MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Cheeks on January 18, 2020, 04:18:51 PM

Title: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 18, 2020, 04:18:51 PM
MU back to 10-8 projection....two weeks ago it was 7-11 with one ranking.

Go Warriors.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Lennys Tap on January 18, 2020, 04:27:21 PM
I would take 10-8. Would mean we were safely in, somewhere between a 6 and 10 seed.

Still hoping for better.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: PGsHeroes32 on January 18, 2020, 04:33:48 PM
I would take 10-8. Would mean we were safely in, somewhere between a 6 and 10 seed.

Still hoping for better.

A 4 seed range?? Lol

We would be much better than a 10 at 10-8
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Lennys Tap on January 18, 2020, 04:44:48 PM
A 4 seed range?? Lol

We would be much better than a 10 at 10-8

7 and 10 seeds are interchangeable - the games are usually toss ups. They’re preferred over 8 and 9 seeds. If 10-8 put us tied for 4th or in 5th and we lose our first BEast tournament game I could see us as a 7 or 10. Sorry you find that possibility so outrageously remote.LOL.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: BM1090 on January 18, 2020, 04:46:11 PM
7 and 10 seeds are interchangeable - the games are usually toss ups. They’re preferred over 8 and 9 seeds. If 10-8 put us tied for 4th or in 5th and we lose our first BEast tournament game I could see us as a 7 or 10. Sorry you find that possibility so outrageously remote.LOL.

Seems reasonable. I'd expect a 7 seed at 10-8.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: PGsHeroes32 on January 18, 2020, 05:01:43 PM
7 and 10 seeds are interchangeable - the games are usually toss ups. They’re preferred over 8 and 9 seeds. If 10-8 put us tied for 4th or in 5th and we lose our first BEast tournament game I could see us as a 7 or 10. Sorry you find that possibility so outrageously remote.LOL.

HUH? the teams are usually interchangeable. But thats still 4 seed lines. Thats like me predicting a guy will be drafted 2nd-4th rounds. Bold.

And no, 10-8 would not be close to a 10.

We are not close to a 10 now. And that would mean 7-6 finish at worst.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhiteTrash on January 18, 2020, 05:52:41 PM
A 4 seed range?? Lol

I hope you were not a math major. LOL.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: fjm on January 18, 2020, 07:45:49 PM
5 more wins gets us in.

6 more wins is solidly in.

Give me 7 more wins please.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Lennys Tap on January 18, 2020, 09:27:52 PM
HUH? the teams are usually interchangeable. But thats still 4 seed lines. Thats like me predicting a guy will be drafted 2nd-4th rounds. Bold.

And no, 10-8 would not be close to a 10.

We are not close to a 10 now. And that would mean 7-6 finish at worst.

A 7th seed is theoretically rated between 25 and 28 on the S curve. 10s are theoretically rated between 37 and 40, though often they are higher than 8s and 9s because a 10 is a more desirable seed (doesn’t face a #1 in round 2).

But “we’re not CLOSE to a 10 now”. LOL what do you think we’re rated, genius?



Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WithoutBias on January 18, 2020, 09:31:04 PM
A 7th seed is theoretically rated between 25 and 28 on the S curve. 10s are theoretically rated between 37 and 40, though often they are higher than 8s and 9s because a 10 is a more desirable seed (doesn’t face a #1 in round 2).

But “we’re not CLOSE to a 10 now”. LOL what do you think we’re rated, genius?

Uh, what? Teams aren’t ranked 1-68 and called in order, being asked what seeding they’d like based on what’s available. If you’re ranked 29, you don’t get to pick to be a 10 seed because it makes for a more favorable draw. You’re seeded where you deserve to be, unless potential conference matchups or potential higher seeds getting bad locations based on matchups change those.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Lennys Tap on January 18, 2020, 09:41:13 PM
Uh, what? Teams aren’t ranked 1-68 and called in order, being asked what seeding they’d like based on what’s available. If you’re ranked 29, you don’t get to pick to be a 10 seed because it makes for a more favorable draw. You’re seeded where you deserve to be, unless potential conference matchups or potential higher seeds getting bad locations based on matchups change those.

All I know is that frequently #10 seeds are higher rated than 9s (and sometimes 8s).

