Better Next Year or Hit With Rebuilding?

[Moonboots]

You're kidding, right?

Here is the list of current players in the conference who average between 8-9 rebounds per game.

Wes Johnson
Devin Ebanks
Luke Harangody
Greg Monroe
Herb Pope
Jamine Peterson
Mac Koshwal

Less than half the teams in the BE have a guy that grabs 8 or more rebounds per game.

Don't think Otule gets it... but I think Jimmy Butler has a legitimate shot at 7-8 rebounds per game, for sure.  His knack for finding the ball, especially on the offensive glass.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If JC is "all that", we'll be fine.  If he isn't, then next year could be a little bumpy.  Tremendous talent coming in, bu they'll be freshmen which makes them unpredictable.  I think the key is the point guard position and how well that position is played next year. 

[flash]

I think we will get about 10-11 big east wins next year, we are loosing a lot of experience (Lazar, Acker, Cooby) and we are bringing in a lot of inexperienced talent.  I think replacing Acker will be tough.  He does get abused on defense, but he is great at taking care of the basketball and not turning it over.  I think we can expect a lot of turnovers next year with a young back court.  Also the only true point guard we have is Cadougan.  From what I understand Smith, Blue, and Newbill are all shooting guards. 

[tower912]

The ceiling is higher and the floor is lower.    Assuming normal progressions of players, the 6 returning who are playing right now will be solid.   Otule in November was about where EWill is now.  That is 7 that can be good.    Assuming Blue and Crowder are as advertised, we have a decent 9 man rotation going in.    Assumptions all, but not reaches.     We now know what Buzz does with TC's players, and we know how he coaches when he has an underdog team.     I am looking forward to see what he does with a full roster with talent.    And I dream of the day that he has a full roster of talent with dependable bigs.   

[g0warriors1]

Otule has his work cut out for him, have we forgotten about Mbao 

[NersEllenson]

If JC is "all that", we'll be fine.  If he isn't, then next year could be a little bumpy.  Tremendous talent coming in, bu they'll be freshmen which makes them unpredictable.  I think the key is the point guard position and how well that position is played next year. 

+1 - We agree on something Chicos??!!

[hairy worthen]

IMO guard play will be the key, more so than post play. Our key to success this year has been the low turnover rate and the steady play of the senior guards.  The newcomers may be better players and more explosive than Cubillian and Acker, but as freshmen they will make mistakes and turn the ball over. Cadougan may be the most important piece next year.  If he can effectively keep the turnovers down, make good decisions and manage the game, we will be better in 2010-11.

[HoopsMalone]

We have all-Big East candidates on each wing next year in Jimmy and DJO if Buzz goes that way. 

[Niv Berkowitz]

The more and more this season went on the more happy I am with the players coming in next year.

That said, I also off set that optimism with how much I think we are going to miss Hayward next year. Sure, his rebounds may be picked up by a combo of Crowder and Otule, but I don't see both of them combining to match his points. And, I don't think either will be as versatile as Hayward. Crowder sounds like he could be, but Lazar just brings so much I think.

I'm actually more worried about making up for what we lost from Lazar than I was for what we lost from the big three coming into this season.

PG play will be huge too. We really could not have asked for more from Acker this season and turnovers will be a big growing pain next year. Combine young PGs and losing Lazar and I think we temper our expectations for next year. I think we'll be 7-9 in the conference and I'm fine with that all things considered. I don't think we are pre-season top 25 or anything. That will have to play itself out.

Either way, I think things continue to look up for the Warriors under Buzz and if we make a small step back next year, so be it.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The guy we all should be asking is Marquette84.

I believe he "called" this season pretty well, and was laughed at and ripped on.

I thought he was nuts at the time, but apparently he knew something most of us didn't.

[Mobot]

Otule has his work cut out for him, have we forgotten about Mbao 

There is some speculation that Mbao will not be back next year.  Was he at the game on Saturday?

[Niv Berkowitz]

Yes. I swore I saw him on the bench. I know he was there for Louisville.

[Clam Crowder]

I saw Mbao today with a suitcase so i'm assuming he's heading to the Big East tourney also

[Lennys Tap]

The guy we all should be asking is Marquette84.

