I was lurking around one of their boards and found this:
http://www.the-boneyard.com/threads/wil-the-next-2-games-determine-their-post-season-fate.13472/
Here are a couple of quotes (some good praise of Buzz in the thread):
"Johnson Odom and Crowder are better college players than anyone on UConn. Marquette is a very good team that has a tendency to stay in games they should win easily because of Buzz Williams."
"Marquette is beatable by UConn. Drummond needs to be healthy and win the boards. I hate to say the game will be won beyond the arc but it could be. When Marquette craps out on the road and misses the tres they lose. Let them get into a groove from the perimeter and its over."
"Williams clearly is not a great "game" coach. Far too many bonehead plays. A couple of years ago they blew a game against a team in the tourney (Missouri) all based on strange calls and poor game management.
I like Buzz. You can get to a Final Four with Buzz perhaps. I don't think you're winning a title with him without a lot more talent."
Some good praise for Buzz? Those comments basically say we win despite Buzz. So Buzz will not win a title unless we get more talent. Seems to me like almost every team that has won a title has multiple 5 star recruits. Makes coaching a lot easier with a few studs on the roster.
It's a good thing he is bringing in more talent, then. Next year, and the year after that, when MU has multiple upperclassmen who have experience and have bought into Buzz's system, MU is going to be scary.
Well, Buzz/MU did muck up that end-game against Missouri, although the refs did miss an obvious intentional foul when JFB's uni was pulled from behind while going up for a big rebound at end of game. But I think he keeps getting better and is having his best season on the bench this year, especially if you only count what happens after the first media timeout.
Quote from: CTWarrior on February 14, 2012, 09:58:32 AM
Well, Buzz/MU did muck up that end-game against Missouri, although the refs did miss an obvious intentional foul when JFB's uni was pulled from behind while going up for a big rebound at end of game. But I think he keeps getting better and is having his best season on the bench this year, especially if you only count what happens after the first media timeout.
I don't recall what Buzz did to cost the Missouri game. I thought he got MU in position to win. The obvious foul with the crippling injury, followed by Zar's botched inbounds. How, though, were those tied to Buzz?
Didn't they hear, Buzz is at the top of UT's list.
I thought Buzz made great in-game adjustments against Mizzou that got us back into the game in the first place. And somehow Marquette beat UConn in there building in each of the past two years???
Because it's Buzz's fault that Lazar stepped 5 feet over the baseline.
Quote from: MUMac on February 14, 2012, 10:02:23 AM
I don't recall what Buzz did to cost the Missouri game. I thought he got MU in position to win. The obvious foul with the crippling injury, followed by Zar's botched inbounds. How, though, were those tied to Buzz?
Probably unfair to blame Buzz, but we had a 4 point lead under 2 minutes to go and were outscored 9-1 because we fouled early in the shot clock (even with the lead) and ran shot clock on offense to end up with desperation 3s. Basically he hadn't wiped away the last remnants of his predecessor, for whom such tactics (particularly running the shot clock and taking a terrible shot) were the norm in end-game scenarios.
Quote from: downtown85 on February 14, 2012, 09:49:21 AM
I was lurking around one of their boards and found this:
http://www.the-boneyard.com/threads/wil-the-next-2-games-determine-their-post-season-fate.13472/
Here are a couple of quotes (some good praise of Buzz in the thread):
"Johnson Odom and Crowder are better college players than anyone on UConn. Marquette is a very good team that has a tendency to stay in games they should win easily because of Buzz Williams."
"Marquette is beatable by UConn. Drummond needs to be healthy and win the boards. I hate to say the game will be won beyond the arc but it could be. When Marquette craps out on the road and misses the tres they lose. Let them get into a groove from the perimeter and its over."
"Williams clearly is not a great "game" coach. Far too many bonehead plays. A couple of years ago they blew a game against a team in the tourney (Missouri) all based on strange calls and poor game management.
I like Buzz. You can get to a Final Four with Buzz perhaps. I don't think you're winning a title with him without a lot more talent."
We can stay in games we should win easily. Umm, not exactly high praise.
Let's see, we've beaten them two years in a row at their arena when they have superior talent, and Buz is not a good game coach. They must really not like Blaney's game coaching.
Not exactly coherent either. There have been very few games (DePaul) that we should have "won easily". The fact that they think MU is so good that it should win easily means Buzz must be doing something right. He certainly has not UNDER-achieved his talent.
Quote from: LittleMurs on February 14, 2012, 10:42:40 AM
We can stay in games we should win easily. Umm, not exactly high praise.
Let's see, we've beaten them two years in a row at their arena when they have superior talent, and Buz is not a good game coach. They must really not like Blaney's game coaching.
Yeah, that was a strange thread to make when MU has beaten them at their place.
I suspect, though, if we go through some of Calhoun's losses, we can pull out a nugget or two of questionable decisions, blame them on him and then use that as evidence he is a poor game coach that can only win with superior talent. Probably shouldn't be too hard to do, either. ;)
Quote from: tower912 on February 14, 2012, 09:56:02 AM
It's a good thing he is bringing in more talent, then. Next year, and the year after that, when MU has multiple upperclassmen who have experience and have bought into Buzz's system, MU is going to be scary.
Rampaging past SMU en route to a Rivalry Week showdown with UCF. :-\
Uconn is 15-9 (5 - 7). Unless they repeat their BE conference run from last year, are they even making the tourney?
Can you imagine Buzz if he had Crean's recruits?
Can you ever dare imagine Crean with Buzz's recruits?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on February 14, 2012, 11:47:46 AM
Uconn is 15-9 (5 - 7). Unless they repeat their BE conference run from last year, are they even making the tourney?
Next year they aren't. :D
Quote from: MUMac on February 14, 2012, 11:26:38 AM
Yeah, that was a strange thread to make when MU has beaten them at their place.
What do you expect? A bunch of fans from UConn that are just talking. Be the same as you just talking about UConn. Be careful what you lurk for, you just may find it!
Quote from: Warriors10 on February 14, 2012, 10:38:28 AM
Because it's Buzz's fault that Lazar stepped 5 feet over the baseline.
Has anyone else noticed that we're getting awefully close to stepping over the line still? Especially with Jae. It's kind of a douche call to make anyways, but, you know, still against the rules.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on February 14, 2012, 11:47:46 AMUconn is 15-9 (5 - 7). Unless they repeat their BE conference run from last year, are they even making the tourney?
UConn's not a lock yet, but they are still in decent shape. Their RPI is a monstrous 20, and they have played the toughest schedule in the country so far. If they get to 9-9, they're in. That would likely mean wins against DePaul and Pitt at home, and Villanova and Providence on the road. Even if they go 8-10 in league play, a win or two in the Big East tourney would easily get them in. The bubble this year will be just as soft as last year's, and when you compare UConn's resume to teams like Minnesota, Colorado State, Illinois, Dayton, Miami, Mississippi, and Texas that are sitting squarely on the bubble, there's no real comparison.
What will be interesting is what happens if UConn goes 8-10 but manages to win 2 Big East tourney games and USF goes 11-7 (very possible) and gets at least one in MSG. Personally, I still think UConn in and USF out would be a no-brainer, but finishing 3 games better in conference is a pretty noticeable metric.
Quote from: MU_LOL on February 14, 2012, 01:38:57 PM
Has anyone else noticed that we're getting awefully close to stepping over the line still? Especially with Jae. It's kind of a douche call to make anyways, but, you know, still against the rules.
After makes, when the other team is pressuring, it appears that MU is trying to get the ball in ASAP to keep the other team from setting up. I've thought a couple of times that it looks like we are trying to repeat that particular mistake.
Quote from: MU_LOL on February 14, 2012, 01:38:57 PM
Has anyone else noticed that we're getting awefully close to stepping over the line still? Especially with Jae. It's kind of a douche call to make anyways, but, you know, still against the rules.
McIlvaine brought that up during the DePaul or Prov game.
That many players got away with that in the NBA, Jimmy included.
Quote from: MUMac on February 14, 2012, 10:02:23 AM
I don't recall what Buzz did to cost the Missouri game. I thought he got MU in position to win. The obvious foul with the crippling injury, followed by Zar's botched inbounds. How, though, were those tied to Buzz?
I was not happy with Buzz's coaching in the Washington NCAA game. The Missouri game, thought he did a good job.
What worries me about the UConn game is that they may very well look at it as a must win game to shore up their NCAA resume. We'll be in the same boat for all three of our remaining road games. UConn, Cincy and WV are all likely NCAA participants but none of them are locks and a win over us would be big for them and a loss cuts deeply into their margin for error.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 14, 2012, 03:02:56 PM
I was not happy with Buzz's coaching in the Washington NCAA game. The Missouri game, thought he did a good job.
The Washington game was frustrating, but it highlighted the two weaknesses we all knew that team had; depth and interior defense. MU wasn't deep enough to hold that lead and wasn't tall enough to send a help defender to challenge Poindexter's layup. We need DG back for depth, even though he won't help much on defense.
As with everyone, Buzz is a work in progress. He has room to grow and learn. But he is still the best thing that Crean ever did for MU.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 14, 2012, 03:02:56 PM
I was not happy with Buzz's coaching in the Washington NCAA game.
I'm sure when he sees this he'll want to personally apologize. Check your inbox.
Quote from: tower912 on February 14, 2012, 03:16:09 PM
As with everyone, Buzz is a work in progress. He has room to grow and learn. But he is still the best thing that Crean ever did for MU.
Debatable.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 14, 2012, 03:20:58 PM
I'm sure when he sees this he'll want to personally apologize. Check your inbox.
Lenny, do you just follow Hoopaloop thread to thread and rip him? It's pretty annoying.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 14, 2012, 03:22:39 PM
Debatable.
That's what we do on a message board. If I were to list Crean's contributions to MU (and BTW, I was a fan and appreciate what he did) in order of importance it would be 1. Hire Buzz 2. Land Wade. 3. Promote the hell out MU. #2 led to the final 4, which was the capper of #3. But if others see differently, I certainly won't blame them.
Land wade has to be #1. That singular achievement led to the final four, the big east, increased exposure for MU, new facilities, and the hiring of buzz.
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on February 14, 2012, 03:31:06 PM
Lenny, do you just follow Hoopaloop thread to thread and rip him? It's pretty annoying.
+1
and i agree, land wade has to be #1. everything since has stemmed from that.
Quote from: tower912 on February 14, 2012, 03:35:50 PM
That's what we do on a message board. If I were to list Crean's contributions to MU (and BTW, I was a fan and appreciate what he did) in order of importance it would be 1. Hire Buzz 2. Land Wade. 3. Promote the hell out MU. #2 led to the final 4, which was the capper of #3. But if others see differently, I certainly won't blame them.
I can't say what was more important between landing Wade and getting us into the Big East since Wade and that success was a contributing factor in getting into the Beast. But long term, the importance of Wade and his legacy is dwarfed in comparison with the ability to compete on a national level in the Beast year in and year out.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 14, 2012, 03:20:58 PM
I'm sure when he sees this he'll want to personally apologize. Check your inbox.