We are currently #33 in Pomeroy and #35 in Sagerin - so “fair value” says a #9 seed. If things end that way I hope we get a 10 instead - it’s usually (IMO) an easier path.

Some additional information:

Average final Pomeroy ranking of 9 and 10 seeds over the last 3 seasons - 9 seeds = 41, 10 seeds = 38.

Every year the highest rated #10 seed was rated higher than any #9. In 2017 3 #10 seeds were rated higher than all the #9 seeds.

8 seed numbers are about the same as the 9s.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhoaJoe2020 on January 18, 2020, 11:06:07 PM
All I know is that frequently #10 seeds are higher rated than 9s (and sometimes 8s).

We are currently #33 in Pomeroy and #35 in Sagerin - so “fair value” says a #9 seed. If things end that way I hope we get a 10 instead - it’s usually (IMO) an easier path.

Some additional information:

Average final Pomeroy ranking of 9 and 10 seeds over the last 3 seasons - 9 seeds = 41, 10 seeds = 38.

Every year the highest rated #10 seed was rated higher than any #9. In 2017 3 #10 seeds were rated higher than all the #9 seeds.

8 seed numbers are about the same as the 9s.

That's deep.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WithoutBias on January 19, 2020, 09:01:14 AM
All I know is that frequently #10 seeds are higher rated than 9s (and sometimes 8s).

We are currently #33 in Pomeroy and #35 in Sagerin - so “fair value” says a #9 seed. If things end that way I hope we get a 10 instead - it’s usually (IMO) an easier path.

Some additional information:

Average final Pomeroy ranking of 9 and 10 seeds over the last 3 seasons - 9 seeds = 41, 10 seeds = 38.

Every year the highest rated #10 seed was rated higher than any #9. In 2017 3 #10 seeds were rated higher than all the #9 seeds.

8 seed numbers are about the same as the 9s.

What did the NET rankings show? And were the higher ranked 10 seeds in the same conference as the 1 seed in their bracket, or the lower ranked 8/9 seeds in the same conference as the 2 seeds in their bracket? And were the higher ranked 10 seeds closer to home than the 1 seed in their bracket for a second round matchup, or the lower ranked 8/9 seeds closer to home than the 2 seeds in their bracket?
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: willie warrior on January 19, 2020, 09:03:42 AM
MU back to 10-8 projection....two weeks ago it was 7-11 with one ranking.

Go Warriors.
10-8 is about middle of the pack. Prefer 14-4. After all, we have the Duke Wunderkind as our coach.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: brewcity77 on January 19, 2020, 09:05:52 AM
What did the NET rankings show?

I'd look at NET & RPI. If I get a chance I'll try to dig into this later in the week, but I disagree wholeheartedly that the Selection Committee gives 10 seeds preference over 8/9 seeds. Three years is also a small sample. I'd look at 7-10 to make sure it wasn't a coincidence.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: The Lens on January 19, 2020, 11:47:01 AM
10-8 is about middle of the pack. Prefer 14-4. After all, we have the Duke Wunderkind as our coach.

Lol.  No kidding.  Wojo absolutely Tom Crean’d this.  Start out 1-3 so a 10-8 season feels great. 

We are elite

Elite at managing expectations.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 11:54:38 AM
Lol.  No kidding.  Wojo absolutely Tom Crean’d this.  Start out 1-3 so a 10-8 season feels great. 

We are elite

Elite at managing expectations.

Second best conference in the country....no one said we were elite....elite unicorns went away in 1977
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Elonsmusk on January 19, 2020, 12:45:20 PM
Second best conference in the country....no one said we were elite....elite unicorns went away in 1977

Interesting conference this year compared to last. League ranks 3rd in Pomeroy trailing Big 12 by minuscule amount. However league quality is much better compared to last based on EM of ~15.25% compared to 10.5% last year.

No top 10 teams at this stage for BE, with Butler and Seton Hall checking in at 10,11. Next is Nova at 26, then MU at 33.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: muguru on January 19, 2020, 01:17:11 PM
Second best conference in the country....no one said we were elite....elite unicorns went away in 1977

2nd best conference in the country, sure...but then tell me why a program like MU with the resources they invest can't reasonably be the best(or top 3 for sure) in the conference year after year?? Answer...they should be in comparison to other schools in the conference.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: tower912 on January 19, 2020, 01:28:04 PM
One year removed from a second place finish.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 01:49:50 PM
Interesting conference this year compared to last. League ranks 3rd in Pomeroy trailing Big 12 by minuscule amount. However league quality is much better compared to last based on EM of ~15.25% compared to 10.5% last year.

