MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on March 16, 2017, 09:09:35 PM
-
Comparison
Marquette Indiana
Years 1999-2008 (9 yrs) 2008-2017 (9 yrs)
Win/Loss 190-96 (.664) 166-135 (.551)
Conf. W/L 90-56 (.616) 71-91 (.438)
Conf. Wins 1 (C-USA, 2003) 2 (2013, 2016)
Post Season 8 (5 NCAA) 5 (4 NCAA)
S16 or Better 1 (FF, 2003) 3 (S16, '12, '13, '16)
Another set of amazingly similar results
Final season Kenpom ranking
Marquette (Kenpom started in 2002)
2002 =11
2003 = 15
2004 = 92
2005 = 100
2006 = 36
2007 = 38
Avg. 48.6
Indiana (excluded his first two years as they were rebuilding years)
2010 = 110
2011 = 82
2012 = 9
2013 = 3
2014 = 63
2015 = 48
2016 = 11
2017 = 47
Avg. 50
Here's another set of stats that are also amazingly similar
9 Years at MU (1999 - 2008)
Weeks Ranked 79
% of all weeks 41.8%
Highest = 8
9 Year at IU (2008 - 2017)
Weeks Ranked 75
% of all weeks 38.9%
Highest = 1
Here is a stat that leans favorably for IU
Marquette
Weeks ranked in top 10
7 total
2002 = 2 wks (peak 9)
2003 = 4 wks (peak 8 twice)
2007 = 1 wks (peak 8)
Indiana
Weeks ranked in top 10
27 total
2012 = 1 wks (peak 8)
2013 = 20 wks (peak 1, 9 times)
2016 = 1 wks (peak 10)
2017 = 5 wks (peak 5 twice)
Please add other metrics you think are relevant.
It looks pretty even. Does that mean that IU and MU are equal programs? They had the same coach and produced very similar results. So, I say yes.
-
You could also compare Buzz's record at Virginia Tech and wojos record at Marquette.
-
Here's another set of stats that are also amazingly similar
9 Years at MU (1999 - 2008)
Weeks Ranked 79
% of all weeks 41.8%
Highest = 8
9 Year at IU (2008 - 2017)
Weeks Ranked 75
% of all weeks 38.9%
Highest = 1
-
The Final Four tips the scale in Marquette's favor.
-
Not even close. He was never been a good coach. I think he actually even regressed at IU. He however may be the luckiest sumbitch in the history of college bball. If it were not for Snagging Dwyane Wade he prolly doesnt last 5 years at MU and is a Fred Hill or Anthony Solomon type. One short stint followed by being a career assistant. He owes at least 10 years of being a head coach n 30 million to DWade, simply a poor coach.
-
The Final Four tips the scale in Marquette's favor.
And Indiana has a much higher recruiting base.
-
Comparison
Marquette Indiana
Years 1999-2008 (9 yrs) 2008-2017 (9 yrs)
Win/Loss 190-96 (.664) 166-135 (.551)
Conf. W/L 90-56 (.616) 71-91 (.438)
Conf. Wins 1 (C-USA, 2003) 2 (2013, 2016)
Post Season 8 (5 NCAA) 5 (4 NCAA)
S16 or Better 1 (FF, 2003) 3 (S16, '12, '13, '16)
Please add other metrics you think are relevant.
It looks pretty even. Does that mean that IU and MU are equal programs? They had the same coach and produced very similar results. So, I say yes.
Marquette: left for dream job
Indiana: got fired
-
And Indiana has a much higher recruiting base.
The stats suggest this is a myth. Or, it ended in when Knight was fired.
-
Well,to be fair Big Ten competition > Conference USA competition.
-
Well,to be fair Big Ten competition > Conference USA competition.
And to be fair, BE competition > Big Ten competition.
IMHO, his biggest accomplishment other than the Final Four was moving us into the Big East without skipping a beat.
-
MU era beats IU era, thanks to Wade.
-
The stats suggest this is a myth. Or, it ended in when Knight was fired.
This doesn't look like a myth to me. Lots of NBA paper in nine years.
http://www.btpowerhouse.com/2016/6/14/11909648/ranking-tom-creans-nine-indiana-hoosiers-basketball-recruiting-classes
-
Not even close. He was never been a good coach. I think he actually even regressed at IU. He however may be the luckiest sumbitch in the history of college bball. If it were not for Snagging Dwyane Wade he prolly doesnt last 5 years at MU and is a Fred Hill or Anthony Solomon type. One short stint followed by being a career assistant. He owes at least 10 years of being a head coach n 30 million to DWade, simply a poor coach.
