I had a conversation yesterday with a co-worker who likes Marquette but loves the Badgers. We were talking about how Bo has owned the series between the 2 schools in recent history. I told him we got them next season. What do you all think? Am I nuts to think we are going to win at the Kohl next season?
No, yes you're nuts.
Quote from: MUHoopsfan6 on May 12, 2011, 12:12:39 PM
I had a conversation yesterday with a co-worker who likes Marquette but loves the Badgers. We were talking about how Bo has owned the series between the 2 schools in recent history. I told him we got them next season. What do you all think? Am I nuts to think we are going to win at the Kohl next season?
I wan't aware 5 and 9 point wins in the last 2 meetings, a 2-2 record in the last 4 meetings, or his 6-4 record overall meant Bo was owning MU. However, I think it will be a tough task, as usual, to win at UW next year. Much depends on how much the other guys, particularly Brusier and Gasser, step up around Taylor but I could easily see MU winning that game. Aside from Taylor, it appears MU will be the more talented team, but Bo's teams usually outplay what they appear to be on paper.
Depends on whether we have a guard who can cover Taylor. Hold Taylor in check and hope they do not shoot well from three. Look at Butler game. Butler did a good job on Taylor and Wisconsin for the most part shot poorly. I think the size differential is smaller than it was in the past. Still have deal with home crowd and referees.
WI wins in triple OT when Ed Hightower calls Junior for charging as a secondary defender takes the charge after sliding over into the new 3 foot arc under the hoop thius negating MU's winning basket.... :D
Magic 8 Ball says ....
(http://usedbooksblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/magic-8-ball-better-not-tell-you-now.jpg)
Probably not, but it's possible.
Quote from: whodem on May 12, 2011, 12:46:53 PM
Probably not, but it's possible.
Are you sure about this?
Some Badger fans think they may have the potential to be better next year. The problem with this year's team is that it was WAY too dependent on the 3 point shot, and their forward floated too much on the perimeter. They are going to be able to start forwards who are actually bangers in Brusewitz and Berrgeren, and a couple sophomores who can put the ball in the basket coming off the bench in Brust and Dukan.
If Hightower is reffing the game there is no chance that we win. We didn't play great last time we were there, however Hightower assured the victory. Even the Becky fans around me were laughing.
You don't win 95+% ( I don't have stats in front of me, so save comment here) of your home games without some help. ;)
On paper, I think we have the better team. But they're almost impossible to beat in that building. I'd give us 50/50 odds, which are better than we get there most years. But then again, I was probably 80% confident we'd win last year, and we saw how that turned out, so take what I say with a grain of salt regarding Becky.
YES, we will win. Surprised at the little faith of the Warrior fans on this blog.
Quote from: msbjim on May 12, 2011, 01:53:57 PM
YES, we will win. Surprised at the little faith of the Warrior fans on this blog.
I've seen too many times where MU has been better and still lost in that building. As someone said, there's a reason UW wins so many games at home. Fully expecting MU to be good enough to win but get jobbed.
Quote from: leever on May 12, 2011, 01:12:56 PM
Are you sure about this?
Yeah, I'd give the Warriors about a 30% shot of winning. It's tough to win there, and I don't like our chances.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2011, 01:15:08 PM
Some Badger fans think they may have the potential to be better next year. The problem with this year's team is that it was WAY too dependent on the 3 point shot, and their forward floated too much on the perimeter. They are going to be able to start forwards who are actually bangers in Brusewitz and Berrgeren, and a couple sophomores who can put the ball in the basket coming off the bench in Brust and Dukan.
Maybe Brust and Dukan will contribute next year, but last year the two walk ons were playing ahead of them. The three point shooting ability of Leuer and Nankivil kept the lane open for Taylor to drive. I think UW will be much easier to defend next year.
Valentyn and who? Who was the second walk-on?
The answer to the question is: Yes.
And it will become more and more the norm so long as Buzz continues on at Marquette.
Quote from: Ners on May 12, 2011, 02:30:48 PM
The answer to the question is: Yes.
And it will become more and more the norm so long as Buzz continues on at Marquette.
You said MU would beat UW this year at MU (as did I and many others). Why should we believe you now?
Buzz has never won a game at the Kohl and that can be said about a lot of good coaches. Very difficult place to play.
Prior to this year we had never beat Syracuse while a member of the BEAST. However, we beat Syracuse twice this year. Hence, while not easy, we could beat the Badgers at the Kohl.
Quote from: NCMUFan on May 12, 2011, 02:43:17 PM
Prior to this year we had never beat Syracuse while a member of the BEAST. However, we beat Syracuse twice this year. Hence, while not easy, we could beat the Badgers at the Kohl.
