Big East preview

[al3xis]

cuttingdownnets.wordpress.com

[MR.HAYWARD]

based on the first sentence of this guys review he must not be familiar with the antics of one, Bob Huggins, to aasume truck Bryant or Mazzula will miss one single game in which they are needed or at all is awfully naive.  With all the felonies that were commited at Cincinnatti with nary a suspension that caused anyone to miss any games, i think we all know the eventual resolution of this farce.

[bilsu]

I think Georgetown is overrated and Cincy is underrated.

[thanooj]

Even if he is correct about where mu finishes, i now officially hate him for saying it.

petty, but warranted.

[Nukem2]

Even if he is correct about where mu finishes, i now officially hate him for saying it.

petty, but warranted.

As Buzz has said a couple of times, MU realistically should be ranked 16th based on the returnees.  This team will do better than 16th; but, its going to be a roller coaster ride.  People should not have unrealistic expectations for this team.  Comparing it to the Amigos frosh season is silly since these are different players and coaches in a BE that has changed.  Can't wait until October to see how this all plays out.

[Marquette84]

As Buzz has said a couple of times, MU realistically should be ranked 16th based on the returnees.  This team will do better than 16th; but, its going to be a roller coaster ride.  People should not have unrealistic expectations for this team.  Comparing it to the Amigos frosh season is silly since these are different players and coaches in a BE that has changed.  Can't wait until October to see how this all plays out.

Based on the "number of returnees" logic, MSOE is going to be a challenge.

Comparisons to the Amigo's frosh season are completely appropriate--this year's backcourt newcomers are coming in with similar accolades, but are more experienced.  .

All three amigos were true freshmen.  In this year's backcourt, only Cadougan is a frosh--DJO comes in with one year of college ball under his belt, Buycks has two years.   

I get that a lot of people like to set expectations low--but a 12th place finish is as unrealistic as expecting a championship.  We brought in experienced JUCO players so that we don't have a dropoff into the dregs of the league.  This team absolutely should not finish below 8th place, and with a relatively easy draw on the mirror games, one could make the case that we should be competitive for 5th or 6th.   There is far too much talent to expect that we'll be battling with DePaul, Rutgers, USF and St. Johns locked in a battle for 12th through 16th. 

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Couldn't agree more with 84 (hey that rhymes). People tend to be on two ends of the spectrum on this: either they are half-glass-empty and all we have back are Lazar and Butler and will suck, or expecting the new guys will come in and gel immediately like 05-06. Right now predictions are just meaningless. I think comparisons to Wes, Jerel and Dom are unwarranted but may turn out to be true. But to write off people who think we can be in the top half of the league as dreamers is just plain pessimistic. I just like the type of class Buzz has assembled and am excited to see these guys in MU uniforms.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If we finish 12th, that would be disappointing.  Could happen, but I think we break the top 10...I should hope.

[wadesworld]

Based on the "number of returnees" logic, MSOE is going to be a challenge.

Comparisons to the Amigo's frosh season are completely appropriate--this year's backcourt newcomers are coming in with similar accolades, but are more experienced.  .

All three amigos were true freshmen.  In this year's backcourt, only Cadougan is a frosh--DJO comes in with one year of college ball under his belt, Buycks has two years.   

I get that a lot of people like to set expectations low--but a 12th place finish is as unrealistic as expecting a championship.  We brought in experienced JUCO players so that we don't have a dropoff into the dregs of the league.  This team absolutely should not finish below 8th place, and with a relatively easy draw on the mirror games, one could make the case that we should be competitive for 5th or 6th.   There is far too much talent to expect that we'll be battling with DePaul, Rutgers, USF and St. Johns locked in a battle for 12th through 16th.

I get the point but have you seen each of our recruits?  I understand, they're highly ranked.  Rankings are fine, but there is no way to know for sure that these recruits are the real deal until they've actually played at Marquette.  Even if they are very talented, who knows how well they will play as a TEAM.  And I get that DJO and Buycks have more experience than high school, but you can't compare JUCO to the Big East.

Do I THINK we will be in the top half of the league?  I actually do.  But to say "This team absolutely should not finish below 8th place" I personally think is ridiculous.  We have 2 proven players in Lazar and Butler, and even Butler is not truly proven.  He was playing out of position and was a 6th man, not a go to guy.  Other than that we have SEVEN newcomers.  Not to mention a SECOND YEAR head coach.  I THINK and HOPE that this team will take somewhere above 8th place, but I don't think it is anywhere near a given.  Let's wait to see if these recruits really are THAT good.