No top 10 teams at this stage for BE, with Butler and Seton Hall checking in at 10,11. Next is Nova at 26, then MU at 33.

League was ranked second by Sagarin until a few days ago, still ranked second in some services.  Very tight with Big 12 for 2nd and 3rd based on which rating is used.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: willie warrior on January 19, 2020, 02:09:44 PM
2nd best conference in the country, sure...but then tell me why a program like MU with the resources they invest can't reasonably be the best(or top 3 for sure) in the conference year after year?? Answer...they should be in comparison to other schools in the conference.
They should be, but are not. Coaching?????
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Jay Bee on January 19, 2020, 02:10:31 PM
No top 10 teams at this stage for BE, with Butler and Seton Hall checking in at 10,11.

wat
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: wadesworld on January 19, 2020, 02:18:55 PM
wat

Lol.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 02:22:37 PM
They should be, but are not. Coaching?????

Here I thought we were in the top 3 last year.  This year isn't over yet...right?
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: News: Garcia dreams MU on January 19, 2020, 02:24:59 PM
wat
Ners #FakeNews, hey
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhoaJoe2020 on January 19, 2020, 02:46:09 PM
2nd best conference in the country, sure...but then tell me why a program like MU with the resources they invest can't reasonably be the best(or top 3 for sure) in the conference year after year?? Answer...they should be in comparison to other schools in the conference.

I don't get it either. Milwaukee is a location destination, and MU is the most recognizable name in college sports. Marquettes dedication to running a clean program also serves as a beacon to elite players. The program is basically the same as Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Arizona, and Oregon. Not to mention its similarities to this years Memphis program.

It must be the coach.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: muguru on January 19, 2020, 02:47:29 PM
Here I thought we were in the top 3 last year.  This year isn't over yet...right?

They finished second sure, but when you consider that they had a MONUMENTAL unprecedented collapse to not win the title, that isn't very good. I think if I remember right with the lead they had with 4-5 games to go, that 538 projected it at like 98% to win the BE. Just unbelievable collapse.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: muguru on January 19, 2020, 02:49:53 PM
I don't get it either. Milwaukee is a location destination, and MU is the most recognizable name in college sports. Marquettes dedication to running a clean program also serves as a beacon to elite players. The program is basically the same as Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Arizona, and Oregon. Not to mention its similarities to this years Memphis program.

It must be the coach.

Outside of your sarcastic BS, why can't they be the best or at minimum top 2-3 in the conference every year?? You comparing it to Arizona etc is NOT relevant in regards to the Big East. Compare it to other schools in the Big East and there is NO reason they can't be one of the best year in year out in conference.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: jesmu84 on January 19, 2020, 03:23:23 PM
They finished second sure, but when you consider that they had a MONUMENTAL unprecedented collapse to not win the title, that isn't very good. I think if I remember right with the lead they had with 4-5 games to go, that 538 projected it at like 98% to win the BE. Just unbelievable collapse.

Goalposts moved.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhoaJoe2020 on January 19, 2020, 03:49:01 PM
Outside of your sarcastic BS, why can't they be the best or at minimum top 2-3 in the conference every year?? You comparing it to Arizona etc is NOT relevant in regards to the Big East. Compare it to other schools in the Big East and there is NO reason they can't be one of the best year in year out in conference.

Hidden within my "sarcastic BS" we're the reasons why Marquette may struggle meeting your expectations.

That's not to say the team won't have its moments...... like last years 2nd place finish in the BEast.

The consistency you seem to be demanding is just a bit unrealistic.

Oddly, I believe keeping Wojo makes meeting your expectations more likely than if he were replaced as you seem to advocate.

Have you ever cut off your own nose ?

Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Shooter McGavin on January 19, 2020, 04:22:43 PM

Oddly, I believe keeping Wojo makes meeting your expectations more likely than if he were replaced as you seem to advocate.


