wait for you to (belatedly) admit MU got a major upgrade when we got Buzz.
-
So TC and Buzz used the exact same recruiting tactics and signed equally talented players (according to you). Crean coached his guy into total obscurity. Buzz coached his guy to a likely NBA career. Can't wait for you to (belatedly) admit MU got a major upgrade when we got Buzz.
DWade says hi, gave another shout out tonight....
-
DWade says hi, gave another shout out tonight....
Has there ever, in the history of college basketball, been a coach who owes more to one player than TC does to Wade? Half a point higher on his ACT and Wade never even considers MU - and TC is following Mike Deane's footsteps at Wagner or Lamar.
-
I keep thinking they will sign Juniors Canadian friend for 1 year who is going to graduate school. Good choice
I must have missed this...who's this kid and what's his deal?
-
So TC and Buzz used the exact same recruiting tactics and signed equally talented players (according to you).
Crean coached his guy into total obscurity. Buzz coached his guy to a likely NBA career. Can't wait for you to (belatedly) admit MU got a major upgrade when we got Buzz.
I'm happy to admit that Crean coached Blackledge into total obscurity. But I'm also going to give him credit for developing Wade out of total obscurity into the greatest player in MU history.
I'm happy to admit that Buzz coached Butler into an outstanding player. I'm also going to call him on making one of the biggest errors of recruiting judgement in MU history by thinking that Roseboro was Big East talent.
I understand that all coaches have hits and misses. Crean had both. Buzz had both. Every coach does.
I just don't try to define one coach only by his misses, and define the next only by his successes.
You want to be fair--fine--Compare Butler to Wade. Compare DJO to Matthews. Compare Crowder to Noavk. Then compare Blackledege to Roseboro, Menard to Mbao, Amo to Maymon.
If you weren't trying to hard to filter everything through the agenda of pretending that Buzz is a major upgrade, you wouldn't make such obvious contradictions and double standards that occupy virtually every one of your posts.
Butler is a great example. One minute you claim that Butler is an example of Buzz's outstanding recruiting eye. The next you're claiming that Buzz pulled a coaching miracle out of his hat in 2010 using less-talented recruits like Butler.
Bottom line is that the same head coach Jimmy Butler and Brett Roseboro. Neither Butler nor Roseboro alone define Buzz's recruiting. So please, stop with the fiction that Blackledge defines Crean's recruiting.
-
Has there ever, in the history of college basketball, been a coach who owes more to one player than TC does to Wade? Half a point higher on his ACT and Wade never even considers MU - and TC is following Mike Deane's footsteps at Wagner or Lamar.
Al McGuire owes just as much to George Thompson.
If Al doesn't convince George Thompson to come to Marquette, he's out after 4 years with four straight losing seasons.
-
Al McGuire owes just as much to George Thompson.
If Al doesn't convince George Thompson to come to Marquette, he's out after 4 years with four straight losing seasons.
Huh? Four straight losing seasons? MU was 5-21 the year before Al arrived. MU improved to 8-18 Al's first year and had a WINNING season, 14-12, WITHOUT George in year two. In year three we were NIT runnerups and George was neither our leading scorer or rebounder. George was a great beginning, and as good or better players (Meminger, Chones, Lucas, Lee, Ellis) followed.
TC hit a tape measure homerun with Wade (aided by the 50 mph wind of his academic ineligibility with BCS schools) and settled for doubles (Diener, Novak, James, etc) or worse thereafter. Al followed his first homerun (hit against the winds of Marquette's recent 5-21 season) and continued hitting them until he retired.
So you start by misstating the facts and draw baseless, ridiculous conclusions from them. Well done.
-
I can't believe there are still scoopers that don't have 84 on ignore.
-
Huh? Four straight losing seasons? MU was 5-21 the year before Al arrived. MU improved to 8-18 Al's first year and had a WINNING season, 14-12, WITHOUT George in year two. In year three we were NIT runnerups and George was neither our leading scorer or rebounder. George was a great beginning, and as good or better players (Meminger, Chones, Lucas, Lee, Ellis) followed.
Heh!
You completely forgot that freshmen were on campus and practiced with the varsity back then, didn't you?
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/111379684.html
From the man himself during his freshman year: "We would play against the varsity in practice"
You're free to disagree, but I think the presence of Thompson in practice for the 1965-66 team helped the varsity improve by more than just a couple of wins that year.
Great players make everyone around them better--and includes practice.
So now you have a choice--
You could have the cojones to state that you don't think that Thompson's presence in practice helped to improve the varsity team one iota.
Or you can apologize and admit that you forgot that Thompson was around as a frosh.
Either way, my argument wasn't baseless. Without Thompson, I don't think we have a winning season in Al's second year, the pipeline to NYC doesn't open up, and we have four straight losing seasons.
-
Has there ever, in the history of college basketball, been a coach who owes more to one player than TC does to Wade? Half a point higher on his ACT and Wade never even considers MU - and TC is following Mike Deane's footsteps at Wagner or Lamar.
It's a shame to watch MU alums continue to crap on Dwyane Wade for him feeling that TC was a wonderful coach and someone he still leans on to this day. I find it rather sad watching MU alums do this like you just did. Backhand attacks at Wade like that are really not necessary. Essentially saying that Wade is a moron for not seeing things about TC the way YOU see them. Pretty sad.
-
Any hope of us talking about Chris Bryant? Is there any more recent info that indicates either we have offered him or that he is more seriously considering Marquette? While he may be a bit thin, the idea of an actual face-up power forward wouldn't be a bad thing. He may not be rated like Alex Poythress or Jarnell Stokes, but he at least seems to play the style that we are all hoping for.
-
Any hope of us talking about Chris Bryant? Is there any more recent info that indicates either we have offered him or that he is more seriously considering Marquette? While he may be a bit thin, the idea of an actual face-up power forward wouldn't be a bad thing. He may not be rated like Alex Poythress or Jarnell Stokes, but he at least seems to play the style that we are all hoping for.
I hope we get him if he's the best available player we can land.
I think its stupid to "bank" a scholarship--especially with the number of injuries, transfers, ineligibility, etc that can happen to any player on any team.
And if we do take Bryant and he doesn't pan out, I'm not going to single Bryant out as the definition of Buzz's recruiting.
-
'84, I don't want to get involved w/ the current conversation, but must point out one thing. I watched Dwade at open scrimmage the fall before his ineligible freshman year..., and he was unstoppable. To say anyone coached him out of obscurity is absurd. Our best players couldn't begin to stop him- before anyone had a chance to coach him. In fact, the only one that could keep him under 30 points was TC, and he did so regularly after he became eligible.
-
'84, I don't want to get involved w/ the current conversation, but must point out one thing. I watched Dwade at open scrimmage the fall before his ineligible freshman year..., and he was unstoppable. To say anyone coached him out of obscurity is absurd. Our best players couldn't begin to stop him- before anyone had a chance to coach him. In fact, the only one that could keep him under 30 points was TC, and he did so regularly after he became eligible.