I believe he "called" this season pretty well, and was laughed at and ripped on.

I thought he was nuts at the time, but apparently he knew something most of us didn't.

84 "called" this season by comparing 2005-06 to 2009-10. In both years we had a stud returning along with talented role players and highly rated newcomers. In both years we were picked 12th by the writers and coaches. Since Tom Crean (in what was his best coaching job at MU) could win 10 Big East games under those circumstances then so should Buzz. The logic had more holes than Albert Hall but it served the purpose of setting up Buzz for a fall (especially once it became clear MU would get nothing this year from its freshman class). Unfortunately for 84, Buzz "coached up" this team of average talent and no size and led them to the NCAA tournament, thereby denying 84 the bogus "I told you so" moment he hoped for and expected.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

84 "called" this season by comparing 2005-06 to 2009-10. In both years we had a stud returning along with talented role players and highly rated newcomers. In both years we were picked 12th by the writers and coaches. Since Tom Crean (in what was his best coaching job at MU) could win 10 Big East games under those circumstances then so should Buzz. The logic had more holes than Albert Hall but it served the purpose of setting up Buzz for a fall (especially once it became clear MU would get nothing this year from its freshman class). Unfortunately for 84, Buzz "coached up" this team of average talent and no size and led them to the NCAA tournament, thereby denying 84 the bogus "I told you so" moment he hoped for and expected.

If he was really looking for an "I told you so", he's got an even better one now because he told us that they would be good and everybody laughed at him (including me).

I know several people will accuse him of a conspiracy theory, but he called it, and it wasn't a wild guess either. He even told everybody how he came to the conclusion.

I gotta give him credit.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If he was really looking for an "I told you so", he's got an even better one now because he told us that they would be good and everybody laughed at him (including me).

I know several people will accuse him of a conspiracy theory, but he called it, and it wasn't a wild guess either. He even told everybody how he came to the conclusion.

I gotta give him credit.

+1

In Lenny's world no matter what some of us say, we're either "setting up Buzz" or don't worship at the altar so you can't win either way.  84 used reasonable logic, unlike how it was portrayed by Lenny, and he nailed it.  Good for 84.  Tip of the hat to him.

Despite the conspiracy theories, 84 and others don't want Buzz to fail.  Why on earth would anyone?  All it does is set the program back.

[Lennys Tap]

If he was really looking for an "I told you so", he's got an even better one now because he told us that they would be good and everybody laughed at him (including me).

I know several people will accuse him of a conspiracy theory, but he called it, and it wasn't a wild guess either. He even told everybody how he came to the conclusion.

I gotta give him credit.

I'm not a conspiracy theory freak by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a boring guy who believes Oswald shot Kennedy, Al Quaeda (not GWB) brought down the twin towers and that BO is a U.S. citizen. But if you and Chicos (surprise, surprise) can't see what 84 was up to you're either incapable or unwilling to connect the most rudimentary of dots. Since I think that you at least attempt some intellectual honesty regarding these matters do me a favor. Go back to the threads in question and reread them. It's clear to anyone with an open mind.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I'm not a conspiracy theory freak by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a boring guy who believes Oswald shot Kennedy, Al Quaeda (not GWB) brought down the twin towers and that BO is a U.S. citizen. But if you and Chicos (surprise, surprise) can't see what 84 was up to you're either incapable or unwilling to connect the most rudimentary of dots. Since I think that you at least attempt some intellectual honesty regarding these matters do me a favor. Go back to the threads in question and reread them. It's clear to anyone with an open mind.

I hear ya, and I know how it looks.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree.

Here's my take:

Marquette84 was labeled as a TC apologist by some.
Marquette84 predicts (given the roster) that MU should just as good as the frosh. year team from 2005-2006.
Some people jump to the conclusion that Marquette84 is just "setting Buzz up" because he loves TC.

BUT...

Here's the thing. Marquette84 has never really been a Buzz hater or Buzz basher. There are a good handful of those guys around, just check out the threads after any loss. Marquette84 isn't the guy leading the charge on the Buzz hate, so I can't just jump to the conclusion that he is "setting up Buzz" by predicting that they be a good team.