The fan base would definitely be more in line with this thought with a good finish to this year.   That plus our recruiting class would definitely give him more slack.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: muguru on January 19, 2020, 04:30:11 PM
Hidden within my "sarcastic BS" we're the reasons why Marquette may struggle meeting your expectations.

That's not to say the team won't have its moments...... like last years 2nd place finish in the BEast.

The consistency you seem to be demanding is just a bit unrealistic.

Oddly, I believe keeping Wojo makes meeting your expectations more likely than if he were replaced as you seem to advocate.

Have you ever cut off your own nose ?

I don't think it's unrealistic at all..Isn't that what Nova is doing?? MU SHOULD have a higher pedigree and be more nationally relevant consistently than any other team in the BE besides Nova. That's not unrelaistic at all when you consider the resources they put into it.

Secondly...I have said this a MILLION times already, but just because you fire a Coach does NOT necessarily mean losing a recruiting class. It all depends on who you bring in.

That being said, that class is also the reason why he has a bit more slack with me not a lot, but a bit more. I'm not going to argue that he isn't trending up, but damn has it been at a snail's pace. That's my biggest issue..NO reason the program couldn't/shouldn't be further ahead than they are now.

He really needs to do two things for me to be more on board:

1. Win something of substance ANY of these...BE title, BE tourney title, most of all NCAA games.
2. STOP losing games at home to mediocre teams. It's happened way too often during his tenure, and that loss to PC this year still sticks in my craw.

Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhoaJoe2020 on January 19, 2020, 04:51:14 PM
The fan base would definitely be more in line with this thought with a good finish to this year.   That plus our recruiting class would definitely give him more slack.

I have to admit I had serious concerns after the Hausers left, but with the team still being competitive in a tough conference, along with the recruiting class for next year, my worries about Wojo as a coach and a recruiter have greatly diminished. If Marquette makes the tournament after losing Sam, Joey, and Ed, and the injuries to Greg, Jayce, Theo, and Koby, I hope he gets a little appreciation from those who boo him at home games.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 05:03:32 PM
They finished second sure, but when you consider that they had a MONUMENTAL unprecedented collapse to not win the title, that isn't very good. I think if I remember right with the lead they had with 4-5 games to go, that 538 projected it at like 98% to win the BE. Just unbelievable collapse.

All you had to do was stop after the first four words.  We finished in the top 3.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 05:14:52 PM
I don't think it's unrealistic at all..Isn't that what Nova is doing?? MU SHOULD have a higher pedigree and be more nationally relevant consistently than any other team in the BE besides Nova. That's not unrelaistic at all when you consider the resources they put into it.

Secondly...I have said this a MILLION times already, but just because you fire a Coach does NOT necessarily mean losing a recruiting class. It all depends on who you bring in.

That being said, that class is also the reason why he has a bit more slack with me not a lot, but a bit more. I'm not going to argue that he isn't trending up, but damn has it been at a snail's pace. That's my biggest issue..NO reason the program couldn't/shouldn't be further ahead than they are now.

He really needs to do two things for me to be more on board:

1. Win something of substance ANY of these...BE title, BE tourney title, most of all NCAA games.
2. STOP losing games at home to mediocre teams. It's happened way too often during his tenure, and that loss to PC this year still sticks in my craw.

Villanova stuck with their coach, they have stability.  Better program overall, better recruiting backyard, more tradition than MU historically.  Three national titles, have won conference titles in the ‘70’s, 80’s, 90’s, 00’s, 10’s....they have had relevance most decades...we have not.  Sure, they have had down times which last far shorter than our downturns.

STABILITY MATTERS.  CONSISTENCY MATTERS. 
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Shooter McGavin on January 19, 2020, 05:20:03 PM
I have to admit I had serious concerns after the Hausers left, but with the team still being competitive in a tough conference, along with the recruiting class for next year, my worries about Wojo as a coach and a recruiter have greatly diminished. If Marquette makes the tournament after losing Sam, Joey, and Ed, and the injuries to Greg, Jayce, Theo, and Koby, I hope he gets a little appreciation from those who boo him at home games.

The booing is uncalled for and serves zero purpose.  That is indisputable.  If he goes to the NCAA this year that’s 3/6 years with an NIT and a great recruiting class coming in.  Not too shabby for a guy learning on the job and potentially his best years ahead of him. His leash will definitely be longer.