And who would Wade have been playing against in the fall before his ineligible freshman year? Deane's holdovers, plus newcomers Blankson, Sanders and and Merritt?
I would expect Wade to be unstoppable in that environment--as would be most top 100 guards.
When playing against comparable competition, he was 7th in Mr. Basketball voting in Illinois, and not among the top 100 players nationally per the RSCI.
-
I can't believe there are still scoopers that don't have 84 on ignore.
+1,000,000
-
mu ice I forgot his name but is a 6 7 rebounding forward who played Div 1 and is graduating. Is going to grad school and if MU has programs he wants that his existing school doesnt he would have 1 year of eligibility. He was friends with Junior and is from Canada. Supposed to be a strong post player, not sure but think he played in the south.
-
mu ice I forgot his name but is a 6 7 rebounding forward who played Div 1 and is graduating. Is going to grad school and if MU has programs he wants that his existing school doesnt he would have 1 year of eligibility. He was friends with Junior and is from Canada. Supposed to be a strong post player, not sure but think he played in the south.
Done...take a potential "energy guy" that can rebound and contribute / add some depth for one year then make a splash in 2012 with another pg and a big...
BAM! The classes are evened out in terms of numbers and skill sets (if only it was that easy...haha)
Thanks for the info!
-
And who would Wade have been playing against in the fall before his ineligible freshman year? Deane's holdovers, plus newcomers Blankson, Sanders and and Merritt?
I would expect Wade to be unstoppable in that environment--as would be most top 100 guards.
When playing against comparable competition, he was 7th in Mr. Basketball voting in Illinois, and not among the top 100 players nationally per the RSCI.
Brian Wardle was a senior on his way to becoming the third leading scorer (at that time) in MU history when Wade arrived as a freshman at Marquette. Wade dominated Wardle from the day he arrived on campus. He also wowed the Bucks players he went up against in pick up games. He was easily the best player on campus the moment he arrived.
-
It's a shame to watch MU alums continue to crap on Dwyane Wade for him feeling that TC was a wonderful coach and someone he still leans on to this day. I find it rather sad watching MU alums do this like you just did. Backhand attacks at Wade like that are really not necessary. Essentially saying that Wade is a moron for not seeing things about TC the way YOU see them. Pretty sad.
Sorry - Lenny never crapped on D-Wade in any of his posts...he crapped on Crean. Could you find posts that "crap on D-Wade?" You've taken me to task for my theory that D-Wade is THE Reason we made the Final Four in 2003. You've crapped on D-Wade's performance in the Holy Cross game, and Missouri game. You have tried to downplay Wade's value to the Final Four team in countless arguments with me. When I pointed out the 2004 and 2005 teams with the exact same rosters except Wade and Robert Jackson couldn't even get out of the 2nd round of the NIT...you still were trying to argue the RJax had a lot to do with that MU team making the Final Four (and Diener and Novak - yet they couldn't even get MU to an NCAA tourney) in 2004 and 2005..
Just sayin'
-
It's a shame to watch MU alums continue to crap on Dwyane Wade for him feeling that TC was a wonderful coach and someone he still leans on to this day. I find it rather sad watching MU alums do this like you just did. Backhand attacks at Wade like that are really not necessary. Essentially saying that Wade is a moron for not seeing things about TC the way YOU see them. Pretty sad.
The only thing that's "pretty sad" is what a total misrepresentation this is of anything I said. I never "crapped on Wade" or "essentially called him a moron" for not seeing through TC. Crean's not a dumb guy - he knew early in the game that DWade would be his meal ticket and he has a pretty solid record of ingratiating himself to those who can help him - just as he has a well earned reputation for abusing those who can't. So it's not on Wade no matter how hard you want to twist it. It's on TC and always was.
-
Brian Wardle was a senior on his way to becoming the third leading scorer (at that time) in MU history when Wade arrived as a freshman at Marquette. Wade dominated Wardle from the day he arrived on campus. He also wowed the Bucks players he went up against in pick up games. He was easily the best player on campus the moment he arrived.
Yep--you're absolutely right. And at the time Wade was considered the 7th best player in Illinois, and not one of the top 100 nationally.
Keep in mind that Deane was fired largely because of his insufficient recruiting. It doesn't surprise me in the least that one of Crean's first recruits would dominate Deane's holdovers and be easily the best player on campus.
Sorry - Lenny never crapped on D-Wade in any of his posts...he crapped on Crean. Could you find posts that "crap on D-Wade?"
Just sayin'
Wade gives Crean credit for making him a better player.
For all intents and purposes, Lenny says Wade is a liar for saying Crean helped him improve.
Either that, or he thinks Wade is stupid for believing that Crean helped him.
Either way, he's crapping on Wade. Just sayin'
-
Wade gives Crean credit for making him a better player.
For all intents and purposes, Lenny says Wade is a liar for saying Crean helped him improve.
Either that, or he thinks Wade is stupid for believing that Crean helped him.
Either way, he's crapping on Wade. Just sayin'
Number one, I never said Wade didn't improve while at MU, only that he was a stud (far better than the 7th best high school senior in Illinois) when he got here and was NBA bound no matter who was the coach. Crean was the coach, so I'm okay with him getting some credit. So I never called Wade a liar or stupid or crapped on him in any way.
I will, however, assess those qualities to anyone who intentionally misrepresents what I did say. If the shoe fits... Just sayin'.
-
Yep--you're absolutely right. And at the time Wade was considered the 7th best player in Illinois, and not one of the top 100 nationally.
Keep in mind that Deane was fired largely because of his insufficient recruiting. It doesn't surprise me in the least that one of Crean's first recruits would dominate Deane's holdovers and be easily the best player on campus.
Wade gives Crean credit for making him a better player.
For all intents and purposes, Lenny says Wade is a liar for saying Crean helped him improve.
Either that, or he thinks Wade is stupid for believing that Crean helped him.
Either way, he's crapping on Wade. Just sayin'
84 - I don't have any kind of hatred for Crean..really don't...I do appreciate what he got done at MU. The reality is, however, that in 11 years now as a Division 1 head coach - Tom Crean has won 1 NCAA tourney game, without having an all-world player the caliber of D-Wade. Crean helped Wade become a better player...but D-Wade has helped Crean a heck of a lot more. Crean rides Wade's jock...he's no idiot...d-Wade is a great recruiting/publicity tool. Wade likes TC - and that shouldn't surprise anyone...as TC was, after all, D-Wade's college basketball coach. Rarely does a head coach have a bad relationship with a star, unselfish, team oriented player..
-
Number one, I never said Wade didn't improve while at MU,
I didn't say you did.
I said you don't give Crean as much credit for Wade's improvement that Wade himself does.
only that he was a stud (far better than the 7th best high school senior in Illinois)
Based on what? Seeing Wade against a bunch of Deane-era recruits?