Just for comparison's sake, the team that just graduated had 3 seniors who had started since day 1 on the team, who made up one of the best backcourts in the nation, took 6th in the league last year.  I don't think it'd be that big of a shock to fall more than 2 spots in the league after losing 4 of 5 starters, including the 3 best players.

[NCMUFan]

Remember Jimmi Butler is the only Buzz recruit so far to log any minutes and think how high we are on him.  Now we have more initially heralded recruits than Jimmi.  Hence if Buzz eye for talent is consistent we could have a kick butt team.

[bilsu]

Uconn was a final four team this year with Thabeat. When Thabeat was a freshmen along with several other highly rated newcomers they did not make the NIT after entering the Big East undefeated. They played a bunch of nobody's in non-conference and got hammered in the Big East. I expect the same thing to happen to MU. There are very few JC players that have a high impact their first year in Division 1. It took Butler a half of season to become effective. Cadougan missing the summer sessions is going to hurt his start. Based on Rosiak's latest report it sounds like neither Otule or Roseboro are the answer at center. My guess is that Hayward, Butler, Maymon, Buycks and DJO are the starters at the start, with Cadougan eventually starting at point.

[Nukem2]

Based on the "number of returnees" logic, MSOE is going to be a challenge.

Comparisons to the Amigo's frosh season are completely appropriate--this year's backcourt newcomers are coming in with similar accolades, but are more experienced.  .

All three amigos were true freshmen.  In this year's backcourt, only Cadougan is a frosh--DJO comes in with one year of college ball under his belt, Buycks has two years.  

I get that a lot of people like to set expectations low--but a 12th place finish is as unrealistic as expecting a championship.  We brought in experienced JUCO players so that we don't have a dropoff into the dregs of the league.  This team absolutely should not finish below 8th place, and with a relatively easy draw on the mirror games, one could make the case that we should be competitive for 5th or 6th.   There is far too much talent to expect that we'll be battling with DePaul, Rutgers, USF and St. Johns locked in a battle for 12th through 16th.  

The comparisons are silly 84.  We have one guy who has ever started a Div I game and another who played off the bench in his second semester.  Other than that, the amigos were ighly touted as opposed to the incoming group which has come about in different ways to MU.  You are beginging to sound like Murff ( if thats possible).

[bamamarquettefan]

I still keep thinking this is 1991, which makes this pretty realistic.

In retrospect, I ranked that incoming class as our third best class of all-time, and think this class could be up there as well.

However, that year we were replacing All-American Tony Smith, this year we lost All-American Jerel McNeal.

We brought back two contributors that year and this:

1) One great contributor and our top rebounder in Trevor Powell, just as we bring back Lazar Hayward.

2) Our second decent contributor in Mark Anglavar, just as we have Jimmy Butler this year (albeit completely different players in a 3-point shooter and a great offensive rebounder).

The new guys were fantastic with Key scoring immediately, Curry pounding the glass and McIlvaine and Logterman showing some of their future potential.

However, the record in 1991 was 11-18.  I'm just not sure a team built on one great returnee (Lazar), one very good one (Butler) and a ton of potential is going to be competitive this year.  I'm not saying this to downplay our chances next year - I hope we do much better than that, I am saying it because I hope we don't boo the players next year if they falter like they were booed in 1991.

The records the next three years were 16-13, 20-8 and NCAA bid, and 24-9 and conference champion and Sweet 16 the fourth year (1994).  Let's keep it in perspective.  Hope we do great next year, but if we don't, I will still be thrilled with the potential for what we are building.

[Marquette84]

The comparisons are silly 84.  We have one guy who has ever started a Div I game and another who played off the bench in his second semester.  Other than that, the amigos were ighly touted as opposed to the incoming group which has come about in different ways to MU.  You are beginging to sound like Murff ( if thats possible).

Here's how I see things:

Behind: WVU, Villanova, Louisville, UConn
About the same level as:  Cincinnati, Georgetown, Seton Hall
Ahead of:  DePaul, USF, Providence, Rutgers, St. Johns, Syracuse, Pitt, ND

I think one can make a reasonable argument for us to be expected to finish ahead of the 8 teams I see as behind us.

• Notre Dame lost 4 of their top 6, including 3 starters.  Hayward and Harangody are probably about equal in overall talent.  Jackson might be slightly better than Butler.  Our recruits are better than theirs.   We play them head to head at home.