Yes, of course, it's sports. Anything can happen. Prior to this year we had never not beaten UW-hyphen Milwaukee by less than double digit points.
I'd love to go on a beatdown of Bucky for the next decade, but history has shown it will, indeed, be a difficult task. They have beaten us at our place far more frequently than we have taken care of them at the Kohl.
Deane never won at the Kohl (though he did win the last game ever at the Field House), Crean won there only once I believe. Buzz has yet to do it. It's not just a MU thing, they have a remarkable record over there, almost boarding on the ridiculous. I believe they are 185-17 there, 92% winners. Pretty incredible considering this isn't a team like Memphis or Gonzaga playing at home in a weak conference. They are doing this against heavyweight teams.
Part of it is that they are a jump shooting team, and such teams tend to play better at home. And it is a very loud place. In fact, when I went to the MU game there in 2009, I was surprised how loud it got in there.
I know we want to write it off to officiating, but that's not really the case.
Marquette 96
Wisconsin 42
JFB leads all scorers with 40.
Quote from: drewm88 on May 12, 2011, 03:24:14 PM
Marquette 96
Wisconsin 42
JFB leads all scorers with 40.
Ooooh....I think someone is about to disappoint you.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2011, 02:59:14 PM
Part of it is that they are a jump shooting team, and such teams tend to play better at home. And it is a very loud place. In fact, when I went to the MU game there in 2009, I was surprised how loud it got in there.
I know we want to write it off to officiating, but that's not really the case.
Yes, but in the true spirit of rivaly there has to be conspiracy theory. :)
I dream of the day when a thread like this will be titled, instead,
Will Wisconsin be able to beat us next season?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 12, 2011, 02:34:25 PM
You said MU would beat UW this year at MU (as did I and many others). Why should we believe you now?
Buzz has never won a game at the Kohl and that can be said about a lot of good coaches. Very difficult place to play.
Using that logic, why would should we believe you now, regardless of your prediction, since you were wrong last year as well?
Yep, in his many, many, many tries (1) Buzz has yet to win at the Kohl Center. It truly is a house of horrors for him!! Maybe you would like to phrase that a little differently as that wording, although true, sounds misleading, at least from my perspective.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2011, 02:59:14 PM
I know we want to write it off to officiating, but that's not really the case.
I don't know think it's all officiating, but it certainly plays a part.
Henry Sugar did a nice breakdown several years back showing the huge foul disparity from which Bucky benefits when playing at Kohl versus away from Kohl.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=4694.msg38745#msg38745
Here's how things have broken down as far as foul disparity in the last eight MU-UW games:
'10 at BC: UW +2 (i.e. two more fouls called on UW)
'09 at Kohl: MU +9
'08 at BC: UW +10
'07 at Kohl: MU +4
'06 at BC: UW +4
'05 at Kohl: MU +12
'04 at BC: Even
'03 at Kohl: MU +11
'02 at BC: UW +2
'01 at Kohl: MU +9
So, in the last five games at UW, MU on average has been called for nine more fouls than Bucky. When playing at the BC, UW has been called for just 3.6 more fouls per game.
There's some truth to the argument that UW simply fouls less, but as Henry's analysis points out, even that doesn't fully account for the the foul disparity from which they benefit in home games.
So, the bottom line is that while I don't think officiating has cost MU games at UW, there's a provabale bias they (and any other team playing there) must overcome.
But again, this analysis assumes that the disparity is due to referee bias, and not simply better performance by the home team....and/or worse performance by the road team.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 12, 2011, 03:52:52 PM
I don't know think it's all officiating, but it certainly plays a part.
Henry Sugar did a nice breakdown several years back showing the huge foul disparity from which Bucky benefits when playing at Kohl versus away from Kohl.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=4694.msg38745#msg38745
Holy crap. I forgot that I even wrote that.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2011, 03:59:47 PM
But again, this analysis assumes that the disparity is due to referee bias, and not simply better performance by the home team....and/or worse performance by the road team.
The disparity is due to referee bias. The recently released book "Scorecasting" went through and looked at home court advantages. Basically, home court advantage is about 59%, almost universally regardless of team or sport. The primary reason is that referees make more judgement calls for the home team. So... yeah, UW gets more home cooking. But... Marquette benefits from the same type of advantage.
Valentyn played in 24 games and scored 25pts
Wquentin Smith played in 26 games and scored 13pts
Brust played in 15 games and scored 10pts
Dukan played in 8 games and scored 2 pts.