I understand your disdain, but in all fairness, every team ends up with a "diamond in the rough" every now and then. Guys who ended up being better than advertised which could be a whole different and very interesting thread. tommy seemed to walk around with a mirror in front of himself and saw a whole different image than the one he actually projected. Maybe a little "couch time" would have done himself some good
-
Here's another set of stats that are also amazingly similar
9 Years at MU (1999 - 2008)
Weeks Ranked 79
% of all weeks 41.8%
Highest = 8
9 Year at IU (2008 - 2017)
Weeks Ranked 75
% of all weeks 38.9%
Highest = 1
Here is a stat that leans favorably for IU
Marquette
Weeks ranked in top 10
7 total
2002 = 2 wks (peak 9)
2003 = 4 wks (peak 8 twice)
2007 = 1 wks (peak 8)
Indiana
Weeks ranked in top 10
27 total
2012 = 1 wks (peak 8)
2013 = 20 wks (peak 1, 9 times)
2016 = 1 wks (peak 10)
2017 = 5 wks (peak 5 twice)
-
The stats suggest this is a myth. Or, it ended in when Knight was fired.
What stats?
Compare his rankings of recruiting classes
-
This doesn't look like a myth to me. Lots of NBA paper in nine years.
http://www.btpowerhouse.com/2016/6/14/11909648/ranking-tom-creans-nine-indiana-hoosiers-basketball-recruiting-classes
So does MU
-
He has a legacy at Marquette. At IU, he was a bridge from one guy to the next.
-
What stats?
Compare his rankings of recruiting classes
Go ahead, look forward to it.
-
Go ahead, look forward to it.
I'm telling you to.
You're the one that claimed "stats". What stats?
And if you're talking about recruiting and not developing, then it really needs to be class rankings and not NBA talent
-
I'm telling you to.
You're the one that claimed "stats". What stats?
And if you're talking about recruiting and not developing, then it really needs to be class rankings and not NBA talent
Whatever he recruited the stats above say he produced amazingly similar records between the two schools. So same guy, gets the same out of his kids, similar results = similar quality of recruits between the schools.
-
I understand your disdain, but in all fairness, every team ends up with a "diamond in the rough" every now and then.
How many guys end up with a prop 48 "diamond in the rough" who can't be recruited by the big boys - who then becomes one of the top 30 players of all time? I only know of one.
-
Marquette under Crean did just as well, if not better, than Indiana under Crean.
Bobby's bullying ways led to a recruiting downturn at IU before he even left. Modern athletes said, "To hell with that; other guys can coach me up just as well, and I don't even have to get choked or kicked." Crean actually recruited at IU better than Bobby did his last few years. Crean also had more postseason success at IU over his last half-dozen years than Bobby did over his last half-dozen years.
Finally, to hold Wade against Crean is dopey. I mean, take away Vander and Buzz doesn't go S16-S16-E8. Take away Laettner and K doesn't win two national titles.
-
Another set of amazingly similar results
Final season Kenpom ranking
Marquette (Kenpom started in 2002)
2002 =11
2003 = 15
2004 = 92
2005 = 100
2006 = 36
2007 = 38
Avg. 48.6
Indiana (excluded his first two years as they were rebuilding years)
2010 = 110
2011 = 82
2012 = 9
2013 = 3
2014 = 63
2015 = 48
2016 = 11
2017 = 47
Avg. 50
-
All I know is that I am glad he left MU for IU.
-
He has a legacy at Marquette. At IU, he was a bridge from one guy to the next.
More accurately, he was a bridge from Indiana's lowest point as a program to regaining achievements.
-
Crean has proven he can deliver consistence positive performance at the highest levels of College basketball. I don't think there is a material difference between his performance at MU and IU.
After a brief sabbatical, he will be back at the controls of a high major .
-
How many guys end up with a prop 48 "diamond in the rough" who can't be recruited by the big boys - who then becomes one of the top 30 players of all time? I only know of one.
