To Buzz Williams

[Silkk the Shaka]

Wow, a positive appreciative thread turns into the same two wet blankets trying to "set the record straight" in an attempt to justify their year-long complaining.  Never saw that one coming.

[HouWarrior]

Wow, a positive appreciative thread turns into the same two wet blankets trying to "set the record straight" in an attempt to justify their year-long complaining.  Never saw that one coming.

Well noted.
The thread is started, as To Buzz Williams...please stay and it digresses to postings that are off point and narcissistic.

Please, men...take it outside.....outside this thread, especially as new threads are cropping up every 10 minutes.

Thanks, in advance, for your consideration. 

[Lennys Tap]

Wow, a positive appreciative thread turns into the same two wet blankets trying to "set the record straight" in an attempt to justify their year-long complaining.  Never saw that one coming.

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Buzz gets a team with very little experience playing together to peak at the exact right time and all we get are complaints - as if 84 coaching the team would have resulted in this sort of success much earlier. LOL

I know we became accustomed under the previous regime to teams that faded miserably down the stretch (with one exception) but guess what SJS? The IDEA is to be playing your best basketball in March, not holding on for dear life. That memo never made it to the desk of your hero so I'm not surprised you're unafamiliar with the concept.

[Marquette84]

So, you're suggesting that every team, regardless of experience, age, talent, etc., has the exact same capacity to develop over the course of a season?
Hmmm.

Nope--never said that.  I think there's a normal distribution/bell shaped curve.   Some develop more than average, some less.

But I firmly reject your implication that MU alone had the chance to improve over the course of the season.  We had no more or less chance than anyone else.

But even at that, I am willing to credit changes that Buzz made over the course of the season--not some normal development over the course of the season.

Oh, boy.
Sure, because coaching in the NFL can't compare to the complexities and intracacies of college basketball.
I assume your attempt at wit is admission that all this halftime adjustment talk is folly.

Of course it can't compare.  

If you've ever watched a football game you'd know that the game stops for nearly the equivalent of a timeout after every play.  The offense and defense get the equivalent of a halftime every time the ball switches sides.  And the offense and defense are never on the field at the same time.

So Simms comment makes perfect sense--if he throws three straight incompletes and all receivers are well covered, they're not going to wait until halftime to fix the situation--an adjustment will be made for the next set of downs.  A football coach (or offensive coordinator) doesn't make adjustments at halftime because they have plenty of time to do so during the normal flow of the game.

[Marquette84]

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Buzz gets a team with very little experience playing together to peak at the exact right time and all we get are complaints - as if 84 coaching the team would have resulted in this sort of success much earlier. LOL

So what are you saying, Lenny?  Are you saying that Buzz made no coaching moves to improve the team?  That it was just that the players needed more experience?

Sounds harsh.

[ATL MU Warrior]

So what are you saying, Lenny?  Are you saying that Buzz made no coaching moves to improve the team?  That it was just that the players needed more experience?

Sounds harsh.

You look like such a fool when you argue for the sake of arguing.  Too bad you can't see it. 

[Marquette84]

You look like such a fool when you argue for the sake of arguing.  Too bad you can't see it.  

Yeah, I suppose you're right.  

The only reason we lost any game this year was because the Nerdlucks stole the talent of the Marquette players.  

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

Wow, a positive appreciative thread turns into the same two wet blankets trying to "set the record straight" in an attempt to justify their year-long complaining.  Never saw that one coming.

LOL

Buzz:  we love how you coach and we love you as a person.  You are a great teacher of life to a lot of people - not only the players, but to everyone in touch with the Marquette program.  We hope you stay at Marquette a long, long time.

We have two cottages in Door County on Lake Michigan that you and your family are welcome to stay at anytime.
Continue to enjoy the ride!  Fight hard to beat UNC!

Buzz said thanks and to leave the keys with me. 

[ATL MU Warrior]

Yeah, I suppose you're right.  

The only reason we lost any game this year was because the Nerdlucks stole the talent of the Marquette players.  