Predicting ANY team to beat Bucky at the Kohl-hole is just plain sillly. Ask Duke. If the game were played on neutral site or at the BC, sure. I think we will be a good team next year, but that place is cursed for OOC road teams, and not much better for B1? teams. Thrilled if it happens, not betting any currency on it.
Quote from: jmayer1 on May 12, 2011, 03:51:14 PM
Yep, in his many, many, many tries (1) Buzz has yet to win at the Kohl Center. It truly is a house of horrors for him!! Maybe you would like to phrase that a little differently as that wording, although true, sounds misleading, at least from my perspective.
Technically correct statements that nevertheless distort and give false impressions are an integral part of Chico's playbook.
Don't forget, UW also uses a different ball than all other teams when they play at home as well. Distinct advantage.
Quote from: muguru on May 12, 2011, 05:35:45 PM
Don't forget, UW also uses a different ball than all other teams when they play at home as well. Distinct advantage.
The smaller women's college basketball or the kicker's ball in the NFL?
Quote from: Pakuni on May 12, 2011, 03:52:52 PM
I don't know think it's all officiating, but it certainly plays a part.
Henry Sugar did a nice breakdown several years back showing the huge foul disparity from which Bucky benefits when playing at Kohl versus away from Kohl.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=4694.msg38745#msg38745
Here's how things have broken down as far as foul disparity in the last eight MU-UW games:
'10 at BC: UW +2 (i.e. two more fouls called on UW)
'09 at Kohl: MU +9
'08 at BC: UW +10
'07 at Kohl: MU +4
'06 at BC: UW +4
'05 at Kohl: MU +12
'04 at BC: Even
'03 at Kohl: MU +11
'02 at BC: UW +2
'01 at Kohl: MU +9
So, in the last five games at UW, MU on average has been called for nine more fouls than Bucky. When playing at the BC, UW has been called for just 3.6 more fouls per game.
There's some truth to the argument that UW simply fouls less, but as Henry's analysis points out, even that doesn't fully account for the the foul disparity from which they benefit in home games.
So, the bottom line is that while I don't think officiating has cost MU games at UW, there's a provabale bias they (and any other team playing there) must overcome.
This is a failed argument people constantly put out there when assessing if officiating had a role in the outcome of a game (nothing against your analysis, you are in the majority that analyze it this way).
The problem with looking at it only through numbers is you never take into account when the foul was called and what was the outcome. Questions such as "Was there a change in possession," "Did it take a potential basket away," and of course "what fouls were NOT called." All too often, if you watch closely, fouls called for one side do not impact the game, change the possession or influence the momentum as much as the other. Numbers simply don't tell that story.
I am of the belief that there there is something wrong with a sport when a team can win 60+ straight by just playing at a certain venue (Kansas, Wisconsin). I dont care how great that crowd is, if that doesn't make you suspicious of the integrity of the officiating (especially in such an unpredictable sport) then nothing will.
Quote from: Aughnanure on May 12, 2011, 07:36:15 PMThe problem with looking at it only through numbers is you never take into account when the foul was called and what was the outcome. Questions such as "Was there a change in possession," "Did it take a potential basket away," and of course "what fouls were NOT called." All too often, if you watch closely, fouls called for one side do not impact the game, change the possession or influence the momentum as much as the other. Numbers simply don't tell that story.
Another key factor, when did the fouls happen? If a team is up by single digits, it's possible that they'll get sent to the line 5-6 times in the final two minutes, which could easily contribute heavily to such a foul discrepancy.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 12, 2011, 12:14:51 PM
No, yes you're nuts.
This. Wish I could disagree, but I cannot.
Quote from: jmayer1 on May 12, 2011, 03:51:14 PM
Using that logic, why would should we believe you now, regardless of your prediction, since you were wrong last year as well?
Yep, in his many, many, many tries (1) Buzz has yet to win at the Kohl Center. It truly is a house of horrors for him!! Maybe you would like to phrase that a little differently as that wording, although true, sounds misleading, at least from my perspective.
Fair point....I guess the difference is that I'm not in a man relationship with Buzz like ners is (his words, not mine) so I try not to let the love emotional aspect creep into it. :D
You are also correct that he's only had one go of it so far at the Kohl, but he is 1-2 against Wisconsin overall...TC wasn't great against them either. We have not exactly come away with that many victories against Wisconsin regardless of who the coach is in the last decade +.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on May 12, 2011, 04:20:10 PM
Holy crap. I forgot that I even wrote that.
The disparity is due to referee bias. The recently released book "Scorecasting" went through and looked at home court advantages. Basically, home court advantage is about 59%, almost universally regardless of team or sport. The primary reason is that referees make more judgement calls for the home team. So... yeah, UW gets more home cooking. But... Marquette benefits from the same type of advantage.