Lenny -
This is clearly your worst post ever! Aside from annoying some of the other posters, you know perfectly well that Hoopaloop does not need to check his inbox for messages from Buzz. Buzz has him on speed dial!
Quote from: wadesworld on February 14, 2012, 03:22:39 PM
Debatable.
No kidding. That guy that is on Sports Center every other night for the Miami Heat (Wade, not Lebron) is up there. That Final Four banner is up there. Guys by the name of Matthews, McNeal, James, Novak, Diener, Hayward are up there. Never finishing worse than 5th in the first three years of the Big East and proving we belonged with the big boys. People keep bringing up Western Michigan and ignoring this stuff? Hate fuels a lot of things, I'm happy I don't live with that much hatred.
Some of our fans sometimes act like Wisconsin fans, but in reverse. Wisconsin fans can't remember their dreadful history from 1940 to 1994 but some MU fans purposely ignore most of the 2000's because they don't like the guy who was calling the shots.
Calhoun to miss at least next 3 games, proly come back for the tourny
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on February 14, 2012, 03:31:06 PM
Lenny, do you just follow Hoopaloop thread to thread and rip him? It's pretty annoying.
No. Sorry my attempt at humor annoyed you.
If this was a rhetorical question please disregard the "no" part of my response.
Quote from: dwaderoy2004 on February 14, 2012, 03:44:53 PM
Land wade has to be #1. That singular achievement led to the final four, the big east, increased exposure for MU, new facilities, and the hiring of buzz.
I don't follow how landing Wade led to MU hiring Buzz. I think that stating that without Wade, MU doesn't get a Big East invite is flat out wrong. Wade = new facilities also seems to be an over reach to me.
Quote from: LittleMurs on February 15, 2012, 03:50:34 PM
I don't follow how landing Wade led to MU hiring Buzz. I think that stating that without Wade, MU doesn't get a Big East invite is flat out wrong. Wade = new facilities also seems to be an over reach to me.
No Wade could have meant no NCAA tourney appearances in TC's 1st 5 years. Would MU have got donations to build new facilities or get a Big East invite? Maybe, maybe not? Tough to say definitively one way or the other.
Quote from: jmayer1 on February 15, 2012, 03:57:54 PM
No Wade could have meant no NCAA tourney appearances in TC's 1st 5 years. Would MU have got donations to build new facilities or get a Big East invite? Maybe, maybe not? Tough to say definitively one way or the other.
This. More or less. Without Wade and the accompanying final four, I don't think think we have the success necessary to garner a Big East invite or inspire massive donations to build the Al. Look at how many new buildings were added to the campus in the years before the final four, and look how many we added just within the decade after. Pretty clear correlation if you ask me. As to Buzz, Crean may have been canned before he even had a chance to hire Buzz. Or, without prior success, would Buzz have even wanted to be an assistant at MU? Surely it's all speculative, but that's my take on it.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 15, 2012, 02:59:20 PM
No kidding. That guy that is on Sports Center every other night for the Miami Heat (Wade, not Lebron) is up there. That Final Four banner is up there. Guys by the name of Matthews, McNeal, James, Novak, Diener, Hayward are up there. Never finishing worse than 5th in the first three years of the Big East and proving we belonged with the big boys. People keep bringing up Western Michigan and ignoring this stuff? Hate fuels a lot of things, I'm happy I don't live with that much hatred.
Some of our fans sometimes act like Wisconsin fans, but in reverse. Wisconsin fans can't remember their dreadful history from 1940 to 1994 but some MU fans purposely ignore most of the 2000's because they don't like the guy who was calling the shots.
Agreed. And you didn't even mention the Big East, which might have been his biggest achievement.
As far as Wade leading to all of the things he got, whether that is right or not, who cares? Does Wade come to Marquette if Tom Crean is not the coach? Maybe he does as his options were limited due to his academic situation, but maybe he does not. It seems to me that Wade seems to think Crean played at least a TINY part in his success considering he seems to continue to support Crean at Indiana and wears Indiana stuff as well. Regardless, I hate Crean and hope he loses every single game at Indiana unless they are playing Wisconsin, but I am not naive enough to think the best thing he did for Marquette was get Buzz Williams to Marquette. HE got us Wade, which means, even if Wade alone led us to the Final Four, which got us the Al and into the Big East, then HE (Crean) got us those things by bringing Wade in. My guess is that if we never got into the Big East then Crean is probably still at Marquette and Marquette is nowhere near the program that it is today, even with the 2003 Final Four. Conference USA just doesn't seem to draw recruits in like the Big East does. So maybe Buzz doesn't even leave a head coaching position to become an assistant at a mid-major basketball school (what we probably would have been had the Big East taken, say, Memphis instead of Marquette).
In summary, regardless of whether you hate Crean and want to pretend that without Wade he would have never achieved anything at all (again, very debatable considering he got the Big 3, Novak before Wade was even Wade, Diener, etc...I know, I know, WADE was the reason those guys came, not Crean...I get it, which is why I'm saying this...), Crean got Marquette Wade, so whatever Wade got Marquette, Crean therefore got for Marquette.
Let's not put personal feelings in the way of giving credit where it is due.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 15, 2012, 05:05:17 PM
Agreed. And you didn't even mention the Big East, which might have been his biggest achievement.
As far as Wade leading to all of the things he got, whether that is right or not, who cares? Does Wade come to Marquette if Tom Crean is not the coach? Maybe he does as his options were limited due to his academic situation, but maybe he does not. It seems to me that Wade seems to think Crean played at least a TINY part in his success considering he seems to continue to support Crean at Indiana and wears Indiana stuff as well. Regardless, I hate Crean and hope he loses every single game at Indiana unless they are playing Wisconsin, but I am not naive enough to think the best thing he did for Marquette was get Buzz Williams to Marquette. HE got us Wade, which means, even if Wade alone led us to the Final Four, which got us the Al and into the Big East, then HE (Crean) got us those things by bringing Wade in. My guess is that if we never got into the Big East then Crean is probably still at Marquette and Marquette is nowhere near the program that it is today, even with the 2003 Final Four. Conference USA just doesn't seem to draw recruits in like the Big East does. So maybe Buzz doesn't even leave a head coaching position to become an assistant at a mid-major basketball school (what we probably would have been had the Big East taken, say, Memphis instead of Marquette).
In summary, regardless of whether you hate Crean and want to pretend that without Wade he would have never achieved anything at all (again, very debatable considering he got the Big 3, Novak before Wade was even Wade, Diener, etc...I know, I know, WADE was the reason those guys came, not Crean...I get it, which is why I'm saying this...), Crean got Marquette Wade, so whatever Wade got Marquette, Crean therefore got for Marquette.
Let's not put personal feelings in the way of giving credit where it is due.
Not sure if this was directed at me, but it shouldn't be. I just think landing wade was Crean's greatest achievement because everything else seemed to stem from that. I give Crean all the credit in the world for what he accomplished at MU and don't blame him in the least for going to Indiana.
Crean's achievements
1) Big East
2) The AL
3) Wade
4) Hiring Buzz
We can debate the order. They were all important and helped MU become a better basketball program.
Crean is gone because he started to believe that recruiting to MU was too hard. Buzz has proven that belief wrong. Long term, Buzz has used what Crean built, and improved on it. We are better off.
Quote from: ringout on February 16, 2012, 08:41:12 AM
Crean is gone because he started to believe that recruiting to MU was too hard. Buzz has proven that belief wrong. Long term, Buzz has used what Crean built, and improved on it. We are better off.
The difference I believe is that Buzz can see talent in under rated players and get them to come to MU and succeed, where Crean wanted the high rated player and failed to seal the deal so he took the easy way out.
Quote from: ringout on February 16, 2012, 08:41:12 AM
Crean's achievements
1) Big East
2) The AL
3) Wade
4) Hiring Buzz
We can debate the order. They were all important and helped MU become a better basketball program.
Crean is gone because he started to believe that recruiting to MU was too hard. Buzz has proven that belief wrong. Long term, Buzz has used what Crean built, and improved on it. We are better off.
I don't think Buzz has proven that yet.
Crean's issue was that he couldn't attract highly rated guys like Zeller to MU.
And just like Crean, Buzz has gone after after (and lost) top 25 ranked players like Gabe York to Arizona, Kris Dunn to Providence, Joe Jackson to Memphis, Tobias Harris to Tennessee, Branden Dawson to Michigan State, Mitch McGary to Michigan, BJ Young to Arkansas etc.
Buzz is getting it done the same way Crean did--second tier recruits, JUCOs and transfers (e.g. Novak, Diener, the Amigos, Jackson, Hayward for Crean; DJO, Butler, Cadougan, Blue, Wilson for Buzz) and under the radar players (Wade for Crean; Mayo, Gardner for Buzz).
I think everyone is hopeful that Buzz will turn the corner on those top 25 recruits--we're listed with a number of them for 2014 and 2015. If he can't, he may well reach the same conclusion as Crean.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 16, 2012, 09:26:58 AM
I don't think Buzz has proven that yet.
Crean's issue was that he couldn't attract highly rated guys like Zeller to MU.
And just like Crean, Buzz has gone after after (and lost) top 25 ranked players like Gabe York to Arizona, Kris Dunn to Providence, Joe Jackson to Memphis, Tobias Harris to Tennessee, Branden Dawson to Michigan State, Mitch McGary to Michigan, BJ Young to Arkansas etc.
Buzz is getting it done the same way Crean did--second tier recruits, JUCOs and transfers (e.g. Novak, Diener, the Amigos, Jackson, Hayward for Crean; DJO, Butler, Cadougan, Blue, Wilson for Buzz) and under the radar players (Wade for Crean; Mayo, Gardner for Buzz).
I think everyone is hopeful that Buzz will turn the corner on those top 25 recruits--we're listed with a number of them for 2014 and 2015. If he can't, he may well reach the same conclusion as Crean.
I would contend that Buzz is a significantly better recruiter than Crean. He consistently brings in very talented players that directly translate to production on the court.
Recruit rankings don't matter at all. Recruiting players that are going to flourish in your program is what matters.
Crean recruiting Wade is a non-starter. Plenty of teams wanted to recruit Wade but couldn't because he was a partial qualifier. He fell into Crean's lap.
Quote from: CTWarrior on February 14, 2012, 03:10:26 PM
What worries me about the UConn game is that they may very well look at it as a must win game to shore up their NCAA resume. We'll be in the same boat for all three of our remaining road games. UConn, Cincy and WV are all likely NCAA participants but none of them are locks and a win over us would be big for them and a loss cuts deeply into their margin for error.
Of couse it is a must win game for them. They need to get this one.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on February 16, 2012, 09:54:55 AM
I would contend that Buzz is a significantly better recruiter than Crean. He consistently brings in very talented players that directly translate to production on the court.
Recruit rankings don't matter at all. Recruiting players that are going to flourish in your program is what matters.
Crean recruiting Wade is a non-starter. Plenty of teams wanted to recruit Wade but couldn't because he was a partial qualifier. He fell into Crean's lap.
You can content whatever you want.