If you refuse to accept the universally accepted idea that teams (especially young, inexperienced ones like MU this year) improve over time as players gain experience and confidence then you are beyond help.  And the fact that by refusing to accept it you have somehow convinced yourself that you are the intellectual superior to everyone else on this board is beyond pathetic.  

I'm done with you.  Ignored.  I'll be smarter for never having to read your drivel again.

[Pakuni]

 I think there's a normal distribution/bell shaped curve.   Some develop more than average, some less.

We had no more or less chance than anyone else.

You realize, don't you, that these are two entirely contradictory statements?
Either there's a bell curve in which some develop more than average and some develop less, or all teams have the same chance to develop.
Which is it?

Still waiting for you to explain your "DJO faced better defenders" theory in light of the fact he shot poorer against cupcakes than he did against Big East and NCAA tournament competition.

Of course it can't compare.  

If you've ever watched a football game you'd know that the game stops for nearly the equivalent of a timeout after every play.  The offense and defense get the equivalent of a halftime every time the ball switches sides.  And the offense and defense are never on the field at the same time. So Simms comment makes perfect sense--if he throws three straight incompletes and all receivers are well covered, they're not going to wait until halftime to fix the situation--an adjustment will be made for the next set of downs.  A football coach (or offensive coordinator) doesn't make adjustments at halftime because they have plenty of time to do so during the normal flow of the game.

Your description of a football game makes me wonder if you've ever watched one. The equivalent of a halftime every time the ball changes hands? A timeout between every play?

Regardless, I have to ask, what are you saying here?

1. There aren't enough timeouts and stoppages of play during a basketball game for coaches to make adjustments at any time other than halftime. Never mind those four media timeouts per half, breaks during free throws and up to 10 team timeouts per game.

2. Despite having up to 20 hours of practice time a week, college basketball players need more than the allotted time outs during a half to comprehend and execute changes in strategy. They need and entire halftime period to do so.

3. A staff of a head coach, three full-time assistants and others on staff are not capable of preparing a game plan with multiple strategies and contingencies, and then teaching that plan to a team during 20 hours of practice a week well enough to be flexible during the game itself, but rather they need a half time to make adjustments.









[/quote]

[Marquette84]

If you refuse to accept the universally accepted idea that teams (especially young, inexperienced ones like MU this year) improve over time as players gain experience and confidence then you are beyond help.  And the fact that by refusing to accept it you have somehow convinced yourself that you are the intellectual superior to everyone else on this board is beyond pathetic.

I reject the notion that Marquette in unique in the capacity to improve over the course of the season.  Every other team in D1 had the same amount of time and the same number of games to improve over the course of the year.  

Lets take the Gonzaga game as an example. People would unthinkingly say that because 4 months and 28 games have given us more experience, we'd play much stronger against them now.

I'm merely saying that Gonzaga had the same 4 months and 28 games to get better--so any relative improvement vis-a-vis Gonzaga is likely not due to the passage of time and our playing of 28 games since then, but rather is because of something else.

I also reject your argument that we were young and inexperienced.  Our main rotation included 3 seniors, 2 juniors, one 3rd year sophomore, two true sophomores and only two frosh.  

But even at that, its worth looking at the basic "universally accepted idea"that young teams have a greater capacity for in-season development.  St. Johns made significant improvement over the course of the season--yet they are by far the most experienced team in conference.  UConn is the youngest and least experienced team, and started the season 10-0, including non-conference wins over Kentucky and Michigan State.  They didn't play poorly at the start only to improve with their capatiy for development.   Other young teams include DePaul and Providence, who played poorly from start to finish.Our experience level matched Villanova--yet quite a different level of improvement.

So the "universally accepted idea" doesn't appear to be universally valid.  

So perhaps my problem is that Marquette has instilled such a sense of curiosity, that when someone posts a "universally accepted idea", I want to know if there is any validity to it.   In this case, it might be universally accepted--but that doesn't make it true.  

I apologize if you think that's pathetic.  

[Marquette84]

You realize, don't you, that these are two entirely contradictory statements?
Either there's a bell curve in which some develop more than average and some develop less, or all teams have the same chance to develop.
Which is it?

Not really.  Every team is going to fall somewhere on that curve.  