IF Marquette84 was constantly gunning on Buzz and finding faults, I think your theory would be accurate. But, I just haven't seen that.

I don't think that liking TC makes him dislike Buzz, and I think that's the conclusion several people are jumping to, and thus the "theory" that he is "setting Buzz up".

Anyways, I apologize in advance for the thread jack, everybody.

[Marquette84]

I'm not a conspiracy theory freak by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a boring guy who believes Oswald shot Kennedy, Al Quaeda (not GWB) brought down the twin towers and that BO is a U.S. citizen. But if you and Chicos (surprise, surprise) can't see what 84 was up to you're either incapable or unwilling to connect the most rudimentary of dots. Since I think that you at least attempt some intellectual honesty regarding these matters do me a favor. Go back to the threads in question and reread them. It's clear to anyone with an open mind.

The irony is that you are so patently biased that you felt you had to lowball expectations.  I find it funny that you'd even attempt to bring it up.

Did you offer any analysis?  And data?  Any insight?  Nope--you just declared--before the season started--that Buzz was a better coach and recruiter, but how dare I suggest that he actually, you know, be held accountable and actually win the games.  

Before the season began I provided extensive detail on why I thought most were underestimating this year's team, and it starts with the returning talent:
--Hayward was a stud and everyone should have known that coming in.
--Acker did a more-than-admirable job against the last eight opponents, which included five of last year's elite eight.  Any PG that can put up a 2.5 to 1 a/t ratio against that opposition is solid.
--Butler was underutilized in an environment that had him behind Matthews and Hayward in the depth chart--anyone who looked closely realized the talent he was.  His performance this year is absolutely ZERO surprise to me--not with his #4 in the nation offensive rating last year and his solid play in the conference season.
--DJO and Buycks were 1st team JUCO all-Americans.  1st team. Watching the way coaches like Bob Huggins reloaded with this type of player, there was no reason NOT to expect that they could at least equal the type of performance that Mcneal or Matthews did in their frosh season.
--The schedule gave MU an absolute gift with 2 games against Depaul and 2 against PC.  The home/road schedule was favorable as well, as more of the middle of the pack games were at home (GU, ND, USF, UL) while the bottom-half teams were on the road (SH, SJU, UConn, Cincy).

If you're going to talk about intellectual honesty, then just admit that you wanted to lowball expectations for Buzz, so that you could proclaim his coaching "superiority" regardless of how the team actually performed.  

All I said was that given the very obvious similar circumstances, Buzz should be able to replicate what Tom Crean did.  Apparently, that now passes for a pro-Crean "agenda."  Somehow, you feel it is "intellectually dishonest" to have similar expectations for Buzz and Crean under very similar circumstances.

I'm not like you--I'm not going to hold Buzz and Crean to two different standards simply because I like one of them better.  

Apparently YOU have formed your opinion not based on fact or analysis, but because your agenda is that you want Buzz to be superior to Crean in every way.  What the hell is that if not intellectually dishonest?

So please, stop lecturing me about having an open mind.  YOU are far more biased in your thinking.  YOUR mind was made up in advance that Buzz MUST be a better coach and a better recruiter.   Therefore, you sandbagged the season with low-ball expectations that were not based on any rational analysis.

[Marquette84]

I hear ya, and I know how it looks.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree.

Here's my take:

Marquette84 was labeled as a TC apologist by some.
Marquette84 predicts (given the roster) that MU should just as good as the frosh. year team from 2005-2006.
Some people jump to the conclusion that Marquette84 is just "setting Buzz up" because he loves TC.

BUT...

Here's the thing. Marquette84 has never really been a Buzz hater or Buzz basher. There are a good handful of those guys around, just check out the threads after any loss. Marquette84 isn't the guy leading the charge on the Buzz hate, so I can't just jump to the conclusion that he is "setting up Buzz" by predicting that they be a good team.

IF Marquette84 was constantly gunning on Buzz and finding faults, I think your theory would be accurate. But, I just haven't seen that.

I don't think that liking TC makes him dislike Buzz, and I think that's the conclusion several people are jumping to, and thus the "theory" that he is "setting Buzz up".

Anyways, I apologize in advance for the thread jack, everybody.

Thank you.