What you can't do is say that Buzz has "already proven" that he has been able to land the top-25 type players like York, Dunn, Jackson, Harris, Dawson, McGary, Young, etc.
Sorry... what are UCONN fans saying about the upcoming game? I'm kinda lost here in the "what MU fans are saying about the past."
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 16, 2012, 11:29:26 AM
You can content whatever you want.
What you can't do is say that Buzz has "already proven" that he has been able to land the top-25 type players like York, Dunn, Jackson, Harris, Dawson, McGary, Young, etc.
Not sure where anybody wrote that he has already proven to be able to land top-25 players. He said that Crean thought it was too hard to recruit at Marquette. Buzz has proven that is not true, and he is correct in saying that. Buzz has not gotten the McDonald's All American, but he has consistently gotten top-100 players in every one of his recruiting class, to go along with JUCOs who if they were ranked would also be in the top-100. That is something Crean was never able to do. His biggest problem was that he would get one great class and then follow it up with 2 straight years of all 2-star recruits. Buzz follows up top-20 recruiting classes with more top-20 recruiting classes, and always has a top-100 player in each class.
Not to mention, both Jamil and Vander were top 35 players. Not sure what the difference between a top-25 and top-35 player is. Or top-25 from top-50 or top-100. Let's be honest, it's not like the 25th ranked player is a significantly stronger player than the 26th ranked player. And rankings are incredibly inaccurate. The product on the court is consistently better now than it was with Crean. Another difference between Buzz and Crean is that Buzz's "Plan B" is a guy like Davante Gardner, who is a high-major contributor that wasn't necessarily a major recruit, while Crean's "Plan B" was a guy like Trend Blackledge, who gave you about 1 dunk and 1 rebound a game and 10 blown defensive assignments a game.
If Buzz isn't recruiting better than Crean, then he is a TON better of a coach and a TON better at developing talent, because the talent on Marquette's team is way better than what Crean typically put on the court (no doubt, there were some good seasons with Crean...the consistency was not what it is now, though). If you don't think he's a better coach and talent developer, then he must be a better recruiter. To me, he's better at both.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on February 16, 2012, 11:38:50 AM
Sorry... what are UCONN fans saying about the upcoming game? I'm kinda lost here in the "what MU fans are saying about the past."
+1000
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 16, 2012, 09:26:58 AM
I don't think Buzz has proven that yet.
Crean's issue was that he couldn't attract highly rated guys like Zeller to MU.
Buzz is getting it done the same way Crean did--second tier recruits, I think everyone is hopeful that Buzz will turn the corner on those top 25 recruits--we're listed with a number of them for 2014 and 2015. If he can't, he may well reach the same conclusion as Crean.
Buzz has had much more consistent recruiting. Crean had great years and awful years.
2nd tier recruits?? Buzz has nobody on his roster as bad as the crap that sat on the end of the bench for Crean.
Getting back to original post, does anyone else think it's kind of amazing that UConn fans are saying things like we have two guys currently better than anyone on UConn? Or saying that UConn "has a chance" to beat Marquette? UConn is still the defending national champ and a national power who consistently attracts some of the top recruits in the country and many of the guys on our roster wouldn't have gotten a sniff from UConn. Yet many would view this game as one we should win.
Well, UCONN lost 6 of their last 7 games before last night's win over DePaul...
If that was my team I wouldn't be overly confident either.
Quote from: ringout on February 16, 2012, 12:43:31 PM
Buzz has had much more consistent recruiting. Crean had great years and awful years.
2nd tier recruits?? Buzz has nobody on his roster as bad as the crap that sat on the end of the bench for Crean.
+1
I think this captures it well. Crean's best years are better than Buzz's best years recruiting, but Crean's bad years are much worse than Buzz's worst years.
No one can argue that Crean's cream of the crop players were some of the best in MU history, but we weren't very deep and Buzz has a huge edge there.
Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing i have ever read on a message board. Message boards tend to have alot of stupid things written but that could very well be the dumbest.
I will therefore attempt to list, in order, the reasons Mu was attractive/responsibilitygiven to for being in the Big East.
1-500. AL MCGUIRE...who made MU basketball and put MU into America's conscience and ever since AL even in it's down years was an NIT type program.
The Wooden of UCLA, the Smith of UNC, the kryszewski of Duke
501. Marquette's Administartion, particularly the Jesuits and former ball players that have pushed to make sure Basketball is a core part of who Mu is.
502. Bill Cords.
503. Kevin Oneill...brought Mu back into the national limelight at a point in time when MU was nearing the point of leaving Americas basketball conciousness.
504. Hank raymonds...maintaining a tradition of excellence after Al left.
505. the Milwaukee metropolitan area and the tremendous fan support that has in good times and not so good continued to make it one of the top 25 or so attendence programs in the country. And a major media market.
506. The Bradley Center...NBA venue in an NBA town also see 505 and 501.
Those are the primary reasons that MU was attractive to the GMC, C-USA, and ultimately the BIG East. If DWADE And Tommy Crean never happened Mu still would have been invited for the 506 reasons listed above. Numbnuts is somewhere in the 900's
Quote from: BrewCity on February 16, 2012, 01:46:22 PM
Well, UCONN lost 6 of their last 7 games before last night's win over DePaul...
If that was my team I wouldn't be overly confident either.
No I wouldn't, BrewCity. Although ironically you're the one that disagreed with me after the Syracuse game when I said that UConn was overrated. Your words: "I think that by mid-February, they'll start to play up to their near-limitless potential." Hopefully that day is not Saturday. :)
MU had the chance to to to the Big East back in Al's/Hank's day. They chose not to, because they thought they had a better chance to make the tourney as an independent and would get more TV exposure on WGN. Oops. Give Crean his due. He shepherded the program through its transition to the Big East and did a nice job. I agree that he had plateaued at MU and that Buzz can take us farther. But let's not ignore the good that Crean did.
Quote from: frozena pizza on February 16, 2012, 02:58:27 PM
No I wouldn't, BrewCity. Although ironically you're the one that disagreed with me after the Syracuse game when I said that UConn was overrated. Your words: "I think that by mid-February, they'll start to play up to their near-limitless potential." Hopefully that day is not Saturday. :)
I said almost the same thing about Vandy, and that did not turn out well for us. Hopefully Uconn does not continue their DePaul success against us.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 16, 2012, 11:49:45 AM
Not sure where anybody wrote that he has already proven to be able to land top-25 players. He said that Crean thought it was too hard to recruit at Marquette. Buzz has proven that is not true, and he is correct in saying that.
You're misstating the argument. Crean didn't say that it was hard to recruit to Marquette--he thought he would not be able to get the type of player (like Zeller) that can consistently take a team to the next level.
Buzz has decidedly NOT proven him wrong on that count. He's recruiting at about the same level.
All I'm suggesting here is that if you look objectively, Buzz has brought in roughly the same quality of player that Crean was been able to bring in:
Using RSCI data:
33 Robert Jackson - Crean
36 Dominic James - Crean
40 Travis Diener - Crean
40 Jamil Wilson - Buzz
47 Junior Cadougan - Buzz
48 Vander Blue - Buzz
55 Jerel McNeal - Crean
57 Steve Novak - Crean
61 Wes Matthews - Crean
67 Erik Williams - Crean/Buzz
71 Dameon Mason - Crean
73 Tyshawn Taylor - Crean
73 Jerone Maymon - Buzz
74 Jamail Jones - Buzz
81 Juan Anderson - Buzz
85 Scott Merritt - Crean
88 Nick Williams - Crean
91 Trevor Mbakwe - Crean
I'm sorry, but I don't see the evidence that constitutes "proof" that Crean was proven wrong about the type of player that will come to Marquette. Crean's point was that he couldn't get the top 25 players (like Zeller). Buzz hasn't landed 'em either.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 16, 2012, 11:49:45 AM
Buzz has not gotten the McDonald's All American, but he has consistently gotten top-100 players in every one of his recruiting class, to go along with JUCOs who if they were ranked would also be in the top-100. That is something Crean was never able to do. His biggest problem was that he would get one great class and then follow it up with 2 straight years of all 2-star recruits. Buzz follows up top-20 recruiting classes with more top-20 recruiting classes, and always has a top-100 player in each class.
On the other hand, I don't think its necessarily a bad thing to bring in a class like the Amigos and have them stay together for 4 years. Even if the best player you can get the following year is only an unranked 4-star prep.
I'm also confused over your comment about how Crean would typically follow up one good year with "2 straight years of all 2-star recruits". Specifically, which years are you referring to? I've listed the top 100 recruits, and there was at least one in 7 of 9 seasons. In the other two, the best recruit was better than a 2-star.
2000 - Merritt
2001 - Diener, Robert Jackson
2002 - Novak
2003 - Mason
2004 - none (Amoroso was a 3-star)
2005 - McNeal, James, Matthews
2006 - none (Hayward was a 4-star)
2007 - Mbakwe
2008 - Taylor, N Williams
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 16, 2012, 04:59:06 PM
You're misstating the argument. Crean didn't say that it was hard to recruit to Marquette--he thought he would not be able to get the type of player (like Zeller) that can consistently take a team to the next level.
Buzz has decidedly NOT proven him wrong on that count. He's recruiting at about the same level.
All I'm suggesting here is that if you look objectively, Buzz has brought in roughly the same quality of player that Crean was been able to bring in:
Using RSCI data:
33 Robert Jackson - Crean
36 Dominic James - Crean
40 Travis Diener - Crean
40 Jamil Wilson - Buzz
47 Junior Cadougan - Buzz
48 Vander Blue - Buzz
55 Jerel McNeal - Crean
57 Steve Novak - Crean
61 Wes Matthews - Crean
67 Erik Williams - Crean/Buzz
71 Dameon Mason - Crean
73 Tyshawn Taylor - Crean
73 Jerone Maymon - Buzz
74 Jamail Jones - Buzz
81 Juan Anderson - Buzz
85 Scott Merritt - Crean
88 Nick Williams - Crean
91 Trevor Mbakwe - Crean
I'm sorry, but I don't see the evidence that constitutes "proof" that Crean was proven wrong about the type of player that will come to Marquette. Crean's point was that he couldn't get the top 25 players (like Zeller). Buzz hasn't landed 'em either.
On the other hand, I don't think its necessarily a bad thing to bring in a class like the Amigos and have them stay together for 4 years. Even if the best player you can get the following year is only an unranked 4-star prep.
I'm also confused over your comment about how Crean would typically follow up one good year with "2 straight years of all 2-star recruits". Specifically, which years are you referring to? I've listed the top 100 recruits, and there was at least one in 7 of 9 seasons. In the other two, the best recruit was better than a 2-star.
2000 - Merritt
2001 - Diener, Robert Jackson
2002 - Novak
2003 - Mason
2004 - none (Amoroso was a 3-star)
2005 - McNeal, James, Matthews
2006 - none (Hayward was a 4-star)
2007 - Mbakwe
2008 - Taylor, N Williams
I think you're missing my point. I am arguing mainly that we have depth at Marquette that we didn't have when Crean was the coach here. You seem to obsess over recruiting rankings, which to me is pointless. It seems like you would be happy with 13 Khem Birch types who are "huge" gets that never do anything over a guy like Davante who is not highly ranked by recruiting services but is clearly a much better college basketball player than those same people projected him to be. To me, I'd rather have the better college player, whether they were ranked 1st or 361st, which is why I also exaggerated on the rankings that Crean brought in during his down years for recruiting. My bad. I won't exaggerate anymore.