Scorecasting....great read. Recommend everyone grab a copy. Well written, data centric...a real joy.
What sucks for us, however, is that we haven't been able to cash in on that same "bias" when Wisconsin comes to MU...at least not translated into wins.
I love how Scorecasting gets into NBA home court stuff....damn near makes you want to scream conspiracy. ;)
Quote from: bilsu on May 12, 2011, 04:51:27 PM
Valentyn played in 24 games and scored 25pts
Wquentin Smith played in 26 games and scored 13pts
OK, I thought that Smith started as a walk-on but got a scholarship last year. I might be wrong however.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on May 12, 2011, 04:20:10 PM
The disparity is due to referee bias. The recently released book "Scorecasting" went through and looked at home court advantages. Basically, home court advantage is about 59%, almost universally regardless of team or sport. The primary reason is that referees make more judgement calls for the home team. So... yeah, UW gets more home cooking. But... Marquette benefits from the same type of advantage.
No, it proves that home teams get more calls. That *could* be referree bias, but it could also be the difference in how a home team plays on its home court. That study doesn't objectively point to any bias, but it could by hypotesized from the results.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 12, 2011, 09:04:50 PM
No, it proves that home teams get more calls. That *could* be referree bias, but it could also be the difference in how a home team plays on its home court. That study doesn't objectively point to any bias, but it could by hypotesized from the results.
I went back to the book and looked through that chapter again. To quote... "Long story short, referee bias could well be the
main reason for home court advantage in basketball".
The primary areas where referee bias matters are in ambiguous calls. Loose ball fouls. Blocking vs charging calls. Other fouls that cause a change in possession. Palming / traveling.
So I went and looked at all of UW's available data (2003 - 2011), and then eliminated any team worse that Pomeroy 200. (Note, typically I like to eliminate any team worse than 100, but then we'd cut out a bunch of UW's conference opponents. ha.)
On offense
eFG% - UW shoots 52% (H), 49% (A), 47% (N)
TO% - 15.4% (H), 18% (A), 15.9% (N)
OR% - 33% (H), 33% (A), 30% (N)
FTR - 44% (H), 32% (A), 37% (N)
Noticeable difference on turnovers and FTR. Some improvement on eFG%. The area least subjected to referee impact (OR%) stays constant. The turnovers and FTR are consistent with the theory of referee bias. The eFG% are consistent with the theory that UW plays better at home.
On defense
eFG% - 47% (H), 49% (A), 48% (N)
TO% - 21% (H), 18.6% (A), 18.7% (N)
OR% - 27% (H), 31% (A), 29% (N)
FTR - 27% (H), 36% (A), 34% (N)
Again, there's a big difference in turnovers forced for home/away as well as FTR for home vs away. There is some difference on eFG%, but it's closer. There's also a difference in OR%.
====
Honestly, I now accept referee bias as a facet of human nature more than some conspiracy. UW's fans do a good job influencing the refs. Probably better than many schools. The lesson for MU should be that we should boo vigorously anytime an ambiguous call goes against the team. And cheer mightily when ambiguous calls go for MU.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on May 12, 2011, 10:29:58 PM
Honestly, I now accept referee bias as a facet of human nature more than some conspiracy. UW's fans do a good job influencing the refs. Probably better than many schools. The lesson for MU should be that we should boo vigorously anytime an ambiguous call goes against the team. And cheer mightily when ambiguous calls go for MU.
Absolutely. It's not a matter of purposely making calls as the book states. It's more about getting caught up with the crowd, human nature, etc. The blind studies they did when they put refs in front of the television and took all the sound away and the different it made was quite revealing. They're humans, they get influenced subconsciously.
Great book
Quote from: Henry Sugar on May 12, 2011, 10:29:58 PM
Honestly, I now accept referee bias as a facet of human nature more than some conspiracy. UW's fans do a good job influencing the refs. Probably better than many schools. The lesson for MU should be that we should boo vigorously anytime an ambiguous call goes against the team. And cheer mightily when ambiguous calls go for MU.
OK thanks for this. I am not saying that referee bias doesn't exist, but I don't think it exists to the extent that fans of road teams think it does. Home teams do play better at home and that is a factor too.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 13, 2011, 07:04:45 AM
OK thanks for this. I am not saying that referee bias doesn't exist, but I don't think it exists to the extent that fans of road teams think it does. Home teams do play better at home and that is a factor too.
I'd like to know how you would go about proving that statement. The only data that seems to back that up is the offensive eFG%. Meanwhile, I could make the case that every other discrepancy (including defensive eFG%) is a result of referee bias.