If he doesn’t make it to the tournament this year his leash will be much shorter than it is now fan-wise.  Any weakness in coaching in the next couple years will then start to be viewed harshly by management as well.

Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: IrwinFletcher on January 19, 2020, 05:31:31 PM
2nd best conference in the country, sure...but then tell me why a program like MU with the resources they invest can't reasonably be the best(or top 3 for sure) in the conference year after year?? Answer...they should be in comparison to other schools in the conference.

I believe I can say with certainty that the coaching staff, athletic staff and administration want and believe we can be a consistent Top 3 finisher in the Big East year after year. 

But do you think the same thoughts exist at Villanova? Butler? Xavier? Seton Hall? Providence? Creighton?

To be a Top 3 finisher in any power league means you are a blue blood.  And that is really hard to do.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 07:09:05 PM
The booing is uncalled for and serves zero purpose.  That is indisputable.  If he goes to the NCAA this year that’s 3/6 years with an NIT and a great recruiting class coming in.  Not too shabby for a guy learning on the job and potentially his best years ahead of him. His leash will definitely be longer.

If he doesn’t make it to the tournament this year his leash will be much shorter than it is now fan-wise.  Any weakness in coaching in the next couple years will then start to be viewed harshly by management as well.

The first year (I’d argue 2) were rebuilding years.  It would be like people expecting Buzz to go to the NCAAs in years 1 or 2 at Va Tech or this year at A&M.  Unless you walk into an amazing situation (Buzz 2008, it is an uphill climb).

The booing is ridiculous, but there were some yahoos that booed Kareem back in the day.  It’s unfortunate.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Elonsmusk on January 19, 2020, 07:29:42 PM
The first year (I’d argue 2) were rebuilding years.  It would be like people expecting Buzz to go to the NCAAs in years 1 or 2 at Va Tech or this year at A&M.  Unless you walk into an amazing situation (Buzz 2008, it is an uphill climb).



Finally realized your whole M.O. is to just troll.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: We R Final Four on January 19, 2020, 07:39:28 PM
why can't they be the best or at minimum top 2-3 in the conference every year??
Why can’t Marquette be the best team in the Big East every year?

I have no answer for this question.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 07:40:32 PM
Finally realized your whole M.O. is to just troll.

Nope.  And I don’t know how you would get that from that response, but whatever.  My M.O. is loving MU hoops and sprinkling reality into it as a fan and someone with 25+ years in this crazy business called sports...I realize fandom doesn’t coexist with reality, often.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 07:43:08 PM
Why can’t Marquette be the best team in the Big East every year?

I have no answer for this question.

Lack of stability over the long haul...number one reason.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Vander Blue Man Group on January 19, 2020, 08:04:15 PM
Finally realized your whole M.O. is to just troll.

Let’s be honest - your expectations for Wojo’s first year with what was left here have always been ludicrous. Can’t make chicken salad out of chicken sh*t.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: bilsu on January 19, 2020, 08:19:08 PM
I believe I can say with certainty that the coaching staff, athletic staff and administration want and believe we can be a consistent Top 3 finisher in the Big East year after year. 

But do you think the same thoughts exist at Villanova? Butler? Xavier? Seton Hall? Providence? Creighton?

To be a Top 3 finisher in any power league means you are a blue blood.  And that is really hard to do.

We could finish in the top 3 the next ten years and we still will not be a blue blood.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: lawdog77 on January 19, 2020, 08:22:49 PM
If we win Tuesday, and Providence loses on Wednesday against Seton Hall, we are in 3rd place. We still have a chance to have a great year.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: IrwinFletcher on January 19, 2020, 08:23:26 PM
We could finish in the top 3 the next ten years and we still will not be a blue blood.

Ya, I wrote that incorrectly in my post.  Should have read that if a team finishes in the Top 3 in a Power Conference EVERY YEAR, they are a blue blood.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: MUDPT on January 19, 2020, 08:26:31 PM
They finished second sure, but when you consider that they had a MONUMENTAL unprecedented collapse to not win the title, that isn't very good. I think if I remember right with the lead they had with 4-5 games to go, that 538 projected it at like 98% to win the BE. Just unbelievable collapse.