Anyways, I find it hard to list guys like Maymon, Mason, etc. when pointing out who recruited what guys, because they really didn't contribute too much to the Marquette program as a whole. Somewhat the same for Robert Jackson, as I'm not sure how transfers are "handled" (do coaches begin recruiting transfers when they hear they will be transferring, or do the transfers go to the coaches and ask if there's room for them? I would guess it's the latter, but I truly don't know).
Having said that, you list 11 guys that Crean recruited in the top 100, compared to 6 by Buzz. The difference is Crean was here for 9 years, this is Buzz's 4th year. Not to mention, again, if JUCOs were ranked, there is no doubt that Fulce (and not Butler, as Fulce was supposed to be the big get, and Butler just the "tag along"), DJO, and Jae (and possibly even Buycks as he was a JUCO All-American and already a 3 star 2 years earlier when he came out of high school) would all be ranked well within the top 100 recruits. So that would give Buzz 9 or 10 in his 4 years compared to Crean's 11 in 9 years here. And then beyond that, the guys who Buzz brings in that are not ranked in the top 100 all seem to pan out much better (or will pan out much better) than the guys Crean did.
Crean's 2002 and 2003 top recruits are exactly my point. You bring in Merritt, Diener, and Novak the 3 years prior to give yourself a solid foundation to build a team around and just need some good players to make a really strong roster, and Crean couldn't do it. He gets Mason, who was a good but not great get, and can't keep him at Marquette, and then gets Amaroso, who he also cant keep at Marquette. So you basically get 2 years of nothing, because he was never able to fill those transfer spots with capable players. I believe we were the first team ever to go to the Final Four and miss the NCAA Tournament the next year (could be wrong on that). Does that ever happen with Buzz? When Williams, Smith, Mbao, or Maymonne transfer or Newbill or Roseboro don't show up does anybody ever really doubt that Buzz will fill the spot with someone just as capable as that player, if not more capable? I know I don't. With Crean you were guaranteed to get a guy like Trend who had no business playing in the Big East when those things came up. That is a huge difference between Crean and Buzz.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 16, 2012, 05:42:41 PM
... You seem to obsess over recruiting rankings, which to me is pointless. ...
Exactly.
Quote from: Canadian Dimes on February 16, 2012, 02:53:22 PM
Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing i have ever read on a message board. Message boards tend to have alot of stupid things written but that could very well be the dumbest.
I will therefore attempt to list, in order, the reasons Mu was attractive/responsibilitygiven to for being in the Big East.
1-500. AL MCGUIRE...who made MU basketball and put MU into America's conscience and ever since AL even in it's down years was an NIT type program.
The Wooden of UCLA, the Smith of UNC, the kryszewski of Duke
501. Marquette's Administartion, particularly the Jesuits and former ball players that have pushed to make sure Basketball is a core part of who Mu is.
502. Bill Cords.
503. Kevin Oneill...brought Mu back into the national limelight at a point in time when MU was nearing the point of leaving Americas basketball conciousness.
504. Hank raymonds...maintaining a tradition of excellence after Al left.
505. the Milwaukee metropolitan area and the tremendous fan support that has in good times and not so good continued to make it one of the top 25 or so attendence programs in the country. And a major media market.
506. The Bradley Center...NBA venue in an NBA town also see 505 and 501.
Those are the primary reasons that MU was attractive to the GMC, C-USA, and ultimately the BIG East. If DWADE And Tommy Crean never happened Mu still would have been invited for the 506 reasons listed above. Numbnuts is somewhere in the 900's
This might be one of the saddest posts I have read in a long time because it illustrates just how much hatred some people have. Not the Marquette University I remember.
You state in your first sentence that "Crean having
any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing" you have heard.
Any responsibility, as in he had absolutely zero impact at all. I don't think there is a reasonable personable, even his most ardent haters (other than you) that would say this. Look at the timing of events.
According to this article, the Big East had not yet contacted Marquette in September of 2003. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BS8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M0UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6590,3717250&dq=marquette+university+invited+to+big+east&hl=en
Now think about the timing, it was only 6 months earlier that Tom Crean and his Marquette basketball team made the Final Four and that fresh event was not in the minds of the Big East on expansion of teams would suggest that the Big East conference was in a cave when MU was making major college basketball news under their young coach.
Now, let's take a step back even further. Do I believe that the Big East hadn't actually contacted MU by September of 2003? Doubtful. The first rumors started in April of that year, the same month Tom Crean's Marquette basketball team made the Final Four after knocking off #1 Kentucky.
Around this same time it was widely rumored that Crean was a leading candidate at Pitt when Howland took the UCLA job. Crean ended up staying and it was reported later that these were the initial discussions of Marquette coming to the Big East.
No doubt many people, athletes, administrators paved the way to get to the Big East. MU didn't arrive on the scene in 2003, but MU's Final Four appearance in 2003 in April when these discussions started and 6 months prior to an invitation being presented to the university cannot be denied. Timing is sometimes everything. He got us Wade, he was the coach for the Final Four run, he was the coach when we got invited to the Big East 6 months later. He isn't the only reason we got to the Big East, but the team's accomplishments during that window of time made it a slam dunk. To suggest he had no responsibility makes no sense at all.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on February 16, 2012, 05:58:17 PM
Exactly.
Let's obsess about winning. Both have done some solid winning. Buzz has won more consistently, Crean has achieved the higher highs and the lower lows. Much like the recruiting comparisons between the two.
We've been blessed to have some stud coaches at MU the last fifty years.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 16, 2012, 07:17:03 PM
Let's obsess about winning. Both have done some solid winning. Buzz has won more consistently, Crean has achieved the higher highs and the lower lows. Much like the recruiting comparisons between the two.
We've been blessed to have some stud coaches at MU the last fifty years.
Good call. I believe Buzz will get us winning at the highest level and have us in the top 20 every single year. We will see and I hope I am right.
I hear this Drummond guy is big...
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 16, 2012, 07:15:14 PM
This might be one of the saddest posts I have read in a long time because it illustrates just how much hatred some people have. Not the Marquette University I remember.
You state in your first sentence that "Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing" you have heard.
Any responsibility, as in he had absolutely zero impact at all. I don't think there is a reasonable personable, even his most ardent haters (other than you) that would say this. Look at the timing of events.
According to this article, the Big East had not yet contacted Marquette in September of 2003. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BS8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M0UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6590,3717250&dq=marquette+university+invited+to+big+east&hl=en
Now think about the timing, it was only 6 months earlier that Tom Crean and his Marquette basketball team made the Final Four and that fresh event was not in the minds of the Big East on expansion of teams would suggest that the Big East conference was in a cave when MU was making major college basketball news under their young coach.
Now, let's take a step back even further. Do I believe that the Big East hadn't actually contacted MU by September of 2003? Doubtful. The first rumors started in April of that year, the same month Tom Crean's Marquette basketball team made the Final Four after knocking off #1 Kentucky.
Around this same time it was widely rumored that Crean was a leading candidate at Pitt when Howland took the UCLA job. Crean ended up staying and it was reported later that these were the initial discussions of Marquette coming to the Big East.
No doubt many people, athletes, administrators paved the way to get to the Big East. MU didn't arrive on the scene in 2003, but MU's Final Four appearance in 2003 in April when these discussions started and 6 months prior to an invitation being presented to the university cannot be denied. Timing is sometimes everything. He got us Wade, he was the coach for the Final Four run, he was the coach when we got invited to the Big East 6 months later. He isn't the only reason we got to the Big East, but the team's accomplishments during that window of time made it a slam dunk. To suggest he had no responsibility makes no sense at all.
I wasn't privy to any of the discussions the Big East AD's had when they decided to add MU, Cincy, Louisville and DePaul, but those programs have a lot in common - solid basketball histories/tradition, good size urban markets, arenas with decent seating capacities. Two were basketball only, two had football. So all were good fits.
How much did our two most recent seasons (2 NCAA appearances and a FF) factor in? Well, DePaul was 25-32 with one 1st round NIT loss over that period and it didn't deter their acceptance.
Even though my opinion of TC the person is low, I'm happy as a clam he got Wade and took us to the FF. He deserves credit for both. That said, I don't see any evidence that he (or Dave Leito or whoever was coaching DePaul at the time) is responsible for the invitation.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 16, 2012, 07:17:03 PM
Let's obsess about winning. Both have done some solid winning. Buzz has won more consistently, Crean has achieved the higher highs and the lower lows. Much like the recruiting comparisons between the two.
We've been blessed to have some stud coaches at MU the last fifty years.
This is your finest post to date.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 16, 2012, 07:17:03 PM
Let's obsess about winning.
With you 100%. Let's put the IU coach in our collective rear view mirrors and worry about our present and future Warriors. I'll drop him from any and all discussions if you will. What do you say?
Quote from: wadesworld on February 16, 2012, 05:42:41 PM
I think you're missing my point. I am arguing mainly that we have depth at Marquette that we didn't have when Crean was the coach here. You seem to obsess over recruiting rankings, which to me is pointless. It seems like you would be happy with 13 Khem Birch types who are "huge" gets that never do anything over a guy like Davante who is not highly ranked by recruiting services but is clearly a much better college basketball player than those same people projected him to be. To me, I'd rather have the better college player, whether they were ranked 1st or 361st, which is why I also exaggerated on the rankings that Crean brought in during his down years for recruiting. My bad. I won't exaggerate anymore.
Anyways, I find it hard to list guys like Maymon, Mason, etc. when pointing out who recruited what guys, because they really didn't contribute too much to the Marquette program as a whole. Somewhat the same for Robert Jackson, as I'm not sure how transfers are "handled" (do coaches begin recruiting transfers when they hear they will be transferring, or do the transfers go to the coaches and ask if there's room for them? I would guess it's the latter, but I truly don't know).
Having said that, you list 11 guys that Crean recruited in the top 100, compared to 6 by Buzz. The difference is Crean was here for 9 years, this is Buzz's 4th year. Not to mention, again, if JUCOs were ranked, there is no doubt that Fulce (and not Butler, as Fulce was supposed to be the big get, and Butler just the "tag along"), DJO, and Jae (and possibly even Buycks as he was a JUCO All-American and already a 3 star 2 years earlier when he came out of high school) would all be ranked well within the top 100 recruits. So that would give Buzz 9 or 10 in his 4 years compared to Crean's 11 in 9 years here. And then beyond that, the guys who Buzz brings in that are not ranked in the top 100 all seem to pan out much better (or will pan out much better) than the guys Crean did.