• Pitt lost just as much starting experience as we did, their one returning starter isn't even close to being comparable to Hayward, and our incoming class is much higher rated.   Every argument you can make for MU not being experience applies equally to Pitt.  AND we play them head-to-head at home.

• Syracuse lost their three best players, and even though Rautins and Jackson split a starting role, I don't put either of them ahead of Jimmy Butler, even though Butler didn't start.  I think one has to give the edge to Hayward over Onuaku.  NBA draft projections do.   So Syracuse will largely be going with untested players in the backcourt--except their newcomers aren't as highly rated as ours.

• St. Johns returns everyone from a 6-12 team.  Oh, and they get Anthony Mason Jr. back, who anchored a 5-13 team the season before. 

• Rutgers returns most of the starters from what was a pretty lousy team. I'll be charitable and suggest that Rosario and Hayward are roughly equal.  Butler is as good as anyone else on their roster.  Our recruits are significantly higher rated.  I expect we should beat them head to head at home.

• Providence and USF lost as much as we did.  And the replacements aren't rated as highly.

• DePaul lost their best player, but does return 4 starters from their 0-18 team.  I guess that's good for something.

So that's eight teams right there where there is a more-than-reasonable case to be made that we should be expected to finish ahead of. 

Cincy, Georgetown, and Seton Hall return more than we do, but all have question marks. These are the type of team that we SHOULD be competitive with.   

If you want to make the case that we should be behind ND or Pitt or Syracuse, you'll have to do it on something other than MU's lack of experience--because these teams all have as much to replace as we do.

[Nukem2]

   Syracuse has MO transfer Wesley Johnson coming in.  He is very good.  Losing Devendorf may be addition by subtraction.  Also Mookie Jones is back off injury redshirt.  SU also is significantly better inside than MU.  G-Town simply underperformed last year.  JTIII will have them back.  ND brings in Scott Martin and Ben Hansborough to go with Tory Jackson and Harangody.  The Irish will be better (and might even play some defense).  Cincy and Seton Hall bring in some serious talent to go along with now experienced returnees of note.  Rutgers has a rising star in Rosario and a slimmed down Echenique and they now have a point guard.  MU had tons of trouble with USF even with the Amigos.  Providence is in the same boat as MU albeit with far less incoming talent than MU.  DePaul is, well, DePaul (but they do have experience and Tucker was not always on the same page).
   I'm excited about MU's future under Buzz; but, this season just seems like it could be difficult.  MU could play very well and still be 8-10 or 7-11.  Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[MU_Iceman]

   Syracuse has MO transfer Wesley Johnson coming in.  He is very good.  Losing Devendorf may be addition by subtraction.  Also Mookie Jones is back off injury redshirt.  SU also is significantly better inside than MU.  G-Town simply underperformed last year.  JTIII will have them back.  ND brings in Scott Martin and Ben Hansborough to go with Tory Jackson and Harangody.  The Irish will be better (and might even play some defense).  Cincy and Seton Hall bring in some serious talent to go along with now experienced returnees of note.  Rutgers has a rising star in Rosario and a slimmed down Echenique and they now have a point guard.  MU had tons of trouble with USF even with the Amigos.  Providence is in the same boat as MU albeit with far less incoming talent than MU.  DePaul is, well, DePaul (but they do have experience and Tucker was not always on the same page).
   I'm excited about MU's future under Buzz; but, this season just seems like it could be difficult.  MU could play very well and still be 8-10 or 7-11.  Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

You hit the nail on the head, Nuke...

Syracuse is going to be very talented this year.  Notre Dame is reloading with legitimate talent.  G-Town has Monroe back (he would have likely been a lottery pick this year in the draft) and he has some talented players around him with a great coach.  People tend to assume Rutgers and Seton Hall are crap, but they have some very solid players on their rosters and they're going to surprise a lot of teams.  Pitt will be down, but don't forget that their recruiting classes are consistently better than ours on an annual basis and therefore the players on their bench that will be relied on to contribute this year aren't going to be scrubs by any stretch of the imagination.  Cincy is on the rise...

The fact is, while we'd all like to think that our boys are going to compete at a very high level, let's face it, the chips are stacked HEAVILY against us.  Personally I'd be extremely pleased with an 8th place finish in the conference.  Even though everyone has deemed this coming season to be a down year in the Big East, Joe Lunardi still projects 8 or 9 teams to make the tourney...this a very talented league and we are a very young, raw, unproven team...so I'm going to hope for the best but expect mediocrity...