Marquette benefits from referee bias too.
Henry, I missed you these last several weeks. Your quantitative analysis of college basketball is one of the reasons I log on to MUSCOOP. Thank you. There are many on this board that provide insight that I greatly appreciate. There are others I would like to take out to the back alley and beat the crap out of.
GTST ( except the ones I want to beat the crap out of)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 12, 2011, 07:52:45 PM
Fair point....I guess the difference is that I'm not in a man relationship with Buzz like ners is (his words, not mine) so I try not to let the love emotional aspect creep into it. :D
You are also correct that he's only had one go of it so far at the Kohl, but he is 1-2 against Wisconsin overall...TC wasn't great against them either. We have not exactly come away with that many victories against Wisconsin regardless of who the coach is in the last decade +.
Yes Chicos - I do have an absolute man crush on Buzz Williams - and have no shame in admitting it. A lot better than being in the closet, as you continue to be about your immense love of Tom Crean. Your continued skepticism and wait and see approach on Buzz is comical - its only going to be a matter of a few years to where the performance of MU under Buzz makes you look like an even bigger idiot than you already are. Buzz is a man's man. Tom Crean is a poser - which makes it no surprise that you would identify with him and be a fan of his. A man doesn't let ESPN break the news to his team that he's leaving them behind - he man's up and tells them on his own.
Of course I look at the game with an MU bias, but these are some of the things I have seen at games at UW.
Dwayne Wade getting called for three quick fouls in first half resulting in MU going down 21 points and first half. MU coming back to were they are one. Two plays in a row MU turns ball over and Harris turns it into fast break baskets. the first one was Henry's fault. The second one was no contact called on a shot right at the hoop.
Scott Merrit backing down Wilkenson(?) for the potential winning basket and getting called for traveling instead of Wilkenson getting the foul.
Hank Raymonds getting a technical at a crucial time.
I sure there are other times, but these are the ones that stick out in my memory.
Quote from: Ners on May 13, 2011, 09:52:32 AM
Yes Chicos - I do have an absolute man crush on Buzz Williams - and have no shame in admitting it. A lot better than being in the closet, as you continue to be about your immense love of Tom Crean. Your continued skepticism and wait and see approach on Buzz is comical - its only going to be a matter of a few years to where the performance of MU under Buzz makes you look like an even bigger idiot than you already are. Buzz is a man's man. Tom Crean is a poser - which makes it no surprise that you would identify with him and be a fan of his. A man doesn't let ESPN break the news to his team that he's leaving them behind - he man's up and tells them on his own.
Some people here have been banned recently for personal insults. I'm trying to take the high road of late, but I don't always succeed.
I'll lay this out as clearly as I can. I appreciate Crean for what he did, putting us into a spot that made it attractive for a Buzz Williams to quit his gig after one year and come work for MU. Having a Dwyane Wade represent the university, now potentially playing for another NBA title, going to the Final Four, graduating nearly everyone, etc, etc. Crean may be a poser, of course you consistently have said you had no issues with him but seems character is now revealed...finally.
I like Buzz, always have and probably always will. Good guy, definitely not a poser. I have been consistent from day one that I will wait to see what happens with his guys, that typically takes 4 or 5 years. So far so good. I'll stick to it....you fall in love easier than I do....I like to kick the tires, take her for a few test drives before getting down on one knee. I've seen way too many Bruiser Flints, Steve Lavin at UCLA, etc, etc to not be cautious.
God Bless and have a wonderful Friday the 13th.
Nothing wrong with your cautious approach, CBB. Nothing wrong with you as a person either.
God Bless you back 'atcha!
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 13, 2011, 02:25:13 PM
Some people here have been banned recently for personal insults. I'm trying to take the high road of late, but I don't always succeed.
I'll lay this out as clearly as I can. I appreciate Crean for what he did, putting us into a spot that made it attractive for a Buzz Williams to quit his gig after one year and come work for MU. Having a Dwyane Wade represent the university, now potentially playing for another NBA title, going to the Final Four, graduating nearly everyone, etc, etc. Crean may be a poser, of course you consistently have said you had no issues with him but seems character is now revealed...finally.
I like Buzz, always have and probably always will. Good guy, definitely not a poser. I have been consistent from day one that I will wait to see what happens with his guys, that typically takes 4 or 5 years. So far so good. I'll stick to it....you fall in love easier than I do....I like to kick the tires, take her for a few test drives before getting down on one knee. I've seen way too many Bruiser Flints, Steve Lavin at UCLA, etc, etc to not be cautious.
God Bless and have a wonderful Friday the 13th.