Find me those 1999-2000 newspaper articles that say that Wade was better than Darius Miles. Better than TJ Cummings. Better than Imari Sawyer. Better than Cedric Banks.
Sorry, but but compared to other Illinois HS players that year he was not among the elites in the state.
when he got here and was NBA bound no matter who was the coach. Crean was the coach, so I'm okay with him getting some credit.
But that's not what Wade says, is it?.
Wade specifically credits Crean for helping him develop.
So I never called Wade a liar or stupid or crapped on him in any way.
And yet you don't agree with Wade with respect to Crean's development of Wade.
You've made it abundantly clear you think you're right and Wade is wrong.
In your opinion, do you think Wade knows--despite his statements to the contrary--that Crean didn't do all that much to help him develop?
Or do you think that he doesn't really realize that Crean didn't do anything special--that any other coach would have done just as much to develop Wade?
-
I didn't say you did.
I said you don't give Crean as much credit for Wade's improvement that Wade himself does.
Based on what? Seeing Wade against a bunch of Deane-era recruits?
Find me those 1999-2000 newspaper articles that say that Wade was better than Darius Miles. Better than TJ Cummings. Better than Imari Sawyer. Better than Cedric Banks.
Sorry, but but compared to other Illinois HS players that year he was not among the elites in the state.
The people doing those rankings of Illinois players were obviously very very wrong about Wade, just as they often are about countless other players.
I'm sure Crean helped make Wade become a better player than the high school kid who arrived on campus. Pretty much every college coach makes a kid who arrives on campus a better player. They'd have to be an absolutely brutal coach to not be able to make a high school kid become better and Tom Crean obviously wasn't a brutal basketball coach.
That said, you're continuing to bring up that Wade was only ranked as the 7th best player in Illinois as some argument for how much Crean developed Wade into the stud he is strikes me as a quite shallow argument. If those rankings about Wade weren't so badly wrong and instead it was the role of Crean's coaching which was so vital in developing Wade into a star, why hasn't Crean been able to do the same thing with other recruits of his, including guys who were ranked higher as recruits? Crean had magic developing skills with Wade that he just couldn't muster up with on other similarly rated recruits or even higher rated ones?
The real answer is obvious. Recruit ranking is far from an exact science and those doing it sometimes aren't just wrong about certain kids, they are very wrong. That's why not every kid in the NBA was a top 25 recruit. Those ranking Wade obviously whiffed badly.
As i said earlier, i'm quite sure Crean helped Wade get better, he didn't turn a mediocre talent into a star though. Far from it. Most coaches in college ball would have to have been incompetent to screw up the talent of Wade so that he wouldn't have been special. Talent like Wade possesses is rare. Extremely rare. The type of talent that no coach who has ever lived can coach into a player. If Crean could, he'd repeat it, but he can't because it can't be done.
The point of where Wade was ranked by high school recruiting analysts is irrelevant.
-
The people doing those rankings of Illinois players were obviously very very wrong about Wade, just as they often are about countless other players.
On what basis do you claim that the rankings were wrong?
Yes, i know it conveniently closes the hole in your argument--that Wade was ALREADY better--but can you honestly say that you saw both Wade and players like Darius Miles or Cedric Banks or Imari Sawyer and can honestly claim that you know for a fact that Wade was already a better player with more potential than all of them?
For example, Cedric Banks was picked ahead of Wade as the Chicago Sun Times player of the year. Taylor Bell knows a thing or two about HS basketball. Are you questioning his ability to compare two players?
Everyone in the world thought Imari Sawyer was better than Wade at the time. The difference is that Sawyer didn't get the same quality coaching that Sawyer did.
Darius Miles was the #3 pick in the NBA draft out of HS. If Wade were just as good, why risk injury over the course of 3 seasons, and give up three years of an NBA paycheck?
I'm sure Crean helped make Wade become a better player than the high school kid who arrived on campus. Pretty much every college coach makes a kid who arrives on campus a better player. They'd have to be an absolutely brutal coach to not be able to make a high school kid become better and Tom Crean obviously wasn't a brutal basketball coach.
So I'll pose you the same question I asked lenny.
Wade thinks Crean did do something special to develop him. You obviously disagree.
So do you think Wade is lying about how much Crean helped him develop?
Or do you think that Wade is just not smart enough to realize that Crean didn't do anything that Jimmy Collins or Pat Kennedy would have done had he picked UIC or DePaul?
That said, you're continuing to bring up that Wade was only ranked as the 7th best player in Illinois as some argument for how much Crean developed Wade into the stud he is strikes me as a quite shallow argument. If those rankings about Wade weren't so badly wrong and instead it was the role of Crean's coaching which was so vital in developing Wade into a star, why hasn't Crean been able to do the same thing with other recruits of his, including guys who were ranked higher as recruits? Crean had magic developing skills with Wade that he just couldn't muster up with on other similarly rated recruits or even higher rated ones?
Probably for the same reason that Buzz didn't do for Roseboro what he did for Butler.
If your standard is that a coach must develop every player equally in order to get credit for developing any of them, then no MU coach has ever developed a player above where they would have wound up.
The real answer is obvious. Recruit ranking is far from an exact science and those doing it sometimes aren't just wrong about certain kids, they are very wrong. That's why not every kid in the NBA was a top 25 recruit. Those ranking Wade obviously whiffed badly.
Is it your view that those same rankings whiffed badly on Butler?
Are you prepared to strip Buzz of most of the credit for developing Butler?
Are you ready to substitute the same faint praise that, sure, while Buzz coached him, Buzz wasn't absolutely brutal, therefore Butler developed into the exact same player he would have regardless of who his coach was?
-
84, you are the absolute, undisputed world champion of twisting, misrepresenting and intentionally misinterpreting people's statements into one BIG LIE. I say that I give Tom Crean SOME credit for Wade's development. You claim that Wade gives him more credit than that. You offer no evidence that this is true, but for the sake of argument let's assume you're right. Then you draw the conclusion that if I don't give Tom Crean the same amount of credit for Wade's development that Dwyane does I'm calling DWade a liar, a moron, or both. Honestly, how do you come up with this sh*t? Time for me to join the growing list of people intent on maintaining their sanity by placing you on ignore.
-
84, you are the absolute, undisputed world champion of twisting, misrepresenting and intentionally misinterpreting people's statements into one BIG LIE. I say that I give Tom Crean SOME credit for Wade's development. You claim that Wade gives him more credit than that. You offer no evidence that this is true, but for the sake of argument let's assume you're right. Then you draw the conclusion that if I don't give Tom Crean the same amount of credit for Wade's development that Dwyane does I'm calling DWade a liar, a moron, or both. Honestly, how do you come up with this sh*t? Time for me to join the growing list of people intent on maintaining their sanity by placing you on ignore.
Good move. What took you so long?