Crean's 2002 and 2003 top recruits are exactly my point. You bring in Merritt, Diener, and Novak the 3 years prior to give yourself a solid foundation to build a team around and just need some good players to make a really strong roster, and Crean couldn't do it. He gets Mason, who was a good but not great get, and can't keep him at Marquette, and then gets Amaroso, who he also cant keep at Marquette. So you basically get 2 years of nothing, because he was never able to fill those transfer spots with capable players. I believe we were the first team ever to go to the Final Four and miss the NCAA Tournament the next year (could be wrong on that). Does that ever happen with Buzz? When Williams, Smith, Mbao, or Maymonne transfer or Newbill or Roseboro don't show up does anybody ever really doubt that Buzz will fill the spot with someone just as capable as that player, if not more capable? I know I don't. With Crean you were guaranteed to get a guy like Trend who had no business playing in the Big East when those things came up. That is a huge difference between Crean and Buzz.
What depth? We're playing essentially six or seven deep right now.
For all your ranting about how terrible Trend Blackledge was, his stats are comparable to what Juan Anderson, Jamail Jones and Derrick Wilson are putting up this year. http://bit.ly/yi6Gza
Saying that you don't care about rankings reminds me of the days when Mike Deane arguing the same, suggesting that unranked David Diggs was a poor-man's 9th ranked Quentin Richardson. Rankings don't matter, right?
Actually, you might get by for a few years if a
Jarrod Lovette Davante Gardner falls in your lap. But eventually those unranked players will live up to (or down to) their rank.
Finally, I'm not sure the number of recruits is a valid argument in this discussion. Not much difference in my mind between having Steve Novak for a 4 year stretch versus Jerone Maymon for one year, replaced by Jae Crowder for the next 2, followed by Steve Taylor for a 4th year. Sure, Buzz recruited MORE players over that four year period. But that is partly because he had to.
As I said at the outset, I hope Buzz can turn the corner and get some of those elite-level players he's going after--guys like Kevon Looney or Tyus Jones. But he hasn't done it yet.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 16, 2012, 11:52:14 PM
What depth? We're playing essentially six or seven deep right now.
For all your ranting about how terrible Trend Blackledge was, his stats are comparable to what Juan Anderson, Jamail Jones and Derrick Wilson are putting up this year. http://bit.ly/yi6Gza
Saying that you don't care about rankings reminds me of the days when Mike Deane arguing the same, suggesting that unranked David Diggs was a poor-man's 9th ranked Quentin Richardson. Rankings don't matter, right?
Actually, you might get by for a few years if a Jarrod Lovette Davante Gardner falls in your lap. But eventually those unranked players will live up to (or down to) their rank.
Finally, I'm not sure the number of recruits is a valid argument in this discussion. Not much difference in my mind between having Steve Novak for a 4 year stretch versus Jerone Maymon for one year, replaced by Jae Crowder for the next 2, followed by Steve Taylor for a 4th year. Sure, Buzz recruited MORE players over that four year period. But that is partly because he had to.
As I said at the outset, I hope Buzz can turn the corner and get some of those elite-level players he's going after--guys like Kevon Looney or Tyus Jones. But he hasn't done it yet.
We are playing 7-8 right now with 2 big men hurt and only 11 scholarship players. The fact that when our starting point guard is suspended for one of our biggest games of the year and our freshman backup point guard is making his first start and steps up and helps us get our biggest road victory over a top-15 opponent shows that while Derrick may not get much playing time, he is more than capable of stepping in when needed. The same goes for Jamail Jones, as he has since stepped up in Gardner's absence and given us some very productive minutes. On an undersized team, we have lost our 2 biggest guys for a significant amount of time and yet we are still ranked 12th in the country and tied for 2nd in the Big East conference. Our backup 3/4 is now our starting 5 because our starting and backup 5 are out, yet we have won 9 out of 10, all conference games. Having depth does not mean playing 10 guys for 20 minutes each. Having depth means having 10 guys who, although not all of them will see significant minutes, can hold their own when called upon, which everyone on Marquette besides MAYBE Juan, who has missed important time as a freshman due to injury and suspension, has proven they can do. For the first time in a very long time, there are 10 guys on this team the belong in the Big East. If you want to argue that we have no depth despite winning at Wisconsin without Cadougan and continuing to win without both OTule and Gardner, then go right ahead, but I think you're crazy if you truly believe that. You're trying to use the fact that we're playing 7 or 8 guys right now on a team with 9 healthy guys to show that we only play 7 or 8 guys so we can't be deep, when that is 78%-89% of our healthy roster. But whatever fits your agenda.
Trend was a senior. Juan and Derrick are freshman, apples to oranges. Derrick definitely brings more to the table than Trend ever did even as a senior (defense and doesn't turn the ball over). Jamail has been somewhat of a disappointment, but he is still a sophomore with time to grow and has definitely shown some flashes of what his potential could be over the past few games since he has been forced into action. By the time they are done with their careers, all 3 of those guys will have provided much more to Marquette's basketball program than Trend ever came close to. You know it, but it doesn't fit your agenda, so let's pretend Trend was as effective as...a couple of freshman. Congratulations.
No, rankings don't matter. Not to me, and I would hope not to Buzz. If a kid can play and fits the program, then I would hope Buzz would go out and get him regardless of if he is ranked in the top 100 or not. If he's ranked 1st in the country, that's great too. Did it matter that Wes Matthews wasn't drafted 1st overall? Can he not have success in the NBA because he wasn't a can't-miss prospect out of college? I think if you ask anybody in the Blazers or Jazz organization they would agree that he has been a good player for him and they'd rather have him over some guy who was drafted 2nd but was a bust. Maybe I'm wrong about that. Same goes for recruiting rankings out of high school, in my opinion.
So far the guys Buzz has recruited have either been highly rated or have exceeded their rating. Until Buzz's unranked players "live down to their ranking" (again, rankings mean nothing, so I'm not sure why you keep bringing this up...rankings do not make a player good or bad, a player's abilities do), then I am going to go ahead and continue to think rankings mean nothing and trust that Buzz will continue to bring in the depth that Crean wasn't able to do consistently.
And once again, yes Buzz has had to replace high-major players with high-major players because some have transferred out or not shown up. And therein lies a major difference between Buzz's recruiting and Crean's recruiting. Crean also had guys transfer out, but unlike Buzz, he never replaced them with high-major players. Which is where the biggest holes in his recruiting came from. So I guess if you are saying Buzz has more top-100 recruits because he needs to because guys transfer out so he has more opportunities to recruit players, Crean had guys transfer out as well. And if you're arguing that Buzz has more top-100 guys because his are here for a shorter amount of time, that's not true either. Jackson was here for 1 year, Mason for 2 years, Mbakwe 1 year, Taylor and Williams 0 years. Maymon and E Will transferred out for Buzz. So I'm not sure what direction you are going in, as both guys had transfers, both in and out (Jamil will be here and playing for 3 years). Buzz fills the exiting transfers with much better talent than Crean did. If you're saying you'd rather have a guy who stays 4 years like Novak, me too, but you can't compare that situation to Maymon. That's apples to oranges and you know that. Not every Buzz recruit transfers out, and not ever Crean recruit stayed for 4 years. If you want to compare 4 year players (Novak), then compare 4 year players (or, since Buzz needed to balance the roster and we have no seniors who will have been here for 4 years, to guys who most likely will be here for 4 years, like Junior and Vander). If you want to compare transfers and how those were filled (Maymon), then compare transfers (Mason or Amo for Crean).
Now I'm fairly certain this argument will continue to go in circles. You believe Crean recruits just as good or better than Buzz, and I believe that not only do the rankings of the players Buzz recruits prove that to be wrong (I get it, Crean recruited more top 100 players, but he also had 5 extra years to do so and if you include the JUCOs Buzz has gotten the numbers would be almost the exact same), but the guys that weren't ranked highly have been better and developed better for Buzz than they did for Crean. So it's been a fun argument, but you do far too many apples-to-oranges comparisons and rely on recruiting rankings as the marking of a good college basketball player/recruit far too much, which tells me everything I need to know, as recruiting rankings are as far away from a perfect science as you can get, and truthfully mean very, very little in terms of how a player will turn out at the college level.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 16, 2012, 11:52:14 PM
What depth? We're playing essentially six or seven deep right now.
For all your ranting about how terrible Trend Blackledge was, his stats are comparable to what Juan Anderson, Jamail Jones and Derrick Wilson are putting up this year.
This is where your credibility in the argument is lost.
1. We have two big men in street clothes and still second in the Big East, big testament to our depth.
2. Freshman Wilson has made more impact this season thus far than Trend ever had. Jones and Juan aren't far behind.
wadesworld wins.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 16, 2012, 02:19:21 PM
+1
I think this captures it well. Crean's best years are better than Buzz's best years recruiting, but Crean's bad years are much worse than Buzz's worst years.
No one can argue that Crean's cream of the crop players were some of the best in MU history, but we weren't very deep and Buzz has a huge edge there.
Not exactly where I was going, but I would expect HoopaChic to twist my words.
It may be that Crean's best year (3 Amigos?) is better, but Buzz rosters are stronger (top player to the end of the bench) and more consistent. This is the reason his teams perform better.
Quote from: ringout on February 17, 2012, 08:16:42 AM
Not exactly where I was going, but I would expect HoopaChic to twist my words.
It may be that Crean's best year (3 Amigos?) is better, but Buzz rosters are stronger (top player to the end of the bench) and more consistent. This is the reason his teams perform better.
I don't think he meant to knock Buzz or praise Crean. I agree 100% with what he said. Up to now, Crean's best recruiting class was better than Buzz's best recruiting class. Crean's best year was also better than Buzz's best year (a Final Four compared to a Sweet Sixteen). Buzz is being more consistent and seems to be moving the program towards a consistent top 15-20 program, which Crean never did. The consistency is there with Buzz, but the BIG TIME results haven't been yet.
Quote from: ringout on February 17, 2012, 08:16:42 AM
Not exactly where I was going, but I would expect HoopaChic to twist my words.
It may be that Crean's best year (3 Amigos?) is better, but Buzz rosters are stronger (top player to the end of the bench) and more consistent. This is the reason his teams perform better.
I'm confused. I thought hoopaloop shared similar thoughts in nearly all regards to chico's. Wasn't it chico's that said you cannot judge a coach until after 5 years of results? We have only 3 full years to go on.
The comparisons being used are a 10 year run to a 3 year run. If you used three years as a comparative barometer, Buzz would be favorably compared to Crean in both recruiting classes and best year.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 16, 2012, 07:15:14 PM
This might be one of the saddest posts I have read in a long time because it illustrates just how much hatred some people have. Not the Marquette University I remember.
You state in your first sentence that "Crean having any responsibility for "leading" Mu into the Big East is probably the stupidest thing" you have heard.
Any responsibility, as in he had absolutely zero impact at all. I don't think there is a reasonable personable, even his most ardent haters (other than you) that would say this. Look at the timing of events.
According to this article, the Big East had not yet contacted Marquette in September of 2003. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=BS8jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M0UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6590,3717250&dq=marquette+university+invited+to+big+east&hl=en
Now think about the timing, it was only 6 months earlier that Tom Crean and his Marquette basketball team made the Final Four and that fresh event was not in the minds of the Big East on expansion of teams would suggest that the Big East conference was in a cave when MU was making major college basketball news under their young coach.