Thanks Chicos. I'll also appreciate it when the day comes that you go to the same lengths to defend and support our CURRENT coach as you do our former coach. I'll appreciate it when Buzz doesn't make you squeamish, and you can forgive him for recruiting so many JUCO's. I'll also appreciate it when you decide not to call our team a bunch of choking dogs who pee themselves.
Last thought just because I think Tom Crean is a poser, doesn't mean I don't appreciate what he did in his time at MU. You don't have to like someone, but you can like their results - albeit 1 NCAA tourney win without D-Wade over a decade isn't that great of track record, but Crean did rfescue us from the disaster that was Mike Deane.
Enjoy your Friday the 13th.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 13, 2011, 02:25:13 PM
I like Buzz, always have and probably always will. Good guy, definitely not a poser. I have been consistent from day one that I will wait to see what happens with his guys, that typically takes 4 or 5 years. So far so good. I'll stick to it....you fall in love easier than I do....I like to kick the tires, take her for a few test drives before getting down on one knee. I've seen way too many Bruiser Flints, Steve Lavin at UCLA, etc, etc to not be cautious.
God Bless and have a wonderful Friday the 13th.
Caution gets you Chris Lowery or Bob McKillop. Bold gets you Buzz Williams.
The ADs at Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas A+M, etc. are bold. They've seen enough in Buzz Williams in 3 years to risk their reputations on him. Given the college basketball landscape today, caution gets you bupkus.
Win or lose I predict Elite 8 next season. That is more important to me. I hate UW, but not like I used to.
One reason why I like our chances next year and the year's after at the Kohl Center is Buzz's defense. Though porous at times, it definitely limits fouling. Fouling plays right into the Badgers hands in terms of tempo of the game and their solid FT shooting. I would give us a 50-50 chance of winning next year, which is damn good.
By not fouling as much (and most importantly, not appearing to foul as much) we take much more of the game away from the natural home referee bias.
It will be interesting to see the analysis of this game come early December as we will have much better information on both teams by then.
Quote from: Goose on May 13, 2011, 04:25:47 PM
Win or lose I predict Elite 8 next season. That is more important to me. I hate UW, but not like I used to.
Its comments like this that make me feel like I am reading the Badger boards.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 13, 2011, 03:38:29 PM
Caution gets you Chris Lowery or Bob McKillop. Bold gets you Buzz Williams.
The ADs at Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas A+M, etc. are bold. They've seen enough in Buzz Williams in 3 years to risk their reputations on him. Given the college basketball landscape today, caution gets you bupkus.
LOL. Didn't a lot of AD's say that about another coach we had yet he's a terrible coach according to you. I love it when you try to have it both ways.
Have a wonderful weekend.
PS Bob McKillop has been at Davidson for 20+ years, is their all-time winningest coach, etc, etc. One would think you could come up with a better example....apparently caution gets you the all-time winningest coach in school history, too. LOL. Beautifully played....beautifully played. LOL
Quote from: Ners on May 13, 2011, 03:24:33 PM
Thanks Chicos. I'll also appreciate it when the day comes that you go to the same lengths to defend and support our CURRENT coach as you do our former coach. I'll appreciate it when Buzz doesn't make you squeamish, and you can forgive him for recruiting so many JUCO's. I'll also appreciate it when you decide not to call our team a bunch of choking dogs who pee themselves.
Last thought just because I think Tom Crean is a poser, doesn't mean I don't appreciate what he did in his time at MU. You don't have to like someone, but you can like their results - albeit 1 NCAA tourney win without D-Wade over a decade isn't that great of track record, but Crean did rfescue us from the disaster that was Mike Deane.
Enjoy your Friday the 13th.
I do as well....when the current guy accomplishes what the previous ones have, then I can't wait to do that....since the current guy is a better coach and better recruiter, it really shouldn't be that much longer until we're back in the 4th through 6th position in the Big East and a Final Four. ;)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on May 13, 2011, 02:25:13 PM
I have been consistent from day one that I will wait to see what happens with his guys, that typically takes 4 or 5 years.
5 years, at a minimum, will be your rule for your favorite dude, right? Year 4 ain't gonna be pretty.
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 13, 2011, 11:17:26 PM5 years, at a minimum, will be your rule for your favorite dude, right? Year 4 ain't gonna be pretty.
I'm assuming you're talking about I4. If year 4 ain't gonna be pretty, why did Lunardi have Indiana in the his first NCAA bracket for 2011? Granted, as a 12-seed, but considering where they've been turning up the past 3 years, I think even being a bubble team would be a fairly nice accomplishment.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 13, 2011, 11:27:49 PM
I'm assuming you're talking about I4. If year 4 ain't gonna be pretty, why did Lunardi have Indiana in the his first NCAA bracket for 2011? Granted, as a 12-seed, but considering where they've been turning up the past 3 years, I think even being a bubble team would be a fairly nice accomplishment.