-
84, you are the absolute, undisputed world champion of twisting, misrepresenting and intentionally misinterpreting people's statements into one BIG LIE. I say that I give Tom Crean SOME credit for Wade's development. You claim that Wade gives him more credit than that. You offer no evidence that this is true, but for the sake of argument let's assume you're right. Then you draw the conclusion that if I don't give Tom Crean the same amount of credit for Wade's development that Dwyane does I'm calling DWade a liar, a moron, or both. Honestly, how do you come up with this sh*t? Time for me to join the growing list of people intent on maintaining their sanity by placing you on ignore.
Oh, does he still post here? I've had him on ignore so long......
-
I think coaches provide the opportunity and the instruction for players to develop. However, player development comes from their own attitutude to accepting instruction and the player's own hard work. A player that will not listen or work hard does not develop into the best he can be. The coaches style (game plan) also helps or hinders a player's development. MU is a guard's program. More so under Crean than Buzz, because Crean lets the guards dominate the ball with the dribble. Buzz's offense relies more on using all players, which was much better for Matthews and Hayward to display their talents. I think a player's improvement is directly related to how hard they work. Every player has a ceiling. Wade is close to his, Blue is not. Whether Blue approaches his ceiling depends on Blue, not on Buzz.
-
84, you are the absolute, undisputed world champion of twisting, misrepresenting and intentionally misinterpreting people's statements into one BIG LIE.
What specifically have I misrepresented or twisted here? What "BIG LIE" have I made? I'm amazed at your ability to feign outrage. YOU are the one who claims that Crean did nothing special to develop Wade. Wade says otherwise.
As I see it, there are 3 and only 3 possible ways that explain why you and Wade differ so much on Crean's role in Wade's development. And I'm not saying which of these is what you personally think--but it has to be some version of one of these:
1. You don't understand how much Crean did for Wade and are wrong to downplay Crean's role
2. You think Wade publicly says Crean was instrumental, but in private thinks otherwise. (i.e. its a lie)
3. You think that Wade is not as smart as you (i.e., he too stupid) to see that any other coach could have done what Crean did, therefore Wade shouldn't give Crean such credit.
So my question to you: which of these explains the difference?
I say that I give Tom Crean SOME credit for Wade's development.
No, you really don't. You want to make it sound like you give him credit. But you take it away with the statement that he "was NBA bound no matter who was the coach."
Then you draw the conclusion that if I don't give Tom Crean the same amount of credit for Wade's development that Dwyane does I'm calling DWade a liar, a moron, or both.
You either think Wade is wrong (i.e. too stupid to know Crean didn't do anything special) or that Wade is exaggerating Crean's role (i.e. he's lying about it).
I realize that you don't like the strong wording I used. But lets be honest--you're not mad at me because I'm wrong. You're made because I won't sugarcoat the words.
-
Oh, does he still post here? I've had him on ignore so long......
I'm sorry to lose you. You always seemed like they kind of guy who can disagree but not take it personally and move on. Was I wrong?
In any event, I'll channel Al . . . I'll post with you, or I'll post without you.
Either way, have a great day!
-
Good move. What took you so long?
ATL MU, I invite you back as well.
I'm willing to forgive you for getting personal ("beyond help" and "beyond pathetic") and chalk it up to you just having a bad da that day.
I'm happy to engage in debate, and more than willing to move and argue another day if we choose to disagree--nothing personal. I'll post with you, or without you.
Either way, have a great day!
-
Nobody who saw Dwyane Wade play his senior year believed he was by then the 7th best player in Illinois.
These rankings are largely set by performance during the summer and in all-star camps, and before a kid's senior year. Wade not only was a late bloomer, but he wasn't invited to those all-star camps and he played on an absolutely loaded summer league team, limiting his opportunities.
Those who saw Wade play as a senior - like the Bullseye Brothers - did not consider him the 7th best player in Illinois.
What's funny here is nobody is claiming Tom Crean didn't aide in the development of Dwyane Wade, so this is essentially an argument over nothing.
The only debateable point is whether Crean did something unique to develop Wade that would not have occurred elsewhere. Given Crean's record of player development over 12 years as a head coach, the answer seems obvious. As Duderino ably pointed out, if Crean did something special with Wade, why hasn't he been able to repeat it with any player over his coaching career?
-
On what basis do you claim that the rankings were wrong?
Is it really that hard for you to not grasp?
Wade is one of the best basketball players on the planet. A true NBA superstar. An incredible athlete mixed with elite basketball instincts. Skills that can't be coached into a player. If all it took was trying hard and good coaching for a player to become a superstar like Wade is and has been for awhile, the world would be full of Dwayne Wade's. That obviously isn't the case.
There can be a myriad of reasons as to why recruiting analysts are often so badly wrong about how good of a college prospect that high school kids are. They obviously whiffed badly on how talented Wade was as evidenced by just how great he was from the minute he became eligible. His special gifts were evident to anyone watching from the get go, the same way other special talents show their greatness right away.
For example, Cedric Banks was picked ahead of Wade as the Chicago Sun Times player of the year. Taylor Bell knows a thing or two about HS basketball. Are you questioning his ability to compare two players?
I'm not questioning that he is competent at doing his job, but evaluating talent is far from an exact science. Guys are badly wrong all the time as he was about Wade. Hell, Ted Thompson is arguably the best GM in the NFL. He spends countless hours doing nothing except evaluating college football talent, yet he's whiffed badly on numerous draft picks. John Hammond watched countless hours of Joe Alexander play and thought he'd be a great pro. Used a lottery pick on Alexander and he was a massive bust. This happens all the time and i'm quite sure Bell would admit that he was badly wrong about just how talented Wade was at the time.
Everyone in the world thought Imari Sawyer was better than Wade at the time. The difference is that Sawyer didn't get the same quality coaching that Sawyer did.
And every last one of them were wrong. If you are naive enough to believe that all Sawyer needed to do was play under Tom Crean and bam, he'd have become a superstar like Wade or that Wade wouldn't have become special under a ton of other college coaches, you don't understand basketball well.
So do you think Wade is lying about how much Crean helped him develop?
Or do you think that Wade is just not smart enough to realize that Crean didn't do anything that Jimmy Collins or Pat Kennedy would have done had he picked UIC or DePaul?
Of course Wade thinks Crean helped him develop given that Crean did help Dwayne get better. Crean has helped plenty of other recruits of his become better players than what they were when arriving on campus. As has Buzz and countless other college coaches. The reason though that only Wade became a truly special player under Crean is so painfully obvious, only Wade was an extremely rare talent or else Crean would have done the same with other players under him. Hello. And yes, i think Wade would have been a star if say Pat Kennedy coached him. All Wade mainly needed was the motivation and desire to push himself so as to let out his bounty of natural gifts. I do credit Crean though for pushing Wade hard.
Is it your view that those same rankings whiffed badly on Butler?