Now, let's take a step back even further. Do I believe that the Big East hadn't actually contacted MU by September of 2003? Doubtful. The first rumors started in April of that year, the same month Tom Crean's Marquette basketball team made the Final Four after knocking off #1 Kentucky.
Around this same time it was widely rumored that Crean was a leading candidate at Pitt when Howland took the UCLA job. Crean ended up staying and it was reported later that these were the initial discussions of Marquette coming to the Big East.
No doubt many people, athletes, administrators paved the way to get to the Big East. MU didn't arrive on the scene in 2003, but MU's Final Four appearance in 2003 in April when these discussions started and 6 months prior to an invitation being presented to the university cannot be denied. Timing is sometimes everything. He got us Wade, he was the coach for the Final Four run, he was the coach when we got invited to the Big East 6 months later. He isn't the only reason we got to the Big East, but the team's accomplishments during that window of time made it a slam dunk. To suggest he had no responsibility makes no sense at all.
That most might be dumber than ur last....and why would the Big east contact MU prior to 2003? That is as intelligent as saying the Big 12 had not contacted West virginia pror to 2008!?? really really dumb.
Also others using the deapul analogy is dead on!! I typically use it as well but did not in this case because people always stae, "well depaul go in because of the chicago media market" .
Crean deserves as much credit for Mu being invited as Dave Leitao deserves for Depaul getting invited. I will say it again. If Crean and DWade never happened MU is still invited. period.
Just becuase u and chico agree does not mean you are not dead wrong, dead wrong.
you now may resume your love for Tom Crean and giving him credit for every thing good in the world.
HOW IS THIS FOR TIMING!!!! :D :D
http://www.foxsportswisconsin.com/pages/listgallery?gid=16724&gf=542
expect to see comments from Chicos and Hoopaloop taking the writer to task for "obviously" over looking Tommy NAismith.
Imagine that . . . another Buzz v. Crean thread. Any chance anyone has some insight on "what UCONN fans are saying about the upcoming MU game"? You know, the title of this thread.
Quote from: copious1218 on February 17, 2012, 10:29:36 AM
Imagine that . . . another Buzz v. Crean thread. Any chance anyone has some insight on "what UCONN fans are saying about the upcoming MU game"? You know, the title of this thread.
You can probably find it on their board, if you like.
Quote from: PTM on February 17, 2012, 07:15:28 AM
This is where your credibility in the argument is lost.
1. We have two big men in street clothes and still second in the Big East, big testament to our depth.
Its not not a testament of
depth when the response to losing players to injuries is to shorten the rotation and play fewer guys more minutes each.
Our continued winning is a testament to the resiliency of the core rotation of Crowder, Blue, JWilson, Cadougan, DJO and Mayo--not because we were lucky enough to have Anderson, DWison or Jones to pick up Otule's and Gardner's 38 mpg off the bench.
In fact, it may surprise you to learn that Anderson, Wilson, and Jones have actually seen their average MPG
decline since Otule and Gardner became injured.
I know this fact throws a monkey wrench into the oft-stated notion that only through the increased contribution from guys like Anderson, Jones and Wilson have we been able to weather the loss of two key players.
Quote from: PTM on February 17, 2012, 07:15:28 AM
2. Freshman Wilson has made more impact this season thus far than Trend ever had. Jones and Juan aren't far behind.
I know how much you want to believe this. Trust me, I do. But your wish does not fit with reality. When you actually comparing first year stats, Wilson is having a nearly identical impact as Trend.
MPG:
Trend: 6.4 Wilson: 10.0
PPG:
Trend: 1.7 Wilson 0.8
RPG:
Trend: 1.4 Wilson 1.2
APG:
Trend 0.5 Wilson 0.7
BPG
Trend 0.4 Wilson 0.04
APG
Trend 0.3 Wilson 0.6
ToPG:
Trend 0.5 Wilson 0.3
Fouls per game
Trend: 0.6 Wilson 1.8
And lets be clear about something--I'm not arguing that Blackledge was superior to Jones, Anderson and Wilson. I'm willing to admit that he was the last man on the depth chart. At the same time, you can't make the claim that the end of our bench is having having any greater impact than Blackledge did.
Quote from: MUMac on February 17, 2012, 10:36:23 AM
You can probably find it on their board, if you like.
I'm sure I could. The point was simply that it would be nice if I could also find it in a thread on MUScoop entitled "What UCONN fans are saying about the upcoming MU game."
But I'm sure you already knew what my point was.
Quote from: copious1218 on February 17, 2012, 10:53:17 AM
I'm sure I could. The point was simply that it would be nice if I could also find it in a thread on MUScoop entitled "What UCONN fans are saying about the upcoming MU game."
But I'm sure you already knew what my point was.
Yes, your point was to complain about a thread changing.
Like that's never happenned before. It was a nuanced, change, though, as the comments in the OP from the UCONN fans were directly attributed to the coaching criticism of Buzz.
I didn't see you add anything to the original topic, yet took it off in another direction again. See the irony there?
A lot of us popped in to see what UCONN fans were saying about the game. Tired of the Buzz-Crean discussions ,as if that's all some people know what to talk about. This discussion has gone on AD Nauseum.
Quote from: MUMac on February 17, 2012, 10:58:51 AM
I didn't see you add anything to the original topic, yet took it off in another direction again. See the irony there?
I do. And I will attempt to practice what I am preaching by trying to steer the topic back. Here is a link: http://the-boneyard.com/threads/how-big-is-our-next-game.13695/ (http://the-boneyard.com/threads/how-big-is-our-next-game.13695/)
It appears after the Depaul game their fans are turning slightly more cautiously optimistic about this game than they were on Monday.
If the team plays anything like their fans feel, it also appears many posters here are right and this is pretty close to a "must-win" for them.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 17, 2012, 10:50:31 AM
Its not not a testament of depth when the response to losing players to injuries is to shorten the rotation and play fewer guys more minutes each.
Our continued winning is a testament to the resiliency of the core rotation of Crowder, Blue, JWilson, Cadougan, DJO and Mayo--not because we were lucky enough to have Anderson, DWison or Jones to pick up Otule's and Gardner's 38 mpg off the bench.
In fact, it may surprise you to learn that Anderson, Wilson, and Jones have actually seen their average MPG decline since Otule and Gardner became injured.
I know this fact throws a monkey wrench into the oft-stated notion that only through the increased contribution from guys like Anderson, Jones and Wilson have we been able to weather the loss of two key players.
I know how much you want to believe this. Trust me, I do. But your wish does not fit with reality. When you actually comparing first year stats, Wilson is having a nearly identical impact as Trend.
MPG:
Trend: 6.4 Wilson: 10.0
PPG:
Trend: 1.7 Wilson 0.8
RPG:
Trend: 1.4 Wilson 1.2
APG:
Trend 0.5 Wilson 0.7
BPG
Trend 0.4 Wilson 0.04
APG
Trend 0.3 Wilson 0.6
ToPG:
Trend 0.5 Wilson 0.3
Fouls per game
Trend: 0.6 Wilson 1.8
And lets be clear about something--I'm not arguing that Blackledge was superior to Jones, Anderson and Wilson. I'm willing to admit that he was the last man on the depth chart. At the same time, you can't make the claim that the end of our bench is having having any greater impact than Blackledge did.
So their minutes have declined, but their production hasn't. 99% of Marquette fans thought Jamail Jones was a complete waste (including me) up utnil Gardner got injured. Since then, he has stepped up and provided some decent production for us. As a sophomore, there is definitely hope that he can contribute as a junior and senior. Once again, Juan was hurt at the start of the season. That is easily the most important time for a freshman. You get game experience that becomes very valuable against teams that you aren't in over your head against. Juan's opportunity to gain that experience became limited. Keep ignoring that Derrick Wilson stepped up huge and shut down a Preseason All American in one of the most difficult buildings to win when our starting junior point guard was suspended for the game. Did Trend ever contribute to a win? I can't recall a time he did. Remember with Crean when Travis Diener went down with an injury and we had no DEPTH so we had to have our CENTER, Markus Jackson, play point guard? What a mess that was. And again, when Crean had guys transfer out (Mason, Amo, Bradley, etc.) he brought guys like Trend in (as a junior...not a freshman) who belonged nowhere near the Big East. When guys don't show up or transfer (Nick Williams, Tyshawn Taylor, Mbakwe, Christopherson, etc.) Crean brought transfers in like DJO, Butler, Crowder to fill their spots, guys who go to the NBA, not average 1.7 points and 1.4 rebounds per game. But ignore that one too.
And once again, you love comparing apples to oranges. Trend was a JUNIOR. Derrick Wilson is a FRESHMAN. There is a HUGE difference there. If you want to go purely on statistics then good for you. The statistics are close. If you think that Trend had as big of an influence on games that Derrick Wilson does, then you either don't watch the games or know nothing about basketball. In fact, the fact that you are trying to prove Trend was as good or had as much of an impact on Marquette's seasons as Derrick Wilson is having tells me you know nothing about basketball. It's not even close. Wilson comes in and harasses other team's point guards on defense while handling the ball and never turning it over. Does he make plays and score a ton of points? No. But he knows his role is to play defense first and then not turn the ball over second, and he does that. Trend was good for one highlight dunk and then about 8 blown defensive assignments and nothing more.
If you want to continue your apples to oranges comparisons I think anybody can play that game. We could always compare Jae Crowder's first year in the program (Buzz's recruit - junior year) to Patrick Hazel's first year in the program (Crean's recruit - freshman year) and I could say "See! Buzz has more depth than Crean!" But what's the point? That comparison is a complete joke of a comparison and I know it. You should probably realize comparing Derrick Wilson to Trend Blackledge is a joke too, although they are similar so you are proving my point...the juniors on Crean's teams provided less than the freshmen on Buzz's teams.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 17, 2012, 10:50:31 AM
Its not not a testament of depth when the response to losing players to injuries is to shorten the rotation and play fewer guys more minutes each.
Our continued winning is a testament to the resiliency of the core rotation of Crowder, Blue, JWilson, Cadougan, DJO and Mayo--not because we were lucky enough to have Anderson, DWison or Jones to pick up Otule's and Gardner's 38 mpg off the bench.
In fact, it may surprise you to learn that Anderson, Wilson, and Jones have actually seen their average MPG decline since Otule and Gardner became injured.
I know this fact throws a monkey wrench into the oft-stated notion that only through the increased contribution from guys like Anderson, Jones and Wilson have we been able to weather the loss of two key players.
I know how much you want to believe this. Trust me, I do. But your wish does not fit with reality. When you actually comparing first year stats, Wilson is having a nearly identical impact as Trend.
MPG:
Trend: 6.4 Wilson: 10.0
PPG:
Trend: 1.7 Wilson 0.8
RPG:
Trend: 1.4 Wilson 1.2
APG:
Trend 0.5 Wilson 0.7
BPG
Trend 0.4 Wilson 0.04
APG
Trend 0.3 Wilson 0.6
ToPG:
Trend 0.5 Wilson 0.3
Fouls per game
Trend: 0.6 Wilson 1.8
And lets be clear about something--I'm not arguing that Blackledge was superior to Jones, Anderson and Wilson. I'm willing to admit that he was the last man on the depth chart. At the same time, you can't make the claim that the end of our bench is having having any greater impact than Blackledge did.