(I hope my expectations are terribly wrong)

[Nukem2]

Its hard to have expectations for this team.  What will be will be.  Same was true of the first BE season.  The Amigos came on strong along with Novak and the role players did just that.  That team had Novak, Chapman, Grimm, Barro, as returnees along with redhsirt transfer Fitzgerald to help the Amigos in their frosh season with the same head coach in place.  The cupboard is not as full this time around.  Will be an exciting season.  I certainly do not expect mediocrity; but, I am realistic in understanding that the team could play well but still have a record well under .500   This is a rebuilding season for Buzz and Company. 

[bma725]

• Syracuse lost their three best players, and even though Rautins and Jackson split a starting role, I don't put either of them ahead of Jimmy Butler, even though Butler didn't start.  I think one has to give the edge to Hayward over Onuaku.  NBA draft projections do.   So Syracuse will largely be going with untested players in the backcourt--except their newcomers aren't as highly rated as ours.

Their second best player last year was sitting on the bench as a transfer, Wesley Johnson.  He'll be eligible this year.  They also get Mookie Jones and Scoop Jardine back from injury.

[MuMark]

Their will not be one publication or expert that will pick us ahead of ND.

Obviously anything can happen but they return more then we do with Harangody and Jackson + role players who should improve in Nash and Peoples.

Martin and Hansborough are proven players at the D 1 level.

We have lots of potential in our squad but for anyone to be able to try and predict what this team will do is silly because nobody can have any reasonable idea.

[Sir Lawrence]

Their will not be one publication or expert that will pick us ahead of ND.

I agree.  The thing that bugs me is that the same statement held true regarding the expert opinions last year.  I could never understand why ND received so much preseason hype last year.  

[Marquette84]

Their will not be one publication or expert that will pick us ahead of ND.

Obviously anything can happen but they return more then we do with Harangody and Jackson + role players who should improve in Nash and Peoples.

Martin and Hansborough are proven players at the D 1 level.

We have lots of potential in our squad but for anyone to be able to try and predict what this team will do is silly because nobody can have any reasonable idea.

I don't think its unreasonable to expect that a #1 recruiting class with two solid returnees should be expected to be a top-half team in our league.

Apparently, I am not supposed assume that our guys are capable of living up to their reputation until they actually prove it.   

I am supposed assume that any other team's new recruits have improved dramatically from their last stop (e.g. Wesley Johnson, who led Iowa State to 11th place in the B12 before transferring).

I am supposed to believe that players added to everyone else's roster will gel as a team instantly, while it will take our players at least a full season to become comfortable playing with one another.

I am supposed to assume that other team's players coming off injury will not only come back without missing a beat, but demonstrate substantial improvement (Mookie Jones & Scoop Jardine).

Apparently, I am supposed to accept that our newcomers are incapable of performing well until they have a year in the system--that it is unfair to expect that our top 100 frosh or top 10 Jucos will have initial year contributions of players like DeJuan Blair, Devin Ebanks, Yancy Gates, Kemba Walker, Samardo Samuels, Sam Young, Terrance Jennings,Luke Harangody, Oniuku, Rosario, and yes, even McNeal, James and Matthews.

I'm sorry, but I can't understand the logic of someone saying that "well, Ben Hansborogh and Mookie Jones are much better than Dwight Buycks and Darius Johnson-Odom THIS year, but just wait until NEXT year after our guys have a year under their belts."   What is going to happen?  Will Buycks and Johnson-Odom magically become more talented while all development by Hansborogh and Jones stops?  

The only exception I'll grant is for a guy who is not physically mature--Mbao, Roseboro, perhaps Erik Williams.  A juco transfer who can't be 100% by the time conference season starts is probably not going to get there next year either. 

If Jeronne Maymon can't hold his own against a middle-of-the-pack team now, how is he going to be good enough down the road to lead us to a championship?  If we expect that he's going to lead us to be like Pitt as he gets better, shouldn't he be capable of delivering what Blair or Young did when THEY were frosh? 
 

[bma725]

One service believes MU has the #1 recruiting class, and it's the least respected of all the services.  The ranking is based on their ranking of JUCO players, which history has shown is marginally accurate at best.  They give the same ranking to Dwight Buycks and DJO that they gave to Marcus Jackson, Ousmane Barro, Mike Kinsella and Jamil Lott.  You need to look at the other services to get a more accurate reading.  Scout has MU at #18.  ESPN has MU at #14.  Rivals has MU at #17.   Good, but not #1, not even close.