538 does CBB regular season predictions now?
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Elonsmusk on January 19, 2020, 09:00:20 PM
Nope.  And I don’t know how you would get that from that response, but whatever.  My M.O. is loving MU hoops and sprinkling reality into it as a fan and someone with 25+ years in this crazy business called sports...I realize fandom doesn’t coexist with reality, often.

And yet you crap all over the guy who Tom Crean brought here that gave us our best run since Al...and pretzel logic trajectory graphs to prop up his replacement. Gotcha.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: muguru on January 19, 2020, 09:06:10 PM
Villanova stuck with their coach, they have stability.  Better program overall, better recruiting backyard, more tradition than MU historically.  Three national titles, have won conference titles in the ‘70’s, 80’s, 90’s, 00’s, 10’s....they have had relevance most decades...we have not.  Sure, they have had down times which last far shorter than our downturns.

STABILITY MATTERS.  CONSISTENCY MATTERS.

Sure, but MU has stuck with Wojo too...haven't they?? He has been there 6 years now...6 F'n years! You still have never ever expalined) to me without using some BS excuse for this or that, how Crean and Buzz both had conference titles(Buzz's in the best conference ever assembled-can't use that as a reason), after 5 years at MU as well as deep tournament success, and Wojo hasn't. You always talk about apples to apples...5 years is 5 years..Buzz was in a BETTER Big East...can't use the "look what he started with)"because what he started with was long gone by then(or a vast majority of it), just as what Wojo started with is long gone. It's totally his guys now..it has been for a few years, yet he hasn't come close to matching what TC or Buzz did after 5 years...yet you act like he has been so accomplished. They have stuck with Wojo(and Wojo has decided to stay) just as long as Buzz and TC did. Everything is even so to speak..so you can't use the stability line either...what's the REASON?? Not an EXCUSE, the reason he hasn't accomplished as much?? I know the answer...it's glaringly obvious, though you will give some BS answer instead of admitting the truth.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Elonsmusk on January 19, 2020, 09:21:04 PM
Let’s be honest - your expectations for Wojo’s first year with what was left here have always been ludicrous. Can’t make chicken salad out of chicken sh*t.

My expectation was that he would use good judgment and common sense and invest in the future of the program - the talented freshman class he inherited, instead of bringing in a grad transfer and maxing the time of Derrick Wilson.

That decision-making led us to a 4-14 Big East finish, resulted in Deonte and Dawson transferring out, and JJJ not getting valuable playing time/experience.

In my view that illustrated a general lack of common sense, which caused my alarms to go off that Wojo didn’t have it. He’s certainly not a quick study, and overtly bright. However, he is gritty and perhaps that will bear some fruit. My opinion is that we are seeing his plateau. It’s not awful...just disappointing given our previous two coaches did better.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 09:32:04 PM
And yet you crap all over the guy who Tom Crean brought here that gave us our best run since Al...and pretzel logic trajectory graphs to prop up his replacement. Gotcha.

You are the one that wants Wojo fired, I never once said that about Buzz.  I also said he should be coach of the year.  He’s fake...so is Crean.  I want someone who wants to be at MU for 15 years, or at least 10....and someone that isn’t doing crap that is problematic in so many ways...that’s why I crapped on him.  He gone.  You going to continue to complain about him and Dawson for the next 20 years? Do us a favor, become an A&M fan then.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 09:36:10 PM
My expectation was that he would use good judgment and common sense and invest in the future of the program - the talented freshman class he inherited, instead of bringing in a grad transfer and maxing the time of Derrick Wilson.

That decision-making led us to a 4-14 Big East finish, resulted in Deonte and Dawson transferring out, and JJJ not getting valuable playing time/experience.

In my view that illustrated a general lack of common sense, which caused my alarms to go off that Wojo didn’t have it. He’s certainly not a quick study, and overtly bright. However, he is gritty and perhaps that will bear some fruit. My opinion is that we are seeing his plateau. It’s not awful...just disappointing given our previous two coaches did better.

Please describe this fictional talented freshmen class.

Burton left because his mother died and he needed to get out of Milwaukee per his brother and sister...who repeated that just last year.
 
Dawson was talented?  In what?

Duane was injured, nice kid...worked hard...was never a program changer that you imply.