There were no restrictions on anyone recruiting Wade. Wade didn't become a non-qualifier until AFTER his senior year--he still had a chance to get a qualifying score on the ACT the summer before he enrolled in college. That was a year after his commitment to MU.
The big boys don't have to take a chance on a "diamond in the rough" players, regardless of qualification status.
The big boys usually just go ahead pick from the top 50 players nationally directly out of HS. They don't waste their energy recruiting a player ranked outside the top 100 who wasn't even considered one of the top 5 players in Illinois.
-
Whatever he recruited the stats above say he produced amazingly similar records between the two schools. So same guy, gets the same out of his kids, similar results = similar quality of recruits between the schools.
That's not how that works. Terrible logic there. But go ahead and keep cherry picking stuff that reinforces your conclusion.
-
How many guys end up with a prop 48 "diamond in the rough" who can't be recruited by the big boys - who then becomes one of the top 30 players of all time? I only know of one.
Luck of the draw I guess, but ya get whatcha get. Leaving prop 48 out of it however, there are many players who ended up way better than advertized. Maybe not reaching the eventual top 30 you refer to, but became college basketball studs to say the least. What they end up doing after college is, well, can go either way.
It would be a great topic to explore-guys were were not highly recruited but went onto exceed expectations-jimmy butler was a good college player who exploded as a pro for example. Did anyone see Jae or Wes becoming the type of pro they are?
If you are going to base Tom crean's career on one player, you've just offended many other good players he had
-
Crean's top target was Desmon Farmer out of Michigan. He went to USC so Crean had to go for plan B: Wade.
Talk about falling backwards into a lottery ticket. Granted, TC also landed Diener, Novak, the Amigos, and Hayward. But Wade is the big one.
After losing in the Final Four, I thought Crean would never win a national title at Marquette. He would never coach a player as good as Wade. When TC left, a co-worker broke the news to me. I shrugged and said "Meh." He was a little taken aback but I replied that Crean was replaceable. I felt as Crean did, that he had taken MU as far as he could.
-
He has a legacy at Marquette. At IU, he was a bridge from one guy to the next.
He was there 9 years and replaced a disgraced coach. I'm no huge fan but....
-
He left both programs in better shape than what he inherited. There were no seniors in the starting lineup that played against the badgers in the Big 10 tournament.
-
He left both programs in better shape than what he inherited. There were no seniors in the starting lineup that played against the badgers in the Big 10 tournament.
+1
-
Remember, Tom crean had to clean up in aisle 7 after kelvin sampson...ok, it was Indiana, but he did bring respect back to the program. Could have done a little better with the talent he had, but in all fairness, he had some major injuries to play through. The personality he projected aside, he did ok and he will have no problems finding another top 5-10 job.
To base a coach's success/failure on wining it all is not fair however. Keeping the program reputable and competitive and filling the seats should be the barometer.
-
Remember, Tom crean had to clean up in aisle 7 after kelvin sampson...ok, it was Indiana, but he did bring respect back to the program. Could have done a little better with the talent he had, but in all fairness, he had some major injuries to play through. The personality he projected aside, he did ok and he will have no problems finding another top 5-10 job.
To base a coach's success/failure on wining it all is not fair however. Keeping the program reputable and competitive and filling the seats should be the barometer.
I dont think he was fired for the clean-up. It was likely more to do with your last sentence....yr 9 - surprised it has been that long
-
I dont think he was fired for the clean-up. It was likely more to do with your last sentence....yr 9 - surprised it has been that long
I agree, but unfortunately or not, successful NCAA coaches have to juggle many balls. How long would one expect gonzaga for example put up with a mark few if he put up a couple of boners and/or a mini scandal, academic issues, even though he has worked up quite the resume
-
I agree, but unfortunately or not, successful NCAA coaches have to juggle many balls. How long would one expect gonzaga for example put up with a mark few if he put up a couple of boners and/or a mini scandal, academic issues, even though he has worked up quite the resume
Crean never achieved the desires of the program on the court after getting an initial period of lee-way to clean things up.
Few has earned IMO some years not achieving expectations. If he has a scandal sure - but why should someone be allowed to aggregiously cheat and keep their job.
I'll save my tears for someone who toils for less. They get paid plenty to be judged on w's and l's
-
Crean is a guy who can build a solid tournament team but doesn't have the ability to coach his team to a deep tournament run.