Its not like Marquette can develop ahead of the rest of the universe simply with the passage of time and playing of games.  Everyone else has that same capability to develop leveraging their games and their 4 months of the season.

Therefore, if we improve more than another team, its not because of the passage of time--its due to other changes.  I think primarily coaching changes.

Still waiting for you to explain your "DJO faced better defenders" theory in light of the fact he shot poorer against cupcakes than he did against Big East and NCAA tournament competition.

Actually, this isn't true--unless you're including Duke, Gonzaga, and Vanderbilt as cupcakes.

These 4 teams DJO shot 25.0%
Conference play he shot: 37.9%

My opinion is that opposing coaches did not respect anyone's 3 point shooting but DJO, hence focused on him early in the season. When Buzz started to give the green to Crowder--it forced opponsing defense to cover him as well and opened things up for DJO.  

Your description of a football game makes me wonder if you've ever watched one. The equivalent of a halftime every time the ball changes hands? A timeout between every play?

Regardless, I have to ask, what are you saying here?

There's a 45 second clock between each play. The game comes to a complete stop while teams huddle.  You're not going to see that in college basketball.  I've quite often seen a quarterback or other players head to the sidelines and converse with his coach between downs.  Time wise, its roughly the equivalent to a basketball time out on every play.

Meanwhile, whenever the offense (or defense) comes off the field, there might easily be 15 to 20 minutes of real time (5-7 minutes of game clock) before they have to go back out. They have about the same amount of time as a basketball halftime to work with the offensive coordinator, look at the photos sent down from the skybox, analyze what's going right, what's going wrong etc.  When they go back in, the coaches can spend the same amount of time with the defense.  Every time the offense/defense changes sides.

In basketball, unlike football the same players play both offense and defense, hence they don't have the luxury of in-depth discussions with the coaching staff.  And, of course, they can't stop to huddle between plays.

1. There aren't enough timeouts and stoppages of play during a basketball game for coaches to make adjustments at any time other than halftime. Never mind those four media timeouts per half, breaks during free throws and up to 10 team timeouts per game.

2. Despite having up to 20 hours of practice time a week, college basketball players need more than the allotted time outs during a half to comprehend and execute changes in strategy. They need and entire halftime period to do so.

3. A staff of a head coach, three full-time assistants and others on staff are not capable of preparing a game plan with multiple strategies and contingencies, and then teaching that plan to a team during 20 hours of practice a week well enough to be flexible during the game itself, but rather they need a half time to make adjustments.

Now you're going off the rails a bit.  Go back and read what I wrote.  I didn't say "halftime" adjustments.  I said "2nd half".  

For example, this qualifies as a 2nd half adjustment:  the change Buzz made during the timeout at 12:46 in the 2nd half against Syracuse right after SU made a run went from being down by 2 to up by 5.  That's the type of thing that I did not see effectively used against Louisvlle or @Notre Dame, for instance.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm done with you.  Ignored.  I'll be smarter for never having to read your drivel again.

Can I request that you put me on ignore as well....it would make me feel a lot better and would be one less stalker to deal with.

[NersEllenson]

Actually, this isn't true--unless you're including Duke, Gonzaga, and Vanderbilt as cupcakes.

These 4 teams DJO shot 25.0%
Conference play he shot: 37.9%

My opinion is that opposing coaches did not respect anyone's 3 point shooting but DJO, hence focused on him early in the season. When Buzz started to give the green to Crowder--it forced opponsing defense to cover him as well and opened things up for DJO. 

[/b]

84 - You do realize Buzz recruits guys that can pass, dribble and shoot, correct?  Every player on the team has a green light to shot - with 10 toes toward the basket.  The philosophy is don't take a good shot, take a great shot - which this team may have been doing a little too much of (and that is what has changed - there is less hesitation to pull the trigger on shots since the team meeting after the Seton Hall game.).  Crowder was never given the "green light" to shoot - he as are the other players, are always able to shoot what they deem a good shot.

Another thing - DJO will always be a high priority focus from any coach..regardless how anyone else on the team is shooting the ball...he's not become less a priority to stop due to Crowder or Jimmy shooting better/more 3's...