That class was the most overrated top 10 class in MU history...add in Steve Taylor from a different class (also a mid major player like Cohen) and you have guys with nice numbers in recruiting rankings, but were not high major players. We’re all sorry that was the case, but it was.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 19, 2020, 09:41:39 PM
Sure, but MU has stuck with Wojo too...haven't they?? He has been there 6 years now...6 F'n years! You still have never ever expalined) to me without using some BS excuse for this or that, how Crean and Buzz both had conference titles(Buzz's in the best conference ever assembled-can't use that as a reason), after 5 years at MU as well as deep tournament success, and Wojo hasn't. You always talk about apples to apples...5 years is 5 years..Buzz was in a BETTER Big East...can't use the "look what he started with)"because what he started with was long gone by then(or a vast majority of it), just as what Wojo started with is long gone. It's totally his guys now..it has been for a few years, yet he hasn't come close to matching what TC or Buzz did after 5 years...yet you act like he has been so accomplished. They have stuck with Wojo(and Wojo has decided to stay) just as long as Buzz and TC did. Everything is even so to speak..so you can't use the stability line either...what's the REASON?? Not an EXCUSE, the reason he hasn't accomplished as much?? I know the answer...it's glaringly obvious, though you will give some BS answer instead of admitting the truth.

I can give you many coaches that didn’t win a conference title or a NCAA game in the time their predecessor did, but ended up doing great in the long run.

Your problem is that you think everything is exactly the same....sorry, life doesn’t work that way.  I’m patient and will stick with him....you want to continue the turnover...an absolute recipe for disaster.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhoaJoe2020 on January 19, 2020, 11:48:44 PM
Sure, but MU has stuck with Wojo too...haven't they?? He has been there 6 years now...6 F'n years! You still have never ever expalined) to me without using some BS excuse for this or that, how Crean and Buzz both had conference titles(Buzz's in the best conference ever assembled-can't use that as a reason), after 5 years at MU as well as deep tournament success, and Wojo hasn't. You always talk about apples to apples...5 years is 5 years..Buzz was in a BETTER Big East...can't use the "look what he started with)"because what he started with was long gone by then(or a vast majority of it), just as what Wojo started with is long gone. It's totally his guys now..it has been for a few years, yet he hasn't come close to matching what TC or Buzz did after 5 years...yet you act like he has been so accomplished. They have stuck with Wojo(and Wojo has decided to stay) just as long as Buzz and TC did. Everything is even so to speak..so you can't use the stability line either...what's the REASON?? Not an EXCUSE, the reason he hasn't accomplished as much?? I know the answer...it's glaringly obvious, though you will give some BS answer instead of admitting the truth.

Just because you declare that the circumstances at the beginning of Wojos tenure can't be considered, when comparing his year 5 accomplishments with a Coach X, doesn't mean others have to abide by the arbitrary condition you set.

Just like your declaration that all things are equal after year 5 doesn't have to be accepted by others.

Mitigating circumstances should always be considered when comparing people and historical events. Referring to them as excuses is just a cheap way to try and win an argument.



Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Heisenberg v2.0 on January 20, 2020, 06:41:05 AM
KenPom Rankings Chart
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: willie warrior on January 20, 2020, 07:00:39 AM
One year removed from a second place finish.

One year removed from a huge melt down last month of season. All in the spin, aana?
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: lawdog77 on January 20, 2020, 08:36:11 AM

One year removed from a huge melt down last month of season. All in the spin, aana?
Second place finish is a fact. "meltdown" is an opinion.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: tower912 on January 20, 2020, 08:39:29 AM
It is a fact that MU finished second in the Big East last year.   It is also a fact that MU finished 1-6 last year.   After that, it does start to get into perspective and speculation.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: MU82 on January 20, 2020, 08:55:16 AM
It is a fact that MU finished second in the Big East last year.   It is also a fact that MU finished 1-6 last year.   After that, it does start to get into perspective and speculation.

Yessir. Too often folks on this forum (and most others on the interwebs) act as if everything is mutually exclusive. We were OK the first couple weeks of last season, we were one of the best teams in the country for the next 3 months, and we stunk out every arena we played in the last few weeks. All of those are facts. We get to choose our own opinions, but not our own facts.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 20, 2020, 09:11:30 AM
MU back to 10-8 projection....two weeks ago it was 7-11 with one ranking.