I've said it before but I think Crean would be an excellent high-mid-major coach. In successful high majors, there's a combo of player talent and excellent coaching. At the mid-major level, you often see talented rosters win out because the opposing coaches are simply not as good as they are at the highest level. That's why you see great recruiting mid-major coaches, like John Groce, win at the mid-major level but struggle when they get to a high major program. Talent can only take you so far at the level. Looking at current openings, I think Crean would be a force at a program like UMass or Drake but he's more likely to end up having an up-and-down career at NC State or Cal.
-
He left both programs in better shape than what he inherited. There were no seniors in the starting lineup that played against the badgers in the Big 10 tournament.
Crean may be a lot of things but this is very true
-
I appreciate everything Coach Crean did for Marquette. He built the program up from Mike Deane's vision, which didn't have the Big East in it. He shepherded the program into the Big East. He won 190 games in 9 years. He took MU to a final 4. He reached out to and engaged the students. Kudos and thank you.
But he wasn't and isn't a great coach. I thought that he would grow and be able to compensate for the weaknesses he showed at Marquette by being able to recruit over them. His inability to string together consecutive good classes. His poor in-game coaching. His inability to attack a zone. His poor adjustments. But if you read the Hoosier boards, their gripes are exactly the same. He hasn't improved. And his personality grates when his teams aren't winning.
His performance at Marquette got him the IU job. What job will his performance at IU get him? I think THAT is another way to answer the question.
-
I appreciate everything Coach Crean did for Marquette. He built the program up from Mike Deane's vision, which didn't have the Big East in it. He shepherded the program into the Big East. He won 190 games in 9 years. He took MU to a final 4. He reached out to and engaged the students. Kudos and thank you.
But he wasn't and isn't a great coach. I thought that he would grow and be able to compensate for the weaknesses he showed at Marquette by being able to recruit over them. His inability to string together consecutive good classes. His poor in-game coaching. His inability to attack a zone. His poor adjustments. But if you read the Hoosier boards, their gripes are exactly the same. He hasn't improved. And his personality grates when his teams aren't winning.
His performance at Marquette got him the IU job. What job will his performance at IU get him? I think THAT is another way to answer the question.
Excellent summary. Crean will land at a mid-major because he has demonstrated that his teams can make the tournament with regularity (2 out of 4 years), his teams will be ranked every now and then, and he lands the occasional very good recruiting class. That is enough for most schools.
-
I am not a Pro on Anti Crean for the most part. Thought he did decent job at MU, but did not break my heart when he left. More importantly, I thought it looked good for our program that he went to IU versus Buzz's departure. His overall body of work at both jobs is pretty good IMO. He is far from John Wooden and far from being Bob Dukiet.
Have to admit that I did took pleasure in his firing yesterday. Not exactly sure why I felt that way because I was glad he left MU. My guess is he ends up getting a good to very good job and has similar success that he had at MU and IU.
The real good news is that IU is my favorite Big Ten team and I can go back to cheering for them again.
-
The real good news is that IU is my favorite Big Ten team and I can go back to cheering for them again.
These are my exact feelings. Frankly, rabid Indiana fans feel somewhat the same way. It's very difficult to root for your team when your coach is such an insufferable poser, blowing by opposing coaches, screaming at Michigan assistants, hanging banners...he's the worst!
-
I am not a Pro or Anti Crean for the most part. Thought he did decent job at MU, but did not break my heart when he left. More importantly, I thought it looked good for our program that he went to IU versus Buzz's departure. His overall body of work at both jobs is pretty good IMO. He is far from John Wooden and far from being Bob Dukiet.
This basically describes me, too. I also am not particularly pro or anti Buzz. I wanted him to win last night. I appreciate the contributions both made to Marquette basketball, while also wishing for a little more from each.
As for Wade, one of the real mis-statements some make is that nobody recruited him and that only Marquette would take him because of his grades.
I have had many conversations with guys who used to be assistants at Illinois and DePaul. (I know: Everybody's happy for me.) They regret they didn't go after him harder when he was a younger prepster; by the time they focused more attention on him, he already had verballed to us and soon would sign with us.
By his junior season, most programs in the Midwest knew who Wade was. By the time he was a senior, every coach worth a hill of beans in the entire country knew who he was. He wasn't some mystery kid who went from being a high school mediocrity to being a D1 superstar.