Are you prepared to strip Buzz of most of the credit for developing Butler?
Are you ready to substitute the same faint praise that, sure, while Buzz coached him, Buzz wasn't absolutely brutal, therefore Butler developed into the exact same player he would have regardless of who his coach was?
Yes the recruiting ranks whiffed on Butler, not nearly as badly as with Wade though.
Yes Buzz deserves some credit for Butler becoming the player he has, but Jimmy deserves most of the credit. He's a pretty gifted athlete with above average basketball instincts. What Buzz deserves most credit for is how hard he pushed Jimmy to get the most out of his abilities, as i'm sure Crean did with Wade. The big difference though being very obvious, Dwayne Wade is vastly vastly more talented as a basketball player than Butler could ever dream of being, regardless of what some recruiting analysts said about Wade when he was 17 .
FWIW, i don't hate Crean as other here do. I never discredit what he did for the MU program. He got us to a Final Four and his success is a sizable reason IMO that the Big East accepted in Marquette. I do hate how he left, but that doesn't make me ignore the many positive things he did for the program. When it comes to Wade though, i just think the main thing Crean accomplished was simply signing Dwayne to play at Marquette and that's no minor accomplishment. And push Wade hard to use his massive set of gifts. I don't buy though that Crean was essential in developing Wade, he showed quickly on the court just how gifted he is. The majority of coaches could have coached Wade and he'd have been as special except maybe for a weak type of coach who deferred to much to a talent like Wade vs pushing him hard.
-
Everyone in the world thought Imari Sawyer was better than Wade at the time. The difference is that Sawyer didn't get the same quality coaching that Sawyer did.
Everyone in the world thought DeShawn Stevenson was better than Wade at the time. The difference is that Stevenson went to the NBA, where he played under some bum named Jerry Sloan and didn't get the same quality coaching that Wade did.
Everyone in the world thought Chris Duhon was better than Wade at the time. The difference is that Duhon went to Duke, where he didn't get the same quality coaching that Wade did.
Everyone in the world thought Marcus Taylor was better than Wade at the time. The difference is that Taylor went to Michigan State, where he didn't get the same quality coaching that Wade did.
This is fun.
-
Brian Wardle was a senior on his way to becoming the third leading scorer (at that time) in MU history when Wade arrived as a freshman at Marquette. Wade dominated Wardle from the day he arrived on campus. He also wowed the Bucks players he went up against in pick up games. He was easily the best player on campus the moment he arrived.
Wardle was known for his defensive ability? I thought him to be a tough kid, decent defender and nice shooter, but I don't think Wardle would have stopped DJO, Wes Matthews or McNeal either.
-
Sorry - Lenny never crapped on D-Wade in any of his posts...he crapped on Crean. Could you find posts that "crap on D-Wade?" You've taken me to task for my theory that D-Wade is THE Reason we made the Final Four in 2003. You've crapped on D-Wade's performance in the Holy Cross game, and Missouri game. You have tried to downplay Wade's value to the Final Four team in countless arguments with me. When I pointed out the 2004 and 2005 teams with the exact same rosters except Wade and Robert Jackson couldn't even get out of the 2nd round of the NIT...you still were trying to argue the RJax had a lot to do with that MU team making the Final Four (and Diener and Novak - yet they couldn't even get MU to an NCAA tourney) in 2004 and 2005..
Just sayin'
Sure he did if you view it the same way some of you guys view things...when you guys like to play doctor \ psychologist (note a psychologist is not a doctor for those of you new to this game) this is a slam dunk.
We get it, Lenny thinks very very little of Crean as a head coach and has said so many many times. He's Wagneresque was just the latest.
Wade, one of the greatest players on the planet, doesn't think that way. Wade actually was COACHED by this particular man, where Lenny was never coached by him, yet Lenny's opinion on this is correct. Does make you chuckle, doesn't?
Nevertheless, I can only conclude that Lenny must think Wade a moron for thinking the way he does about Crean. Lenny has had little trouble in the past here declaring how stupid or completely out to lunch someone is for having their opinion (happy to provide examples) that don't agree with his. So if other people here are morons when their conclusions don't measure up with Lenny's, seems only obvious that Wade must also be a moron since he has a different opinion of TC than Lenny does (despite Lenny playing zero seconds in his life for TC while Wade played\practiced 3 years for him and to this stay is still involved with him).
Or maybe Lenny got dissed at Turners or his grandson didn't get camper of the week. Who knows. I just find it somewhat hard to square the opinions of one of the best players ever has one opinion about a coach and actually PLAYED FOR HIM vs someone who played not a second in his life for this coach. But hey, if TC is fired at IU then maybe Wade can recommend Lenny.
-
The only debateable point is whether Crean did something unique to develop Wade that would not have occurred elsewhere. Given Crean's record of player development over 12 years as a head coach, the answer seems obvious. As Duderino ably pointed out, if Crean did something special with Wade, why hasn't he been able to repeat it with any player over his coaching career?
For clarity, are you or Duderino saying no other player under Crean developed or no one developed to the level of Wade?
If it's the former, that is beyond silly. Diener was not a NBA player when he arrived on campus. Neither was Wesley Matthews, neither was Steve Novak. Plenty of other players improved as well.
If it's the latter, well that is a bit silly but not beyond silly.
What seems to be the argument here from some people is this:
Crean can't coach, can't make players better, anyone that got better was done by their own God given skills...or something to that effect. I'm sure Lenny will say, "I said he helped them some'...ok, so Crean can barely do these things.
Buzz, meanwhile, can coach, can make players better and is the primary reason they get better, not their own motivation, skills, maturity, practice, etc.
If I have it wrong, by all means tell me, but I'll be happy to provide examples that layout very well what I've just summed up. People here have two standards for two different coaches.
-
So this is what it has come to...arguing over what %age of Wade's current success is due to his natural ability versus Crean's coaching.
I mean...really???
-
So this is what it has come to...arguing over what %age of Wade's current success is due to his natural ability versus Crean's coaching.
I mean...really???
Nature vs. Nurture
-
So this is what it has come to...arguing over what %age of Wade's current success is due to his natural ability versus Crean's coaching.
I mean...really???
Apparently....at least that's how I'm reading some of the comments. I sometimes wonder how TC's guys tied their shoes and were able to determine if 5 guys were on the court based on some conclusions here.
-
I sometimes wonder how TC's guys tied their shoes and were able to determine if 5 guys were on the court based on some conclusions here.
They learned about shoe-tying and counting to 5 before college?
-
So, who's this Chris Bryant fella? After all the standard issue "I'm smarter than you" BS this thread has devolved into I don't even remember.
-
For clarity, are you or Duderino saying no other player under Crean developed or no one developed to the level of Wade?
Neither.
What I'm saying - and I think what Duderino is saying - is that it's inane to claim, as one poster is, that Crean through his mighty coaching prowess transformed the mere "7th best player in Illinois" into one of the best basketball players on the planet.