For those like Lenny who seem to think I have some anti-Buzz agenda, please go back to the archives in April of 2008 and look at who was among Cottingham's staunchest defenders on his hiring process and the decision to hire Buzz.

You just might be surprised at what you find.

[g0lden3agle]

Can't we all just play nice?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Don't present Lenny with the facts, he's got a good thing going on and he looks awesome in aluminum foil.

[Lennys Tap]

Don't present Lenny with the facts, he's got a good thing going on and he looks awesome in aluminum foil.

Thanks for sharing your family Christmas card with the board.

[LON]

Don't present Lenny with the facts, he's got a good thing going on and he looks awesome in aluminum foil.

Free your mind and the rest will follow
Be colorblind don't be so shallow

/yeah, I just posted En Vogue lyrics on a basketball message board
//deal with it

[Lennys Tap]

The irony is that you are so patently biased that you felt you had to lowball expectations.  I find it funny that you'd even attempt to bring it up.

Did you offer any analysis?  And data?  Any insight?  Nope--you just declared--before the season started--that Buzz was a better coach and recruiter, but how dare I suggest that he actually, you know, be held accountable and actually win the games.  

Before the season began I provided extensive detail on why I thought most were underestimating this year's team, and it starts with the returning talent:
--Hayward was a stud and everyone should have known that coming in.
--Acker did a more-than-admirable job against the last eight opponents, which included five of last year's elite eight.  Any PG that can put up a 2.5 to 1 a/t ratio against that opposition is solid.
--Butler was underutilized in an environment that had him behind Matthews and Hayward in the depth chart--anyone who looked closely realized the talent he was.  His performance this year is absolutely ZERO surprise to me--not with his #4 in the nation offensive rating last year and his solid play in the conference season.
--DJO and Buycks were 1st team JUCO all-Americans.  1st team. Watching the way coaches like Bob Huggins reloaded with this type of player, there was no reason NOT to expect that they could at least equal the type of performance that Mcneal or Matthews did in their frosh season.
--The schedule gave MU an absolute gift with 2 games against Depaul and 2 against PC.  The home/road schedule was favorable as well, as more of the middle of the pack games were at home (GU, ND, USF, UL) while the bottom-half teams were on the road (SH, SJU, UConn, Cincy).

If you're going to talk about intellectual honesty, then just admit that you wanted to lowball expectations for Buzz, so that you could proclaim his coaching "superiority" regardless of how the team actually performed.  

All I said was that given the very obvious similar circumstances, Buzz should be able to replicate what Tom Crean did.  Apparently, that now passes for a pro-Crean "agenda."  Somehow, you feel it is "intellectually dishonest" to have similar expectations for Buzz and Crean under very similar circumstances.

I'm not like you--I'm not going to hold Buzz and Crean to two different standards simply because I like one of them better.  

Apparently YOU have formed your opinion not based on fact or analysis, but because your agenda is that you want Buzz to be superior to Crean in every way.  What the hell is that if not intellectually dishonest?

So please, stop lecturing me about having an open mind.  YOU are far more biased in your thinking.  YOUR mind was made up in advance that Buzz MUST be a better coach and a better recruiter.   Therefore, you sandbagged the season with low-ball expectations that were not based on any rational analysis.

BEFORE Cadougan and OTule were injured and BEFORE Maymon left the team:1.ESPN said MU would be "as good as their freshmen" and picked them 11th in the BEast 2. Yahoo.com also said 11th 3. Big East coaches had MU 12th and 4.Rivals.com had MU #83 in the nation, 20 spots behind UWM and a mere 43 places ahead of Indiana. I saw ZERO predictions from anyone even tangentially connected to college bball that had MU higher than 10th in the conference. My expectations were not "low balled" or "biased" any more than those of Rivals, Yahoo, ESPN, coaches and the rest who make their living covering college basketball were.

It was YOUR expectations that were far outside of the bell curve and some of the information you used to justify them (refering to MU's recruiting class as #1 in the country) was called "purposeful misinformation" by none other than MU Scoop recruiting guru BMA725. Why would you use "purposeful misinformation" to set the bar as high as possible for this year's team? Even Chicos in his silly foil hat knows the answer to that one.