To continue to refer the class as the #1 recruiting class is purposeful misinformation and you know it.

[79Warrior]

One service believes MU has the #1 recruiting class, and it's the least respected of all the services.  The ranking is based on their ranking of JUCO players, which history has shown is marginally accurate at best.  They give the same ranking to Dwight Buycks and DJO that they gave to Marcus Jackson, Ousmane Barro, Mike Kinsella and Jamil Lott.  You need to look at the other services to get a more accurate reading.  Scout has MU at #18.  ESPN has MU at #14.  Rivals has MU at #17.   Good, but not #1, not even close.

To continue to refer the class as the #1 recruiting class is purposeful misinformation and you know it.

completely agree.

[Lennys Tap]

One service believes MU has the #1 recruiting class, and it's the least respected of all the services.  The ranking is based on their ranking of JUCO players, which history has shown is marginally accurate at best.  They give the same ranking to Dwight Buycks and DJO that they gave to Marcus Jackson, Ousmane Barro, Mike Kinsella and Jamil Lott.  You need to look at the other services to get a more accurate reading.  Scout has MU at #18.  ESPN has MU at #14.  Rivals has MU at #17.   Good, but not #1, not even close.

To continue to refer the class as the #1 recruiting class is purposeful misinformation and you know it.

"Purposeful misinformation" that would result in unreasonable expectations for MU and Buzz this year. Hmmm...kinda sounds like the work of someone with an "agenda", no?

[Marquette84]

One service believes MU has the #1 recruiting class, and it's the least respected of all the services.  The ranking is based on their ranking of JUCO players, which history has shown is marginally accurate at best.  They give the same ranking to Dwight Buycks and DJO that they gave to Marcus Jackson, Ousmane Barro, Mike Kinsella and Jamil Lott.  You need to look at the other services to get a more accurate reading.  Scout has MU at #18.  ESPN has MU at #14.  Rivals has MU at #17.   Good, but not #1, not even close.

To continue to refer the class as the #1 recruiting class is purposeful misinformation and you know it.

Perhaps you should let the MU basketball office know that they shouldn't ask us to set expectations based on HoopScoop.  Currently, they highlight HoopScoop in the summer prospectus:

"MU’s seven newcomers (five freshmen, one junior and one sophomore) are
ranked third by HoopScoopOnline.com and Hoopmasters.com, 14th by
ESPNU.com, 16th by Rivals.com and 17th by Scout.com. "

http://www.gomarquette.com/photos/schools/marq/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/0910-prospectus.pdf


Obviously MU has more faith in Hoopscoop than you do.  


Second, I seem to recall someone comparing rankings recently, and when I look at where HoopScoop ranks players (HSC in your tables below), they seem to be right in line with the composite RSCI:







And even admit the guys you mention above were skewed by injuries--to Jackson his junior year, to Kinsella every year he was at MU.  And you didn't even mention that Lott's junior year he missed extensive time because of mono.

So is Hoop Scoop "marginally accurate" becuase they failed to predict nagging injuries.  Kinsella had a good year at JUCO.  NOw that he's healthy he's having success in Europe.  I fail to see that we should indict their judgement because they didn't predict multiple years of injuires.  I think if Kinsella had been healthy, he may well have matched the performance of 2004's #37 Greg Steimsma or #43 Shasha Kuan.
http://www.eurobasket.com/player.asp?Cntry=ROM&PlayerID=91143

Finally let's look at recent performance by Hoop Scoop on Butler.  They ranked him 41-70.  Let's compare Butler to some other guys across that range:

#41 Tony Woods (tied for best in the 41-70 range):
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=41040
#41 Jerime Anderson (tied for best in the 41-70 range):
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=41012
#55 Xavier Gibson (middle of range):
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/gamelog?playerId=40971
#70 Renaldo Woolridge (top of range):
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=41340

I think Hoop Scoop if anything underestimated Jimmy Butler.  

Your implication that they always overestimate JUCO players is purposeful misinformation as well.  You glossed over the impact of injuries, and ignored more contemporary examples like Jimmy Butler.


All that having been said, I still don't understand how a group that can't come within four places of the Amigos as freshmen will somehow magically become significantly better at some indeterminate future point. 

In other words--if we don't start out better than SU or ND or Pitt THIS year, how will we wind up better next year after Hayward has graduated, but SU still has Jones and Oniaku and Jardine, ND still has Hansborough and Pitt still has their newcomers?  Won't those guys get better as well?