I know why everyone is so upset with this team.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Unfair?

Frankly, the expectations of some here was that he would be the starter on Day 1, and many others thought he'd be starting by the time conference play rolled around.

I think fair is to say that he should be equal to slightly better than the Amigos, Hayward, Diener, Pieper, Novak, Key, Mac, Logerman, Eford, Henry, etc. etc. etc.

[/b]
Why is this? 

[Wade for President]

Chicos...Give it a rest.  Seriously. 

I challenge you to not mention Crean in one thread this week.  One.  Regardless if you're egged on by another poster.  Just pretend that Lent came early for ya.

[TJ]

Thinking out loud here ....

We have played 10 currently ranked teams in the last 16.  (and I noted before, for comparison, Wisconsin played 2 ranked teams in the last 16).

Consequently, we are on national TV virtually every game.  What was the last game that was not nationally televised?  I cannot remember.

Would it be better if MU was only televised nationally every third or fourth game.  Then guys like Chicos (and me) would only see a fraction of the games and have a different prospective  AND ... less time invested in this team and not so emotional.

Are we a victim of our success and BE schedule?

Is it really that hard to understand why people are frustrated?  Read this again and pretend Chicos didn't write it:

No, I don't think it's that at all.  I think there is talent on this team and people are frustrated watching us play wonderful basketball for 32 minutes or 35 minutes or 37 minutes but having periods in the game it all goes to hell.  The worst part, WE ALL KNOW IT"S COMING BEFORE IT EVEN HAPPENS. 

The frustration is knowing the talent is there, the willingness is there, the effort is there, the results are NOT there.  That's the frustration.

It's as simple as that.  I don't know why people keep asking about why people are frustrated.

[groove]

I have low expectations. I just hope he isn't Mike Deane v.2

Mike Deane
21-12 NIT
23-8 NCAA 2nd
22-9 NCAA 1st
20-11
14-15 Fired

Buzz
25-10 NCAA 2nd
22-12 NCAA 1st
15-9 ?

[brewcity77]

without reading this when things started getting dirty - cuz i dont really give a damn - i think that the unfairly high expectations set for Vander is the number one reason for the remarkably high expectations of the team.

Personally, I wouldn't say so. I didn't think Vander would contribute much, maybe 10-15 minutes. I think he's done more than I expected personally. I think my expectations were higher because I expected Crowder to do what he's done, DJO to do about what he's done (or a little better), but expected Fulce and Butler to be better. I thought Fulce could become a reliable 20 mpg guy who gave us 10 points and 7 rebounds, and I thought Butler would take that next step to being an 18 ppg and 8 rpg type guy, while also coming through in the clutch. I also admit I expected less from Buycks, more from Cadougan, and more consistency from Otule. Erik Williams was another guy I thought could break into the rotation this year and really contribute. Him not doing that has been a real disappointment.

I did hope for a bit more offense from Vander in the Big East season, but considering our depth, he was never that likely to be a starter from the get-go. He's done fine.

[JWags85]

I have low expectations. I just hope he isn't Mike Deane v.2

Mike Deane
21-12 NIT
23-8 NCAA 2nd
22-9 NCAA 1st
20-11
14-15 Fired

Buzz
25-10 NCAA 2nd
22-12 NCAA 1st
15-9 ?

Deane wasn't bringing in great talent year after year.  Remember Krunti Hester?  Lets also not forget the conference difficulty was a bit less back then.  That comparison isn't very fair cause its far from apples to apples.

[groove]

Deane wasn't bringing in great talent year after year.  Remember Krunti Hester?  Lets also not forget the conference difficulty was a bit less back then.  That comparison isn't very fair cause its far from apples to apples.

great talent? we will see about the recruiting classes and see if the final product matches up with the number of stars they came in with.

[Marquette84]

[/b]
Why is this? 

Blue was widely reported as the best HS player we've recruited in 25 years. 

[groove]

Deane wasn't bringing in great talent year after year.  Remember Krunti Hester?  Lets also not forget the conference difficulty was a bit less back then.  That comparison isn't very fair cause its far from apples to apples.

but the tourny results have been the same. first round loss and second round loss.

[ErickJD08]

I know why I am upset.  We are good enough to absolutely control a majority of the game against pretty good teams and still lose.  That pretty damn frustrating.

Regardless of all of this season, I still think we are going to be really good next season.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Blue was widely reported as the best HS player we've recruited in 25 years. 

Based on his ranking by the scouting services?

[brewcity77]

Based on his ranking by the scouting services?

Safe to say, the only ones that really widely report high school player ratings are scouting services.

[TJ]

I think there's a disconnect here...