I saw him once as a junior (25 points) and once as a senior (35 points) against very good competition; the latter was against Eddy Curry's team and he was spectacular. It was obvious he was going to be a stud, and I was thrilled he was going to be ours.
Beyond all of that, somehow holding a great recruit against Crean seems pretty dopey to me. I mean, we almost surely don't get to the FF without Robert Jackson, either. Maybe we should hold that against Crean, too. Or maybe we should just be happy he got Wade, Jackson, Diener, etc.?!?!
-
Dayton would be a good landing spot after Archie takes his job
-
There was a book many years ago (The Peter Principle) whose premise was that people tend to climb the ladder until they reach their "level of incompetence", i.e., a job beyond their ability. The Indiana job (once they emerged from rebuild mode) was just that for Tom Crean.
-
As for Wade, one of the real mis-statements some make is that nobody recruited him and that only Marquette would take him because of his grades.
I have had many conversations with guys who used to be assistants at Illinois and DePaul. (I know: Everybody's happy for me.) They regret they didn't go after him harder when he was a younger prepster; by the time they focused more attention on him, he already had verballed to us and soon would sign with us.
By his junior season, most programs in the Midwest knew who Wade was. By the time he was a senior, every coach worth a hill of beans in the entire country knew who he was. He wasn't some mystery kid who went from being a high school mediocrity to being a D1 superstar.
I saw him once as a junior (25 points) and once as a senior (35 points) against very good competition; the latter was against Eddy Curry's team and he was spectacular. It was obvious he was going to be a stud, and I was thrilled he was going to be ours.
Beyond all of that, somehow holding a great recruit against Crean seems pretty dopey to me. I mean, we almost surely don't get to the FF without Robert Jackson, either. Maybe we should hold that against Crean, too. Or maybe we should just be happy he got Wade, Jackson, Diener, etc.?!?!
1. I don't know who your "assistant at Illinois" is, but he's giving you bad information. None of the power 5 conference teams were ALLOWED to offer Wade because of his grades/test scores.
2. DePaul like Imari Sawyer better, that God for their stupidity (how many times have we said that in the last 20 years)
3. Tom Crean beat out Illinois State and Bradley for Wade (only teams from mid majors could offer). I was at Dwyane Wade Day at Richards High School when Tom Crean himself stated that Wade would have crawled on his hands and knees through broken glass to Bloomington if Indiana could have offered him. Same would have been true for any of the big programs. Don't get me wrong - I'm ecstatic he fell into our hands - but that doesn't change the fact that he did just that.
-
There was a book many years ago (The Peter Principle) whose premise was that people tend to climb the ladder until they reach their "level of incompetence", i.e., a job beyond their ability. The Indiana job (once they emerged from rebuild mode) was just that for Tom Crean.
We've had simultaneous discussion points on Scoop (seemingly for the entire nine years) that Crean was incompetent relative to the standing of the Indiana position; and that the Indiana fanbase is delusional and needs to come to terms with their program's actual standing in college basketball in the year 2017.
Tom Crean wasn't coaching a blue-blood program the past nine years. The only people who were holding him to that standard of expectation are Hoosiers in denial and Warriors in schadenfreude. The rest of us have been living in the real world.
-
Here is an article that lays out D-Wade's side of things
http://archive.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/168533026.html (http://archive.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/168533026.html)
-
We've had simultaneous discussion points on Scoop (seemingly for the entire nine years) that Crean was incompetent relative to the standing of the Indiana position; and that the Indiana fanbase is delusional and needs to come to terms with their program's actual standing in college basketball in the year 2017.
Tom Crean wasn't coaching a blue-blood program the past nine years. The only people who were holding him to that standard of expectation are Hoosiers in denial and Warriors in schadenfreude. The rest of us have been living in the real world.
I'm certainly a Warrior, Lanche, though not one in schadenfreude. To me TC was a good placeholder while IU cleaned up Sampson's mess but wasn't the guy to make them a real winner again. Maybe you're right and their destiny is nothing special, but given the wealth of basketball talent in their backyard I think the right guy at least brings them to the cusp of blue blood status - and I think TC proved he's not that guy.
-
dwade's freshman year at MU, I managed an apartment on campus for a BIG MU guy. He'd come back from watching some practices exclaiming, we've got a guy who's already better than doc rivers