Are you mu84's niece?
Quote from: copious1218 on February 17, 2012, 11:11:24 AM
I do. And I will attempt to practice what I am preaching by trying to steer the topic back. Here is a link: http://the-boneyard.com/threads/how-big-is-our-next-game.13695/ (http://the-boneyard.com/threads/how-big-is-our-next-game.13695/)
;D
It will be interesting to see if their fans show up tomorrow. And, how loud they will be.
Tough coming off of a National Championship year to fall back to the middle of the pack. Especially when originally picked to be with Cuse atop the conference.
Hopefully MU can turn them over - they have typically been prone to that. It seems the d, as of late, is what jump starts the o.
The Equalizer: your post have got to be some of the dumbest I've read on this board in some time. There is not even a question as to who has a deeper team, its Buzz. Bringing up Trend's stats compared to D. Wilson's does nothing to solve the argument, the argument is won because the players that Buzz has make each other better in PRACTICE everyday. That is where you want your best competition to occur. Every guy on our roster can ball and they bring the best out of each other which is what you want. There is no way your going to tell me that Trend or Jamil Lott was making Ous better, however Jamail and Juan are absolutly making Jamil better and they are all out of position.
This roster is extremly deep and maybe you don't see it on game day, but if you knew what you were taling about you would not have questioned it in the first place. We are ranked 12th right not because of how we practice and the way our players battle each other day in day out. Creans roster's fell off after 7 guys, that doesn't happen with a Buzz team.
Any interview you see with the players some reported will ask "wow you guys really had to fight and claw to get back into that game, how did you do it" the answer with every player is "thats just the way we practice"
Quote from: hairyworthen on February 17, 2012, 11:29:24 AM
Are you mu84's niece?
Pay the man, Shirley. Hoop will be happy to have him/her back.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 11:18:48 AM
So their minutes have declined, but their production hasn't. 99% of Marquette fans thought Jamail Jones was a complete waste (including me) up utnil Gardner got injured. Since then, he has stepped up and provided some decent production for us. As a sophomore, there is definitely hope that he can contribute as a junior and senior. Once again, Juan was hurt at the start of the season. That is easily the most important time for a freshman. You get game experience that becomes very valuable against teams that you aren't in over your head against. Juan's opportunity to gain that experience became limited. Keep ignoring that Derrick Wilson stepped up huge and shut down a Preseason All American in one of the most difficult buildings to win when our starting junior point guard was suspended for the game. Did Trend ever contribute to a win? I can't recall a time he did. Remember with Crean when Travis Diener went down with an injury and we had no DEPTH so we had to have our CENTER, Markus Jackson, play point guard? What a mess that was. And again, when Crean had guys transfer out (Mason, Amo, Bradley, etc.) he brought guys like Trend in (as a junior...not a freshman) who belonged nowhere near the Big East. When guys don't show up or transfer (Nick Williams, Tyshawn Taylor, Mbakwe, Christopherson, etc.) Crean brought transfers in like DJO, Butler, Crowder to fill their spots, guys who go to the NBA, not average 1.7 points and 1.4 rebounds per game. But ignore that one too.
I sure hope Buzz himself isn't as thin skinned as you are. It's not a criticism of him to say that he's recruiting is roughly the same level as Crean, but you're defending like there's no tomorrow. Your need to ensure that Buzz is never equated to Crean borders on the pathological.
For example, I think you know damn well that Crean didn't backfill Mason, Amo or Bradley with Trend. You know how easily it would be for someone to find the dates, post the sequence of LOIs signed and show that you were wrong. I suspect if I gave you more facts, you'd just shift to another irrelevancy--Buzz has nicer suits, Buzz hydrates himself more during games, Buzz sweats more proving how much he cares. Whatever.
If you wanted to join into an honest debate, you'd admit that when guys like Mason, Amo and Bradley left, Crean
first brought in guys like Matthews, James, McNeal and Hayward to replace them--and only
then did he bring in Trend because he had a 13th scholarship to fill.
If you want to try once again to rebut me and suggest that Trend represented the typical level of recruit for Crean, go right ahead. I know the truth. I suspect you do as well.
If, on the other hand, you wanted to make the fundamentally honest statement that both coaches made some recruiting mistakes, and both subsequently replaced them with better players--I'd be happy to agree with you on that statement.
Look, my comments started when I pointed out that Buzz has not proven yet that he can recruit better players than Crean was able to recruit. Both coach's recruits match up pretty much the same--both rating and actual performance--from top to bottom.
You've pulled every argument in the book to avoid the obvious: The original statement was absolutely correct. Buzz hasn't been able to land Quincy Miller or Kris Dunn or Mitch McGary, or Branden Dawsen, or Tobias Harris or Joe Jackson, etc.
I don't understand your need to pretend those aren't great players, as if one has to defend Buzz from the mere observation that he tried but didn't land them.
I truly hope that Buzz can pull in a top 10 guy. I really do. But my need to defend Buzz at all costs isn't going to get me to pretend alongside you that some guy ranked outside the top 100 is really just as good as Kevon Looney or Tyus Jones.
Quote from: cbowe3 on February 17, 2012, 11:46:14 AM
The Equalizer: your post have got to be some of the dumbest I've read on this board in some time. There is not even a question as to who has a deeper team, its Buzz. Bringing up Trend's stats compared to D. Wilson's does nothing to solve the argument, the argument is won because the players that Buzz has make each other better in PRACTICE everyday.
That is where you want your best competition to occur. Every guy on our roster can ball and they bring the best out of each other which is what you want. There is no way your going to tell me that Trend or Jamil Lott was making Ous better, however Jamail and Juan are absolutly making Jamil better and they are all out of position.
This roster is extremly deep and maybe you don't see it on game day, but if you knew what you were taling about you would not have questioned it in the first place. We are ranked 12th right not because of how we practice and the way our players battle each other day in day out. Creans roster's fell off after 7 guys, that doesn't happen with a Buzz team.
Any interview you see with the players some reported will ask "wow you guys really had to fight and claw to get back into that game, how did you do it" the answer with every player is "thats just the way we practice"
Well let's compare 2008 with 2012, since both years we had two players who were injured: Mbakwe and Christopherson in 2008; Gardner and Otule in 2012
Oh, and please, don't start with the "Not fair, Gardner and Otule were more important." I don't dispute that.
I dispute the argument that we had more depth once they became injured:
2008 MPG/2012 MPG
1. Dominc James 30.2 / DJO 32.4
2. Jerel McNeal 30.2 / Jae Crowder 31.8
3. Wesley Matthews 28.9 / Junior Cadougan 28.1
4. Lazar Hayward 25.4 / Vander Blue 25.6
5. Ousmane Barro 19.9 / Jamil Wilson 22.2
6. David Cubillan 17.6 / Todd Mayo 20.9
7. Dan Fitzgerald 14.3 / Derick Wilson / 10.0I
8. Maurice Acker 13.3 / Jamail Jones 9.3
9. Dwight Burke 11.8 / Juan Anderson 4.8
10 Lawrence Blackledge 6.7 / ---
11. Patrick Hazel 3.4 / ---
I'm sorry, but I don't see where you can make the argument that we are deeper now then we were in 2008. The facts just don't support it.
I don't get your comment about practice is where depth is demonstrated, since I'm pretty sure the 2008 team practiced as well--using the same players that appeared in the games.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 17, 2012, 01:09:31 PM
I sure hope Buzz himself isn't as thin skinned as you are. It's not a criticism of him to say that he's recruiting is roughly the same level as Crean, but you're defending like there's no tomorrow. Your need to ensure that Buzz is never equated to Crean borders on the pathological.
For example, I think you know damn well that Crean didn't backfill Mason, Amo or Bradley with Trend. You know how easily it would be for someone to find the dates, post the sequence of LOIs signed and show that you were wrong. I suspect if I gave you more facts, you'd just shift to another irrelevancy--Buzz has nicer suits, Buzz hydrates himself more during games, Buzz sweats more proving how much he cares. Whatever.
If you wanted to join into an honest debate, you'd admit that when guys like Mason, Amo and Bradley left, Crean first brought in guys like Matthews, James, McNeal and Hayward to replace them--and only then did he bring in Trend because he had a 13th scholarship to fill.
If you want to try once again to rebut me and suggest that Trend represented the typical level of recruit for Crean, go right ahead. I know the truth. I suspect you do as well.
If, on the other hand, you wanted to make the fundamentally honest statement that both coaches made some recruiting mistakes, and both subsequently replaced them with better players--I'd be happy to agree with you on that statement.
Look, my comments started when I pointed out that Buzz has not proven yet that he can recruit better players than Crean was able to recruit. Both coach's recruits match up pretty much the same--both rating and actual performance--from top to bottom.
You've pulled every argument in the book to avoid the obvious: The original statement was absolutely correct. Buzz hasn't been able to land Quincy Miller or Kris Dunn or Mitch McGary, or Branden Dawsen, or Tobias Harris or Joe Jackson, etc.
I don't understand your need to pretend those aren't great players, as if one has to defend Buzz from the mere observation that he tried but didn't land them.
I truly hope that Buzz can pull in a top 10 guy. I really do. But my need to defend Buzz at all costs isn't going to get me to pretend alongside you that some guy ranked outside the top 100 is really just as good as Kevon Looney or Tyus Jones.
::). Go look at my post history. I defend Crean when people make ridiculous comments about Crean and his (lack of) influence on Marquette. I think Crean was a slimeball, self-centered prick, but that does not mean I don't appreciate what he brought to the program and the results he posted. In no way am I a blind appologist for Buzz Williams, either. You can go back further into my post history to see evidence of that. I have complained about his use of offense-defense substitutions for entire games, the lack of continuity due to transfers, etc. but Buzz has, in my opinion, improved immensely in every aspect of a high-major division 1 basketball coach, so I am finding less and less reasons to complain about Buzz and the things he does.
To me, depth does not have to do with minutes played in games. It has to do with the basketball ability of every player on the team. Just because a team like maybe Southeast Missouri State or something plays a bunch of guys all for a good amount of minutes does not mean they have a roster deep on talent. Just because a guy like JP Tokoto is going to be at UNC next year and may only see 5 mpg in important games does not mean he is not a talented basketball player. You seem to think that is what it suggests. For me, I watch the games and see that the players who are playing are consistently much better as an entire team than when Crean was here.
So Crean brought in the Big 3 when Bradley, Mason, and Amo left? Weird. Those 3 all left in different years, and the Big 3 all came in together. The point is, when Buzz has made mistakes on offering a sholarship to players who were not good enough, he realizes it within a year and upgrades the talent (Mbao, Roseboro). When Crean did it, he kept those guys around for no reason at all.
