[Cracked Sidewalks] Marquette makes Basketball Times semi-decennial analytical ranking for first time

[CrackedSidewalksSays]

Marquette makes Basketball Times semi-decennial analytical ranking for first time

Written by: noreply@blogger.com (muwarrior92)

Every five years Basketball Times weighs through who the top basketball programs are in the country based on a 10 year analysis of winning percentage, "cleanliness" of the program, graduation rates, players in the NBA and academic reputation (using US News and World Report), and head coaching ranking. 

Thirty-three schools made the list this year with a minimum requirement of winning 2/3 of their games in the last ten years. Thanks to the efforts of Buzz Williams and Tom Crean the last 10 years, Marquette has qualified on the top programs list for the very first time in this evaluation.  MU finished 23rd overall while Duke finished 1st for the third straight time. 

The top ten overall programs ranked as follows:

• Duke
• North Carolina
• Gonzaga
• Davidson
• Wisconsin-madison
• Butler
• Michigan State
• Kansas
• BYU
• Creighton

You will note some heavy weight programs are not listed here and the simple reason is because they had some bad years that pulled them out.  The top criteria is a requirement to win 2/3 of your games during the previous 10 seasons.  UCLA, Indiana, etc are out for that reason.  Kentucky suffers because of some poor seasons prior to Calipari returning. Louisville, for the first time since 1997, is back in the rankings. Others, like UCONN, took a major hit because of coaching change which diluted their ranking in one of the six criteria.

Marquette rankings in each category:

• Buzz Williams ranked 20th out of 33 coaches.  Legendary coach Stew Morrill finished 15th.
• MU 28th best winning % of the 33 programs
• MU 11th of 33 for players in the NBA
• MU 19th of 33 in graduation rate
• MU 21st of 33 in Academic reputation
• MU 20th of 33 in "Cleanliness" of programm

Good read if you have the time. 





http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/11/marquette-makes-basketball-times-semi.html

[dgies9156]

I'm not sure what the point of Basketball Times' story is. I think we've done well in the past 10 years, no doubt. In fact, I'm guessing we're about to make an appearance in some of the most winning programs in the past five or 10 years. But this one, I'm not sure what it says.

For example, in the Top 25, Davidson College in North Carolina is rated fourth and Belmont College in Nashville is rated 11th. Does anyone seriously think Davidson is a better college basketball program than UNCC, NC State or Wake Forest? Likewise, if Vanderbilt, Memphis or Tennessee played Belmont College 10 times a piece, I'm guessing Belmont might win one of those 30 games. There's got to be some type of power rating or "quality points" to reflect the level of competition each team faces and the success they've had against the best in college basketball.

Butler, for example, has a couple of Final Fours and deserves its place. BYU, Creighton and Utah State I can argue about until Satan's home has snowfall, but at least they've consistently played Division 1 teams and made tournaments. The Red Rodent of Madison -- I'll let someone else decide on whether that vile animal deserves his place on the list.

Bottom line: I'm less impressed with the result given who we're sharing the list with!

[brewcity77]

I'm not sure what the point of Basketball Times' story is. I think we've done well in the past 10 years, no doubt. In fact, I'm guessing we're about to make an appearance in some of the most winning programs in the past five or 10 years. But this one, I'm not sure what it says.

For example, in the Top 25, Davidson College in North Carolina is rated fourth and Belmont College in Nashville is rated 11th. Does anyone seriously think Davidson is a better college basketball program than UNCC, NC State or Wake Forest? Likewise, if Vanderbilt, Memphis or Tennessee played Belmont College 10 times a piece, I'm guessing Belmont might win one of those 30 games. There's got to be some type of power rating or "quality points" to reflect the level of competition each team faces and the success they've had against the best in college basketball.

Butler, for example, has a couple of Final Fours and deserves its place. BYU, Creighton and Utah State I can argue about until Satan's home has snowfall, but at least they've consistently played Division 1 teams and made tournaments. The Red Rodent of Madison -- I'll let someone else decide on whether that vile animal deserves his place on the list.

Bottom line: I'm less impressed with the result given who we're sharing the list with!

I'd take that bet regarding Belmont, especially if they played on a neutral court or especially if they played half the games at the Curb. In the past 2 years, Belmont has played all three of those teams a total of 4 times, and while they have lost all 4, they have all been on the road and three of the losses were by single digits (including a 1-point loss at Tennessee).

One factor in this is that it's looking at WP regardless of conference. So while that makes it easier for teams like Davidson, Belmont, Murray State, Old Dominion, and Vermont to get on here by winning conference games, it also makes it harder for major conference teams to get on here because you need to put up victories on par with the low-major schools that can easily reach 20 wins a year even if they only win 4-5 non-conference games.

17 of the 33 teams are HM schools, and are easily recognizable for basketball excellence like Duke, UNC, Michigan State, Kansas, Ohio State, Florida, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and UConn. Many of the mid-major names like Gonzaga, Butler, BYU, Creighton, VCU, Xavier, and UNLV are easily recognizable as routinely quality basketball teams. I tend to think that being on this list is probably a good thing.

[dgies9156]

I'd take that bet regarding Belmont, especially if they played on a neutral court or especially if they played half the games at the Curb.

I tend to think that being on this list is probably a good thing.

Brew, ole buddy, I agree that being on a list like this is better than not being on it.

As to Belmont, are you kidding me? That's like betting on UWM against Marquette! They got close to the Vols when the Vols kinda committed Pearlicide. I don't think you'll see Belmont get that close to the Vols, Commodores or Tigers too often.

I will concede that if the competition is Austin Peay, MTSU, UT-Chattanooga, ETSU or Tennessee Tech, Belmont probably would win more than they lost.

[mu_hilltopper]

Help me out .. on the Federal Grad Rate, they have MU at 53%.  "2002-05 Entering Classes" ..

Who didn't graduate?  .. Or I suppose it could be guys who were part of the class, then transferred.

[mu_hilltopper]

Let's see .. Freshmen/new guys 2002:
Karon Bradley (xferred)
Jared Sichting
Novak
Chapman
Grimm
Andy Freund
Robert Jackson (xferred in)

2003:
D. Mason (xferred)
Brandon Bell (xferred)
C. Christian (xferred)
Tony Gries

2004:
Dan Fitz
John Willkom
Rob Hanley
Shane Grube
Chris Teff
Mike Kinsella (xferr in)
Ousmane Barro
Amoroso (xferred)
Niv Birkowitz (xferred)

2005:
Dwight Burke
Dom James
Wes Matthews
Jerel McNeal
Matt Mortensen (xferred .. or shall I say ineligible'd himself.)

So that's 25 guys .. although 7 of them were walk-ons, 2 were transfers IN.  7 transferred OUT. 

Can anyone recall if any of the guys played their senior year, but did NOT graduate?  Going through the list .. I thought all of them did, so 18 of 25 guys have MU degrees.

[🏀]

Lazar? Acker? Jimmy? Jae and DJO?

[mu_hilltopper]

The stat was from 2002-2005 entering classes .. so .. no.

[🏀]

The stat was from 2002-2005 entering classes .. so .. no.

...so... I'm an idiot

[Tommy Brice for Coach]

Legendary coach Stew Morrill finished 15th.

It has been a long time since I've seen a joke about the legend around here!