According to many on this board we're supposed to consider preseason expectations for the team to be the measuring stick by which we determine whether the team has performed well or not, regardless of how accurate those expectations were with hindsight.

And...

I'm inferring from two posts above that apparently we cannot measure the effectiveness of an individual player based on his preseason ranking coming in.


I understand that it's not apples to apples because one is a whole team and the other is just one player, but it also seems like we're picking and choosing how we want to measure things based on the situation.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Safe to say, the only ones that really widely report high school player ratings are scouting services.

The reason I asked is because I'm not sure comparing recruits' rankings across multiple years is relevant. 

Is the 20th ranked player in the 2010 class as good as the 20th ranked player in the 2009 class because they are ranked the same?  Is that same 2010 player better than the 30th or 40th ranked player in some other class based on his ranking in his class?  Some years yes, some years probably no. 

I don't know...it seems there are such wide disparities between classes, depth at the various positions, etc that it makes it a tricky comparison.  Not to mention the various biases that exist within the rankings themselves. 

As a result, I'm not sure what his point is, but I am sure he'll very thoroughly explain it to me.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos...Give it a rest.  Seriously. 

I challenge you to not mention Crean in one thread this week.  One.  Regardless if you're egged on by another poster.  Just pretend that Lent came early for ya.

Happy to...let's make it a full telethon and make sure everyone does the same thing.

[mugrad2006]

I assume you will insert that same sentence of condemnation toward these posters in these posts for bringing up that argument just in the last few days.

I only ask for consistency. If you're going to call someone out, then you should call others out, especially those that are far greater at inserting said person into these threads.  I don't think I'm asking for anything outlandish. 9 threads with said coach, I inserted him into 1 while someone else did in the others.  I'll bet someone thinks 1 of 9 is VAST MAJORITY.   

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24416.msg271536#msg271536

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24314.msg270271#msg270271

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24298.msg270269#msg270269

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24298.msg270365#msg270365

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24355.msg270827#msg270827

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24348.msg270764#msg270764

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24354.msg270841#msg270841

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=24329.msg270416#msg270416

Dude, you must have some legendary indexing system for muscoop topics...I tried using the search function once to find something I posted and came up with zippo.

[ChicosBailBonds]

but the tourny results have been the same. first round loss and second round loss.

IMO, that's largely a crap shoot.  So many variables.  I've seen teams with "worse" seeds have better draws.  We've had to play a lot of teams here in California or in the western US.  I truly believe the year we lost to Stanford that they were about the only 2nd round team we didn't want to meet outside of the top 8 teams...and the game came down to the final second in OT.

Just as there are teams that win 2 or 3 games in the NCAA tournament but do so because they have a gift draw and really aren't that great.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Dude, you must have some legendary indexing system for muscoop topics...I tried using the search function once to find something I posted and came up with zippo.

I find the search functionality here pretty darn good.  The SCOUT board has no search functionality which drove me crazy.  The key is to use the wildcards when doing a search here, as that will get you a lot farther in your search segments.

[mugrad2006]

Wildcards?

[ATL MU Warrior]

Happy to...let's make it a full telethon and make sure everyone does the same thing.

Crean.

That lasted 21 minutes longer than I thought it would.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Wildcards?

Yeah, like if you wanted to search for something someone said you would use *chico* to search for something I said rather than typing in chicosbailbonds.  Just an example.  Then in your search fields, make sure the settings are not too detailed, otherwise you will limit your results.  If you want something for Buzz Williams, just search Buzz because very few people put in Williams.  Adjust the search by match any word instead of all words.  Etc, etc.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Crean.

That lasted 21 minutes longer than I thought it would.

See, now Wade for Pres is going to be upset.

[ATL MU Warrior]

See, now Wade for Pres is going to be upset.

That's ok.  He never agrees with anything I say anyway. 

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

For the record, I'm not upset with this team. Same record next year...maybe.

[El Duderino]

Blue was widely reported as the best HS player we've recruited in 25 years.

I don't ever watch high school basketball so when Buzz landed Vander Blue, i heard many of the same things from high school scouting services.

Watching him play this year though, i can understand why he was a very good high school player based mainly on his athletic ability, but i am surprised at how crude his offensive skills are. I certainly expected Blue to be more advanced offensively, especially as a shooter. His jump shooting mechanics need to be addressed over the summer.

If Vander puts in a ton of work once the season ends, i still have high hopes for him, but he'll need to be super dedicated. I look at a kid like Jordan Taylor at Wisconsin, he also couldn't shoot as a freshman, but he must have really worked at it and now he's a fabulous player. High recruiting rankings only help a kid get his foot in the door at a big conference program, but then it's up to them to put in the work to improve on their shortcomings.