Dwyane Wade could have gone to any number of schools not named Marquette with any number of coaches not named Tom Crean and today he'd still be Dwyane Wade, NBA All-Star. Nothing Tom Crean did with him was unique. If Tom Crean had special coaching talents that allowed him to turn the "7th best player in Illinois" into an NBA star, wouldn't he have repeated the feat by now, or at least come close?
He hasn't, because he hasn't had a player nearly as good as Wade.
That's not intended as a knock on Crean, though no doubt his defense squad will take it as such. The same could be said of any other coach.
As for the rest, nobody has said anything close to those things.
-
Sure he did if you view it the same way some of you guys view things...when you guys like to play doctor \ psychologist (note a psychologist is not a doctor for those of you new to this game) this is a slam dunk.
We get it, Lenny thinks very very little of Crean as a head coach and has said so many many times. He's Wagneresque was just the latest.
Wade, one of the greatest players on the planet, doesn't think that way. Wade actually was COACHED by this particular man, where Lenny was never coached by him, yet Lenny's opinion on this is correct. Does make you chuckle, doesn't?
Nevertheless, I can only conclude that Lenny must think Wade a moron for thinking the way he does about Crean. Lenny has had little trouble in the past here declaring how stupid or completely out to lunch someone is for having their opinion (happy to provide examples) that don't agree with his. So if other people here are morons when their conclusions don't measure up with Lenny's, seems only obvious that Wade must also be a moron since he has a different opinion of TC than Lenny does (despite Lenny playing zero seconds in his life for TC while Wade played\practiced 3 years for him and to this stay is still involved with him).
Or maybe Lenny got dissed at Turners or his grandson didn't get camper of the week. Who knows. I just find it somewhat hard to square the opinions of one of the best players ever has one opinion about a coach and actually PLAYED FOR HIM vs someone who played not a second in his life for this coach. But hey, if TC is fired at IU then maybe Wade can recommend Lenny.
After reading this tripe I must conclude that you will heretofore NEVER criticize a coach you haven't played for if he has any ex players who like him. That would include virtually every coach who ever bought a whistle. So remember that you no longer can reserve judgement on Buzz, you must accept Wesley and Lazar's glowing opinion of him. Every time you get snarky in the future about Buzz we'll all remind you that you have no right to criticize because you never played for him (or anybody at any high level in anything). This is going to be great fun.
Oh, and a psychologist is a doctor of psychology. That makes him/her a doctor.
-
Neither.
What I'm saying - and I think what Duderino is saying - is that it's inane to claim, as one poster is, that Crean through his mighty coaching prowess transformed the mere "7th best player in Illinois" into one of the best basketball players on the planet.
Dwyane Wade could have gone to any number of schools not named Marquette with any number of coaches not named Tom Crean and today he'd still be Dwyane Wade, NBA All-Star. Nothing Tom Crean did with him was unique. If Tom Crean had special coaching talents that allowed him to turn the "7th best player in Illinois" into an NBA star, wouldn't he have repeated the feat by now, or at least come close?
He hasn't, because he hasn't had a player nearly as good as Wade.
That's not intended as a knock on Crean, though no doubt his defense squad will take it as such. The same could be said of any other coach.
As for the rest, nobody has said anything close to those things.
A bit of hyperbole. He could not have gone to just any school with any coach and been the same Dwade. He certainly could have gone to SOME other schools and achieved the same. Getting an athlete to reach his full potential is often the most important aspect of coaching, not necessarily if he has his wrist cocked just right on his jump shot. It's about motivating the person to get to where he belongs. Not all coaches can do that and some coaches that might be able to do that for some kids can't for others. So I disagree with your statement.
At the end of the day, Wade sure seems to like Crean and sure doesn't seem to put him in the same category that some folks here do. I pretty much will go with Wade's opinion.
-
Nobody who saw Dwyane Wade play his senior year believed he was by then the 7th best player in Illinois.
These rankings are largely set by performance during the summer and in all-star camps, and before a kid's senior year. Wade not only was a late bloomer, but he wasn't invited to those all-star camps and he played on an absolutely loaded summer league team, limiting his opportunities.
With all due respect, Wade was 7th in the Mr. Basketball voting--not done by scouts at summer camps months before the end of the year, but by the reporters that cover illinois HS basketball at the end of the senior season.
-
Neither.
What I'm saying - and I think what Duderino is saying - is that it's inane to claim, as one poster is, that Crean through his mighty coaching prowess transformed the mere "7th best player in Illinois" into one of the best basketball players on the planet.
Dwyane Wade could have gone to any number of schools not named Marquette with any number of coaches not named Tom Crean and today he'd still be Dwyane Wade, NBA All-Star. Nothing Tom Crean did with him was unique. If Tom Crean had special coaching talents that allowed him to turn the "7th best player in Illinois" into an NBA star, wouldn't he have repeated the feat by now, or at least come close?
He hasn't, because he hasn't had a player nearly as good as Wade.
That's not intended as a knock on Crean, though no doubt his defense squad will take it as such. The same could be said of any other coach.
As for the rest, nobody has said anything close to those things.
This is basically what everyone is saying and there's no doubt it's true (to every MU fan not named Chicos or 84)
-
This is basically what everyone is saying and there's no doubt it's true (to every MU fan not named Chicos or 84)
And yet, still, Wade seems to like the guy, thanks the guy, believes he was integral for getting him into the NBA. Maybe you should add his name to Chicos and 84....or is he not a MU fan?
You see, no one is doubting his skill set, but I think Wade and others realize that sometimes it takes that certain coach to get you totally focused, totally motivated, etc to make it. That guy in the minors that taught you the sinker, the coach in college that made you get over your laziness and become a pro, that mentor in business that takes you under his/her wing and shows you how the proper way to manage, organize, cultivate, prepare, etc.
Nah, it couldn't be any of that. :-*
-
A bit of hyperbole. He could not have gone to just any school with any coach and been the same Dwade. He certainly could have gone to SOME other schools and achieved the same. Getting an athlete to reach his full potential is often the most important aspect of coaching, not necessarily if he has his wrist cocked just right on his jump shot. It's about motivating the person to get to where he belongs. Not all coaches can do that and some coaches that might be able to do that for some kids can't for others. So I disagree with your statement.
At the end of the day, Wade sure seems to like Crean and sure doesn't seem to put him in the same category that some folks here do. I pretty much will go with Wade's opinion.
Perhaps if you read my post correctly you wouldn't disagree.
Lots of Huggins', Pitino's and Calipari's former players sure seem to like them, and don't put them into the same category some folks here do.
Not sure what that has to do with the discussion, but I'm guessing you agree that shouldn't shield them from any and all criticism or - gasp! - disagreeing with claims they have the ability to magically transform a state's 7th best player into an NBA all-star.
-
Is it really that hard for you to not grasp?