I have no idea where I4 will end up next season, but I'm not sure being a 12 seed in Lunardi's early May bracket counts for anything or should be used as evidence that they will or won't have a good season.
Getting into the tourney would be a big accomplishment, but folks down in Bloomington might not want to make travel plans just yet based on Bracketology.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 14, 2011, 09:14:51 AMI have no idea where I4 will end up next season, but I'm not sure being a 12 seed in Lunardi's early May bracket counts for anything or should be used as evidence that they will or won't have a good season.
Getting into the tourney would be a big accomplishment, but folks down in Bloomington might not want to make travel plans just yet based on Bracketology.
No, but I'd say the pieces are falling into place for them to make a postseason tournament next year, which is progress. When Sampson left them in ruins, I think they expected a long rebuilding process. Return to the postseason next year, even just the NIT, and then capitalize on the 7 five-star recruits that have either signed or given verbal commitments over the next 4 years and Indiana should be right back on track.
Love or hate Crean, he has been able to recruit the level of players he never got at Marquette. However Buzz is showing promise in being able to recruit those types of players to Marquette, so I'm satisfied with that :)
Quote from: Lennys Tap on May 13, 2011, 03:38:29 PM
Caution gets you Chris Lowery or Bob McKillop. Bold gets you Buzz Williams.
The ADs at Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas A+M, etc. are bold. They've seen enough in Buzz Williams in 3 years to risk their reputations on him. Given the college basketball landscape today, caution gets you bupkus.
Did you not just validate cautious concerns with your examples? MU elevated an assistant, Buzz Williams to the head coaching spot. UCLA did the same thing with Steve Lavin and was run out of town. UMASS did the same thing with Bruiser Flint, who was run out of town. Were UCLA and UMASS bold?
Your McKillop reference is odd as well. Are you someone that can see the future and understands how McKillop would have done? All we know is McKillop has been exceptional at Davidson as stayed there.
Both you and Chico are right on this, that's the funny part. It was a risky hire (Chico) and it was also bold (Lenny). Though to be fair, my suspicions are that you also think it was a risky hire and Chico also believes it was bold. The fact of the matter is that you will be able to perp walk coaches that have made it under your bold scenario and he will equally be able to trump out those that didn't.
The JUCO stuff bothers me as well. Must make me a bad person. ::)
Indiana will be fine. Anyone not paying attention to what they have coming in and claiming otherwise simply hates Tom Crean has not one rational bone in their body. Unfortunately, there are many of you that fit that bill here.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 13, 2011, 11:27:49 PM
I'm assuming you're talking about I4. If year 4 ain't gonna be pretty, why did Lunardi have Indiana in the his first NCAA bracket for 2011?
Some dork put them in a bracket 10 months before a bracket will be decided on? Big deal.
They don't have much coming in - if you check my post from two weeks ago, I went over my thoughts on the 2012, which is the first one that could make a difference on day 1 of their arrival. Cody as a freshman isn't enough in 2011. BTW, shortly after the post below, Scout released an update to their 2012 rankings.. and got sorted things more appropriately (in my view... consistent with what I was saying below).
Anyway, if folks want to put their money where their mouth is, I'm game for some "Indiana will/will not make the tourney in 2011-12" action (although even sneaking into the tourney in year 4 doesn't seem all that impressive for I4).
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 02, 2011, 12:45:55 AM2012 through 2014 is where it looks good. This year is just a couple of traditional players in Zeller (will be very good eventually) and Etherington (tall traditional that can shoot from distance). The recent commit for 2011 (Abell) quit on Bradley recently. Nothing too exciting though.
Their 2012 class is impressive:
Peter Jurkin is a 7-footer. Not great, but tall and a good name.
Ferrell - Sometimes he looks very good.. but he's a little guy.. well under 6 feet.. point guard... I don't think he'll be that amazing on day 1, although many think of him as a '5-star' kid. Not I.
Patterson is good, not great. Could turn into a very good player. Settles a lot, although he's not close to an elite shooter. Can do multiple things though.. solid overall, not great. Could be pretty good, but I'm not sold.
Hollowell... good size at about 6'6".. I was about 15 feet away from him when he busted open his chin (actually it wasn't THAT bad.. just a little gash) and hurt his wrist at a tourney.. that was ugly.. sometimes doesn't do a lot.. then all of a sudden he'll come on and it can get amazing. Can get to the hole and can also knock it down from deep. First couple of times I saw him in person I was unimpressed.. he just wasn't doing jack and missing some shots, looked a little disinterested.. but since those first couple of times, I've seen him do some amazing things. If he puts it all together, look out.