Buzz has not had any 19-12 NIT years (in Conference USA, no less). Buzz hasn't yet, but he has had some of Crean's guys on the team in his first couple years. The thing is, as more of Crean's recruits have exited and Buzz gets his own recruits in, Marquette has steadily improved. Sweet Sixteen last year, hopefully that or better this year and years to come.
You can list statistics. I will actually watch the games and realize that there are far better basketball players on this year's team from top to bottom than Crean typically had.
You still haven't explained the incredible depth Crean had in the program when Diener got hurt and the almighty Markus Jackson, our center, had to play point guard for us. Do you think that incredible depth would happen with Buzz? I, for one, don't. I'd take Cadougan, D Wil, J Wil, Vander, Todd, DJO, Jae, Jamail, and Juan running the point over Markus Jackson (and since he was also our starting center, I'd take Otule, Gardner, JWil, and even Crowder over Jackson at center. Not that Jackson was a bad 5. Just a testament to the DEPTH Buzz has brought in).
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 05:01:58 PM
::). Go look at my post history. I defend Crean when people make ridiculous comments about Crean and his (lack of) influence on Marquette. I think Crean was a slimeball, self-centered prick, but that does not mean I don't appreciate what he brought to the program and the results he posted. In no way am I a blind appologist for Buzz Williams, either. You can go back further into my post history to see evidence of that. I have complained about his use of offense-defense substitutions for entire games, the lack of continuity due to transfers, etc. but Buzz has, in my opinion, improved immensely in every aspect of a high-major division 1 basketball coach, so I am finding less and less reasons to complain about Buzz and the things he does.
You'll note that I'm not complaining about Buzz either. I'm merely pointing out that he hasn't landed those elusive top 30 players that Crean wasn't able to land either.
Had you simply said--"You're right. I agree with you in the hope that Buzz can turn that around with some of the top 25 guys from 2014 he's recruiting. I wouldn't want him to grow frustrated and think he has to go elsewhere to land those better players." this whole thread would have been much easier, friendly discussion.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 05:01:58 PM
To me, depth does not have to do with minutes played in games. It has to do with the basketball ability of every player on the team. Just because a team like maybe Southeast Missouri State or something plays a bunch of guys all for a good amount of minutes does not mean they have a roster deep on talent. Just because a guy like JP Tokoto is going to be at UNC next year and may only see 5 mpg in important games does not mean he is not a talented basketball player. You seem to think that is what it suggests. For me, I watch the games and see that the players who are playing are consistently much better as an entire team than when Crean was here.
Well this is the difference in our thinking. Depth to me means you have players who are either part of the primary rotation, or who can be counted on to increase their minutes when you need them to due to injury.
Your argument is that if that you watch a guy who gets token or spot minutes this year, and he's better (in ways that don't show up in the stat sheet) than the 12th man on the roster who got the spot or token minutes five years ago, well that makes us deep.
I would agree that our team was deep if Anderson, Jones, and Wilson each picked up 8 to 10 minutes of the 38 combined minutes made available when Otule and Gardner became injured.
I can't say that we're deep when in the face of 38 new mpg available, three players see their contribution actually go down.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 05:01:58 PM
So Crean brought in the Big 3 when Bradley, Mason, and Amo left? Weird. Those 3 all left in different years, and the Big 3 all came in together. The point is, when Buzz has made mistakes on offering a sholarship to players who were not good enough, he realizes it within a year and upgrades the talent (Mbao, Roseboro). When Crean did it, he kept those guys around for no reason at all.
Weird. In your last post, you said Crean brought in Blackledge in response to Bradley, Mason and Amo leaving.
When I pointed out we landed the Amigos and Hayward before taking Trend, now all of a sudden, you're concerned about matching scholarships?
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 05:01:58 PM
Buzz has not had any 19-12 NIT years (in Conference USA, no less). Buzz hasn't yet, but he has had some of Crean's guys on the team in his first couple years. The thing is, as more of Crean's recruits have exited and Buzz gets his own recruits in, Marquette has steadily improved. Sweet Sixteen last year, hopefully that or better this year and years to come.
Does this change the fact that Buzz hasn't landed any of those top 25 elite players that have so far eluded him?
Why are you so skittish about that simple statement that rather than just agree agree with my initial sentiment, you felt compelled in response to keep changing the subject to something bad about Crane?
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 05:01:58 PM
You can list statistics. I will actually watch the games and realize that there are far better basketball players on this year's team from top to bottom than Crean typically had.
I'm not sure how you would define what Crean "typically" had, because each season was different (as were Buzz's seasons). I'd put this year's team somewhere between Crean's best and worst teams. Not as good as 2003. Better than 2004.
Quote from: wadesworld on February 17, 2012, 05:01:58 PM
You still haven't explained the incredible depth Crean had in the program when Diener got hurt and the almighty Markus Jackson, our center, had to play point guard for us. Do you think that incredible depth would happen with Buzz? I, for one, don't. I'd take Cadougan, D Wil, J Wil, Vander, Todd, DJO, Jae, Jamail, and Juan running the point over Markus Jackson (and since he was also our starting center, I'd take Otule, Gardner, JWil, and even Crowder over Jackson at center. Not that Jackson was a bad 5. Just a testament to the DEPTH Buzz has brought in).
What's to explain?
I never claimed the 2004 team was deep.
I never claimed that 2004 was deeper than this year's team.
I said we are not deep this year. And we aren't. We have 2 empty roster spots, only 6 guys getting the bulk of the minutes, 2 getting nothing right now because they are are injured, and 3 of them getting the type of minutes that Trend Blackledge got. And that's in blowouts! That's simply not a deep team.
As I said, we're continuing to win primarily because of DJO, Cadougan and Crowder, and increased contribution from Blue and JWilson.
The Equalizer = Marquette84. No doubt about it. She's baaaaaacckkkk. Hooray. ::)
Quote from: Canadian Dimes on February 17, 2012, 10:25:41 AM
HOW IS THIS FOR TIMING!!!! :D :D
http://www.foxsportswisconsin.com/pages/listgallery?gid=16724&gf=542
expect to see comments from Chicos and Hoopaloop taking the writer to task for "obviously" over looking Tommy NAismith.
I honestly don't know how you process things. You rip on Purdue graduates but you make all of us with a Marquette degree shake their heads.
They list eight men in their top five.
Al McGuire
Dwyane WadeKevin O'Neill
Wes Matthews
Dominic James
Jerel McNealBill CordsYou've been saying Crean had not one shred of responsibility.
Can you explain to me then how HALF OF THAT LIST came to Marquette \ associated to Marquette because of him? No Crean, no Wade. No Crean, no Matthews. No Crean, no James. No Crean, no McNeal.
Then let's add in that Bill Cords hired Crean. So if Cords is one of the top 5 on that list and he hired Crean, then they are giving him the nod because of the hires he made.
So now we're up to 5 of the 8 mentioned. ::)
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 16, 2012, 08:31:31 PM
I wasn't privy to any of the discussions the Big East AD's had when they decided to add MU, Cincy, Louisville and DePaul, but those programs have a lot in common - solid basketball histories/tradition, good size urban markets, arenas with decent seating capacities. Two were basketball only, two had football. So all were good fits.
How much did our two most recent seasons (2 NCAA appearances and a FF) factor in? Well, DePaul was 25-32 with one 1st round NIT loss over that period and it didn't deter their acceptance.
Where does DePaul play basketball? Which city? What size television market is it? Common sense.
They are saying that MU just beat us again followed by the question of whether they will host a NIT game or not
I find it very telling that just as we won a big game on the road against UConn we have posters who are defending Tom Crean, who hasn't been our coach for years.
I have nothing against Crean but you can tell who are true Marquette fans in this thread.
Quote from: The Equalizer on February 17, 2012, 07:01:09 PM
You'll note that I'm not complaining about Buzz either. I'm merely pointing out that he hasn't landed those elusive top 30 players that Crean wasn't able to land either.
Had you simply said--"You're right. I agree with you in the hope that Buzz can turn that around with some of the top 25 guys from 2014 he's recruiting. I wouldn't want him to grow frustrated and think he has to go elsewhere to land those better players." this whole thread would have been much easier, friendly discussion.
Well this is the difference in our thinking. Depth to me means you have players who are either part of the primary rotation, or who can be counted on to increase their minutes when you need them to due to injury.
Your argument is that if that you watch a guy who gets token or spot minutes this year, and he's better (in ways that don't show up in the stat sheet) than the 12th man on the roster who got the spot or token minutes five years ago, well that makes us deep.
I would agree that our team was deep if Anderson, Jones, and Wilson each picked up 8 to 10 minutes of the 38 combined minutes made available when Otule and Gardner became injured.
I can't say that we're deep when in the face of 38 new mpg available, three players see their contribution actually go down.
Weird. In your last post, you said Crean brought in Blackledge in response to Bradley, Mason and Amo leaving.
When I pointed out we landed the Amigos and Hayward before taking Trend, now all of a sudden, you're concerned about matching scholarships?
Does this change the fact that Buzz hasn't landed any of those top 25 elite players that have so far eluded him?
Why are you so skittish about that simple statement that rather than just agree agree with my initial sentiment, you felt compelled in response to keep changing the subject to something bad about Crane?
I'm not sure how you would define what Crean "typically" had, because each season was different (as were Buzz's seasons). I'd put this year's team somewhere between Crean's best and worst teams. Not as good as 2003. Better than 2004.
What's to explain?
I never claimed the 2004 team was deep.
I never claimed that 2004 was deeper than this year's team.
I said we are not deep this year. And we aren't. We have 2 empty roster spots, only 6 guys getting the bulk of the minutes, 2 getting nothing right now because they are are injured, and 3 of them getting the type of minutes that Trend Blackledge got. And that's in blowouts! That's simply not a deep team.
As I said, we're continuing to win primarily because of DJO, Cadougan and Crowder, and increased contribution from Blue and JWilson.
Yawn.
Quite the pissin' match on this thread.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 18, 2012, 01:17:21 PM
I find it very telling that just as we won a big game on the road against UConn we have posters who are defending Tom Crean, who hasn't been our coach for years.
I have nothing against Crean but you can tell who are true Marquette fans in this thread.
You might want to look at the timing of the responses since they were all prior to the UCONN game win.
Of course, the random post or thread determining who is a bigger fan and what dictates fandom is always productive here.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 18, 2012, 02:58:56 PM
You might want to look at the timing of the responses since they were all prior to the UCONN game win.
Of course, the random post or thread determining who is a bigger fan and what dictates fandom is always productive here.
You're right prior to the win but during the game. My statement stands on I think it is very telling.
You calling out a post for being unproductive? Oh the irony. I would love to see what posters have the largest ignore numbers on this site. Without a doubt you would be in the Top 5.
Quote from: Hoopaloop on February 18, 2012, 11:57:28 AM
Where does DePaul play basketball? Which city? What size television market is it? Common sense.
Ignore all of the similarities between MU/DePaul (urban, basketball only, rivals of each other, ND, and to a lesser extent Cincy and Louisville, etc.) that made us both the perfect fit for the Big East. Then decide that we got in because Tom Crean was our coach and De Paul got in because it's in a big city that pays no attention to them. Then call your simplistic, inaccurate explanation common sense. Check.