Wade is one of the best basketball players on the planet. A true NBA superstar. An incredible athlete mixed with elite basketball instincts. Skills that can't be coached into a player. If all it took was trying hard and good coaching for a player to become a superstar like Wade is and has been for awhile, the world would be full of Dwayne Wade's. That obviously isn't the case.
I guess the questions is why is it so hard to think that a coach would have some impact on a players development?
You find people frequently saying that Bo Ryan's offense holds players back and ill-prepares them for the NBA. Haven't we seen people on this board make the argument that good players shouldn't go to wisconsin because Ryan's offense will hurt their development?
We also hear the frequent argument that Matthews and Hawyard (and hopefully Butler) send a message to recruits that Buzz can better prepare players for the league. Yet, today's argument seems to suggest that a whole lot of people believe that the coach doesn't matter. If they're good enough for the NBA, it won't matter if they come play for Buzz or if they play the Swing under Bo Ryan, or if Bob Dukiet is raised from the dead and coaches them.
What about a comparison to Pat Kennedy's roll the ball out/no discipline style of play? Is it really a stretch to think that if Wade didn't start learning complex offense and defensive sets, but rather played "street ball" for three years, that he might not have developed the skills to be as successful in the NBA?
Take two players--both about the same in the rankings.
Put one in a highly disciplined program that uses an NBA-style multiple-set game plan where every moment of the day carefully controlled to maximize performance--from weight training to classroom performance to excluding the posse from having access to the player.
Put the second in an anything goes/street-ball style game, no sets--just transition and motion offense, let the posse hang out with the team, take a lassiez-faire attitude to what players do on their own time as long as they pass their courses.
Tell me why you think its so unreasonable for me to think that the player in the first setting is going to benefit from his coach, while the player in the second is more likely to be harmed by his coach.
And every last one of them were wrong. If you are naive enough to believe that all Sawyer needed to do was play under Tom Crean and bam, he'd have become a superstar like Wade or that Wade wouldn't have become special under a ton of other college coaches, you don't understand basketball well.
Not "bam." Three years of hard work at a system tailored for the pro game instead of a no-discipline "street-ball" environment.
And yes, i think Wade would have been a star if say Pat Kennedy coached him. All Wade mainly needed was the motivation and desire to push himself so as to let out his bounty of natural gifts. I do credit Crean though for pushing Wade hard.
I don't think Wade would have been a star. I think Kennedy's offense would have not enabled Wade to establish the discipline necessary to succeed to the extent he did in the pros, I don't think Wade would have received the same weight training or academic support, I don't believe that Kennedy would have been able to keep the posse at bay. I think there are a whole host of reasons why MU under Crean was a MUCH stronger environment than DePaul under Kennedy.
As for UIC under Collins or Illinois State under Richardson, I simply don't think each schools support for the basketball program would be sufficient to have enabled Collins or Richardson to develop Wade to the extent that Crean did.
Natural gifts are a minimum requirement--not a guarantee of success.
-
A strange thread....!
-
Neither.
What I'm saying - and I think what Duderino is saying - is that it's inane to claim, as one poster is, that Crean through his mighty coaching prowess transformed the mere "7th best player in Illinois" into one of the best basketball players on the planet.
Dwyane Wade could have gone to any number of schools not named Marquette with any number of coaches not named Tom Crean and today he'd still be Dwyane Wade, NBA All-Star. Nothing Tom Crean did with him was unique.
I can't wait for you to smack down the next person who claims that Buzz did something to help Hayward or Matthews (and hopefully Butler) get to the league.
If Tom Crean had special coaching talents that allowed him to turn the "7th best player in Illinois" into an NBA star, wouldn't he have repeated the feat by now, or at least come close?
For a guy who tosses out the "straw man" accusation as frequently as you do, you'd think you'd be able to recognize one when its coming off your own fingertips.
Your straw man nothwitstanding, given that we know Crean runs a complex pro-style multi-set offense, and coaches like Bo Ryan are criticized for using a decidedly non-pro like scheme that reportedly hurts players chances at getting to the NBA, and coaches like Pat Kennedy don't instill a sense of discipline required for success in the NBA--is it really that unreasonable to think that Wade developed more than he might have under other coaches--specifically Ryan or Kennedy?
Maybe Wade was good enough that he could atrophy under a Jimmy Collins or Pat Kennedy and turn out to be just as good as he would have been otherwise.
Or maybe because he was 21 when he started that hard work instead of 18, he lost 3 years that he'll never get back.
-
I can't wait for you to smack down the next person who claims that Buzz did something to help Hayward or Matthews (and hopefully Butler) get to the league.
My first post in this thread:
"What's funny here is nobody is claiming Tom Crean didn't aide (note: bad spelling on my part) in the development of Dwyane Wade"
That said, you'll never see me suggesting that it was by the powers invested in Buzz Williams that Jimmy Butler went from a player Rivals ranked 129th - in Texas - to a potential NBA player. I'll give the great majority of the credit to Jimmy's natural abilities and hard work, and chalk up his low ranking to a terrible oversight by the so-called gurus rather than an accurate assessment of his abilities coming out of high school.
If Jimmy really was just the 129th best player in Texas that year, then either Buzz is a miracle worker or Texas should form its own professional league.
Your straw man nothwitstanding, given that we know Crean runs a complex pro-style multi-set offense, and coaches like Bo Ryan are criticized for using a decidedly non-pro like scheme that reportedly hurts players chances at getting to the NBA, and coaches like Pat Kennedy don't instill a sense of discipline required for success in the NBA--is it really that unreasonable to think that Wade developed more than he might have under other coaches--specifically Ryan or Kennedy?
So your argument has now sunk to the level to merely suggesting Crean developed Wade better than Pat Kennedy would have?
The very essence of damning with faint praise, don't you think?
That said, Pat Kennedy has put far more players in the league than Tom Crean (Sam Cassell, George McCloud, Charlie Ward, Bob Sura, Quentin Richardson, Bobby Simmons, Stephen Hunter among them), I chalk that up to the fact he's a better recruiter than Crean, not a better coach, but let's not act as if Kennedy holds players back from the NBA.
As for Bo, I seem to recall a guard ranked outside the RSCI top 100 who went to UW for three years and came out the 5th overall pick in the NBA draft and a future NBA all-star, despite having lesser natural abilities than Dwyane Wade. And another non top 100 kid who became a first round pick of the Phoenix Suns a few years back.
-
A strange thread....!
Possibly the most painful thread ever.
-
That said, you'll never see me suggesting that it was by the powers invested in Buzz Williams that Jimmy Butler went from a player Rivals ranked 129th - in Texas - to a potential NBA player. I'll give the great majority of the credit to Jimmy's natural abilities and hard work, and chalk up his low ranking to a terrible oversight by the so-called gurus rather than an accurate assessment of his abilities coming out of high school.
If Jimmy really was just the 129th best player in Texas that year, then either Buzz is a miracle worker or Texas should form its own professional league.