Hanner Perea... I'm sold. He's a man. He'll continue to get better at rebounding and the offense will come around.. but, he's already a specimen... mean dude out on the court, physical, athletic, can erase shots.. looking forward to Dawson and him going up for the same ball off the glass in Big Ten play. "
Quote from: Jay Bee on May 13, 2011, 11:17:26 PM
5 years, at a minimum, will be your rule for your favorite dude, right? Year 4 ain't gonna be pretty.
Won't be 5 years and year 4 should be rather decent if they can finally get a year without major injuries to their players. We'll see what happens. Big Ten loses a lot this year. I expect them to finish in the top 7 or 8. Top 7 probably gets them a NCAA berth. 8th is probably a NIT. Of course I can't predict injuries and that's been a big bugaboo for the.
I'm sure you realize he took over a program with one player that logged a total of 27 minutes...that's a bit different than stepping into a situation with three guys that would play in the NBA on the squad.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 14, 2011, 10:00:23 AM
No, but I'd say the pieces are falling into place for them to make a postseason tournament next year, which is progress. When Sampson left them in ruins, I think they expected a long rebuilding process. Return to the postseason next year, even just the NIT, and then capitalize on the 7 five-star recruits that have either signed or given verbal commitments over the next 4 years and Indiana should be right back on track.
Love or hate Crean, he has been able to recruit the level of players he never got at Marquette. However Buzz is showing promise in being able to recruit those types of players to Marquette, so I'm satisfied with that :)
I believe Crean could have recruited better at MU, but everyone knew he was looking at MU as a stepping stone. This is why we were constantly out recruited by lower tier schools.
I believe that Crean recruited to the absolute best of his abilities at Marquette, as he is at IU. IU has greater name cache (thank you, Bobby Knight) and one huge advantage. The difference is that Indiana high schools produce a lot more high level recruits than Wisconsin high schools. Crean is doing a good job of keeping the kids home, which, realistically, (if he can coach them) is all he really needs to do to get that team near the top of the Big 1?.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 14, 2011, 10:00:23 AM
No, but I'd say the pieces are falling into place for them to make a postseason tournament next year, which is progress.
Yes, it's progress. But almost anything would have qualified as progress. 10th place next year would be progress. Four conference wins would be progress.
But I think if you took Mr. Peabody's Wayback Machine back to the spring of 2008 and polled the Indiana faithful whether they'd be satisfied with that kind of progress - or even an NIT bid - in year four of Tom Crean's tenure, I suspect most would say no. Other elite programs who've been hit with similar or even worse NCAA sanctions - i.e. Kentucky, post-Sutton, Kansas, post-Brown - rebounded much more quickly. Whether that's a reflection of Crean, the unique circumstances at Indiana or something else, I don't know. I4 isn't the first top program to be nailed with heavy sanctions (and really, there weren't all that bad compared to some others) but their recovery seems to be taking longer than most.
Anyhow, it wasn't my intent to turn this into a debate of how well or how poorly TC is performing at I4. I just meant to point out that nobody should gauge a team's 2011-12 prospects by where Lunardi has them in early May. That's reasonable, don't you think?
Quote from: tower912 on May 14, 2011, 12:16:07 PM
The difference is that Indiana Elite AAU high schools produces a lot more high level recruits than Wisconsin high schools. Crean is doing a good job of getting keeping the Indiana Elite kids home, which, realistically, (if he can coach them) is all he really needs to do to get that team near the top of the Big 1?.
Yes, if it gets to the end of 2013 and the kids who have verbally indicated they will attend I4 actually do, I doubt as many people will continue cheering for their coach if they finish in the bottom half of the Big 10/11/12.
I think TC is far better suited to recruit kids to IU than MU. Buzz sells himself and TC sells a program, IU. I have little doubt that he ultimately will take IU to elite status again. Their are horses for courses and in mind TC needs a perfect fit. Buzz would recruit well if he was MU or any school he worked at.
Quote from: Pakuni on May 14, 2011, 12:57:41 PMI just meant to point out that nobody should gauge a team's 2011-12 prospects by where Lunardi has them in early May. That's reasonable, don't you think?
I was all ready to discuss, but yeah...not really the topic. That's reasonable. I feel they've made progress, not sure the faithful would be happy, but that doesn't mean management isn't. Regardless, if they're patient, they should get there, but it's still a long road to hoe.