Go Warriors.

Now back to 9-9....split with DePaul per KenPom.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Elonsmusk on January 20, 2020, 10:01:12 AM
Now back to 9-9....split with DePaul per KenPom.

Could you in all of your infinite wisdom and intelligence, please define for the board, trajectory and plateau?  Care to place a wager that next year's team finishes worse than this year's? 
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: tower912 on January 20, 2020, 10:05:28 AM
I think it likely that next year's team takes a step back.   I get nervous whenever the key to a season is the performance of freshmen.   But I remain more positive than kenpom about this year's team.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: jesmu84 on January 20, 2020, 12:02:09 PM
Could you in all of your infinite wisdom and intelligence, please define for the board, trajectory and plateau?  Care to place a wager that next year's team finishes worse than this year's?

I like this.

Last year, NoJoers refused to acknowledge the positive trend across Wojo's time at the helm. Now, they acknowledge the trend/trajectory but are jumping at the chance to argue he has plateaued because this year (so far) is relatively the same as last years.

Perfect.

Interesting to note though that this year's performance includes the loss of the Hausers and in a tougher BE conference. So, doesn't this years (so far) steady rankings indicate - at least a partial factor - Wojo's acumen as a coach?
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Pakuni on January 20, 2020, 12:10:01 PM
I think it likely that next year's team takes a step back.   I get nervous whenever the key to a season is the performance of freshmen.   But I remain more positive than kenpom about this year's team.

Better never become a Kentucky or Duke fan.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Elonsmusk on January 20, 2020, 12:15:27 PM
I like this.

Last year, NoJoers refused to acknowledge the positive trend across Wojo's time at the helm. Now, they acknowledge the trend/trajectory but are jumping at the chance to argue he has plateaued because this year (so far) is relatively the same as last years.

Perfect.

Interesting to note though that this year's performance includes the loss of the Hausers and in a tougher BE conference. So, doesn't this years (so far) steady rankings indicate - at least a partial factor - Wojo's acumen as a coach?

My take:  Wojo's tenure will vacillate between 30-60 rankings.  The team is doing better than I thought they would this season, so credit to Wojo.  I do think it is really hard to get a true read on how much of that is coaching acumen, versus how much is the greatness of Markus Howard.  Based on Wojo's first few years on the job, I feel our success is more a function of Markus's greatness, than Wojo's coaching prowess.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: tower912 on January 20, 2020, 04:54:39 PM
Better never become a Kentucky or Duke fan.
The formula doesn't always work even for them.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: jesmu84 on January 20, 2020, 06:29:50 PM
My take:  Wojo's tenure will vacillate between 30-60 rankings.  The team is doing better than I thought they would this season, so credit to Wojo.  I do think it is really hard to get a true read on how much of that is coaching acumen, versus how much is the greatness of Markus Howard.  Based on Wojo's first few years on the job, I feel our success is more a function of Markus's greatness, than Wojo's coaching prowess.

I hope he proves us all wrong.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: WhoaJoe2020 on January 20, 2020, 06:40:21 PM
I like this.

Last year, NoJoers refused to acknowledge the positive trend across Wojo's time at the helm. Now, they acknowledge the trend/trajectory but are jumping at the chance to argue he has plateaued because this year (so far) is relatively the same as last years.

Perfect.

Interesting to note though that this year's performance includes the loss of the Hausers and in a tougher BE conference. So, doesn't this years (so far) steady rankings indicate - at least a partial factor - Wojo's acumen as a coach?

I guess the only solution is to become a better place kicker.
Title: Re: Updated projections
Post by: Cheeks on January 20, 2020, 06:44:59 PM
My take:  Wojo's tenure will vacillate between 30-60 rankings.  The team is doing better than I thought they would this season, so credit to Wojo.  I do think it is really hard to get a true read on how much of that is coaching acumen, versus how much is the greatness of Markus Howard.  Based on Wojo's first few years on the job, I feel our success is more a function of Markus's greatness, than Wojo's coaching prowess.

Well 3 of the last 4 years (counting this season) have been between 29 and 37...so I’m thinking a tighter band.

Looking forward to seeing how he does with the next group of young men coming in.