Knowing, of course, that Butler didn't come to MU out of Tomball HS. He came to MU out of Tyler JC, where he was a JUCO AA. I'd say its less a terrible oversight by the gurus and more a reflection of using the wrong ranking 2007 HS instead of 2008 JUCO.
Did you honestly forget, or was that an intentional misrepresentation?
Nonetheless, as with Crean and Wade, I would argue that Buzz deserves credit for the development that has taken place since Butler's arrival--not all the way from the #129th player in Texas, but from a JUCO AA--and that I think there are plenty of D1 programs where Butler could have attended and not have developed as much as he did at MU.
So your argument has now sunk to the level to merely suggesting Crean developed Wade better than Pat Kennedy would have?
The very essence of damning with faint praise, don't you think?
Of course not, and I know you know better than to even suggest it.
I used Kennedy because he is a known and obvious example of a different coaching style that probably would not have enabled Wade to develop as much as he did at MU.
That said, Pat Kennedy has put far more players in the league than Tom Crean (Sam Cassell, George McCloud, Charlie Ward, Bob Sura, Quentin Richardson, Bobby Simmons, Stephen Hunter among them), I chalk that up to the fact he's a better recruiter than Crean, not a better coach, but let's not act as if Kennedy holds players back from the NBA.
Richardson was ranked #9 in RSCI before he arrived at DePaul
Sam Cassell was a JC all american and called the best JUCO prospect in any position
Hunter was #36 RSCI
Simmons was #26 in RSCI
Sura was PA player of the year
Ward was one of the greatest all-around HS athletes ever out of HS.
Wade was unranked in the RSCI, and based on his senior HS year was considered 7th best in Illinois.
You could argue that Sura was unknown becasue of the HS conference he played in, but otherwise, you've listed a group of players that were already much higher rated than Wade was at the same point in their careers. Apples vs. Oranges
Maybe you didn't realize how highly ranked the players you listed were.
If you want to argue that Kennedy was just as good as Crean at developing players, find a similar player who developed anything close to Wade, but flourished under Kennedy's system.
As for Bo, I seem to recall a guard ranked outside the RSCI top 100 who went to UW for three years and came out the 5th overall pick in the NBA draft and a future NBA all-star, despite having lesser natural abilities than Dwyane Wade. And another non top 100 kid who became a first round pick of the Phoenix Suns a few years back.
I'm going to stand by my view that the Swing isn't particularly well suited for preparing players for the NBA. I think if one looks at the track record of all the top-100 players Bo has had through the years compared to those of Crean, I think the performance will bear me out. If you include the performance of the other outstanding players under the top 100, the record is similar.
-
I guess the questions is why is it so hard to think that a coach would have some impact on a players development?
Nobody said that Crean had zero impact on Wade, yet you keep saying over and over that posters are saying that Crean had no impact? Why?
All that those of us who disagree with you and Chicos on this topic have said is that where Wade was ranked by high school recruiting analysts is irrelevant in how skilled Wade actually was. That's it.
By you repeatedly acting like that ranking is important, you're implying that D.Wade really was just a very mediocre basketball talent that Tom Crean magically turned into one of the best talents on the planet. That's ridiculous. It's ridiculous to think Crean or any college coach could do that because they can't. If they could do it, they'd be able to do it all the time with other recruits. They can't because it can't be done. That's no shot at Crean either.
The best thing Tom Crean did for Wade was recognize early what an insane talent he managed to sign to the program and then push Dwayne to get the most out of his abilities vs letting Wade feel like a star and take shortcuts. There is importance in that, especially given MU at the time hadn't had a ton of success for awhile. Coaches in that situation can sometimes try to appease their star instead continuing to push their star to keep working super hard. Not letting a star get a huge ego and thus, stop working big time at his game.
Crean though had little to nothing to do with what made Wade so a star in college and then in the pros skill wise, that being so few people can stop him off the dribble and then score in tons of traffic. His super high level of instincts. It's similar to guys like say Rose and LeBron, two other guys so gifted physically that very few people on the planet could/can keep these type of rare players from beating them off the dribble. Make incredible plays consistently that leave people watching to go WOW. Just to strong, quick, and coordinated for their size while also blessed with fabulous instincts for the game.
Flat out special gifts and gifts which can't be coached into players, that's why they are so rare, so special, and now so wealthy.
-
Nobody said that Crean had zero impact on Wade, yet you keep saying over and over that posters are saying that Crean had no impact? Why?
All that those of us who disagree with you and Chicos on this topic have said is that where Wade was ranked by high school recruiting analysts is irrelevant in how skilled Wade actually was. That's it.
Why? Because Dude, that's what he does. When he's not taking things completely out of context he reverts to the old standby - repeat a lie often enough and some people might actually fall for it.
It doesn't take a genius (basketball or otherwise) to make the observation that Wade has done WAY more for Crean's career than vice versa. It's obvious. But Wade is also a loyal and humble guy who remains grateful to his high school and college coaches. Good for him. 84 (and to a lesser degree Chicos) distorts that loyalty and humility into a bizarro world where believing anything short of TC molding a nobody into one of the greatest players on the planet is tantamount to calling Wade a liar, a moron or both.
One of our posters (Murs?) has a line from the great Elvis Costello as his signature: "I used to be disgusted, but now I try to be amused". It might help with posts like the one from 84 that you referenced.
-
Lenny, perhaps some people took your posts to imply TC had zero impact on Wade's career. We all know you don't care for the guy through your many statements. We all know that you think he can't coach a lick, so is it really that far of a stretch to interpret your original comments in this thread on that particular aspect as meaning anything less than he did nothing for Wade? That's how I interpreted it...then again, you interpret everything I say as negative against Buzz so maybe I interpret everything you say as negative against Crean. Funny how all this works. :D
I know you've come back to state that isn't what you said, but it seems hardly a reach that someone could get there based on your prior posts. Or, as you like to frame me and others with their posts...your past is catching up to you. ;D
Fact of the matter is, TC isn't as bad as you've portrayed him the last few years, nor is Buzz as good and vice versa. They're coaches. They have limited ways to make players better, most of it through motivation and painting the picture for the young man that they have the opportunity to be great if they are willing to put in the hard work. Sometimes a young man needs that push and sometimes it takes a the right coach to press those buttons.
At the end of the day, Wade feels TC's coaching was crucial in his development to get to where he's at. I'm sure Wade feels that way about his high school coach as well. Doesn't really matter, that's what he thinks and only he went through the process, not any of us. Has Wade helped TC's coaching career...of course. Has Bellichek won a Superbowl without Tom Brady? Has Phil Jackson won a NBA title with any teams without Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant? Has a jockey won the Kentucky Derby riding a mule? Great players benefit coaches, this should not be surprising to anyone. To suggest, as you have, that TC's only accomplishments are due to Wade, however, seem off base to me. You are free to disagree.