2013 NBA draft thread

[Lennys Tap]

 In the case of Harangody, a 3-time All-American and arguably one of the most dominant players in the past couple decades at the collegiate level.

I've always respected your knowledge of the game, but Harangody one of the most dominant players in the past couple of decades? Please. Dominant players don't win one NCAA tourney game in four seasons. He was a great player to those who look at only offense (points and rebounds), but IIRC, ND's best stretch during his last two years was when he was out of the lineup. Every knowledgeable basketball fan I know considered him one of the most overrated college players in recent memory, not one of the most dominant.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I've always respected your knowledge of the game, but Harangody one of the most dominant players in the past couple of decades? Please. Dominant players don't win one NCAA tourney game in four seasons. He was a great player to those who look at only offense (points and rebounds), but IIRC, ND's best stretch during his last two years was when he was out of the lineup. Every knowledgeable basketball fan I know considered him one of the most overrated college players in recent memory, not one of the most dominant.

Can you opine then on Shaq?

2 NCAA wins in three years....NCAA player of the year, two time ALL American, two time SEC player of the year...clearly a dominant player, but the NCAA results aren't there.


It's a crapshoot, anything can happen in one game.  A team can beat one team in the regular season and lose to that exact same team and not score 40 points only 33 days later.   Anything and everything can happen in a one game scenario, something the pros don't have to deal with in a best of 7. 

[tower912]

Fair point.   In the same vein, you never know when a coach is going to go up against another coach/program that he has never been able to figure out. 

[Lennys Tap]

Can you opine then on Shaq?

2 NCAA wins in three years....NCAA player of the year, two time ALL American, two time SEC player of the year...clearly a dominant player, but the NCAA results aren't there.


 

Sure. Here's the line on Shaq vs Gody. Three NCAAs in 3 years vs 3 in 4. Two NCAA wins vs one. One national player of the year vs none. Two first team All American teams vs none. Due to his team's only moderate success in both the regular season and the postseason, I don't know if Shaq makes the "most dominant" team over a two decade period. Probably, as he was that good. Harangody wasn't.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sure. Here's the line on Shaq vs Gody. Three NCAAs in 3 years vs 3 in 4. Two NCAA wins vs one. One national player of the year vs none. Two first team All American teams vs none. Due to his team's only moderate success in both the regular season and the postseason, I don't know if Shaq makes the "most dominant" team over a two decade period. Probably, as he was that good. Harangody wasn't.

I'm asking why Shaq, a dominant player by any measurement, had trouble racking up wins in the NCAA tournament?  I'm happy to provide other dominant players that had ZERO or ONE wins if you wish, but I figured with Shaq no one can deny the dominance and we can just keep it clean without the histrionics on whether said player was dominant or not.

So why with a man so dominant, especially in the college game with is size and agility, only a 2-3 NCAA record in three years?  I'm just curious.  I'll hang up and listen.

[forgetful]

I'm asking why Shaq, a dominant player by any measurement, had trouble racking up wins in the NCAA tournament?  I'm happy to provide other dominant players that had ZERO or ONE wins if you wish, but I figured with Shaq no one can deny the dominance and we can just keep it clean without the histrionics on whether said player was dominant or not.

So why with a man so dominant, especially in the college game with is size and agility, only a 2-3 NCAA record in three years?  I'm just curious.  I'll hang up and listen.

One difference between the two is the supporting cast.  Gody got injured and Notre Dame played its best ball of the year.  In the 1990-1991 season, Shaq got injured at the end of the season (fracture in leg below the knee) and they lost 2 straight, including a 15 point laugher to Auburn, who they previously beat by 12. 

Shaq had to play on the injured leg so they could have a chance to win.  In their loss to Auburn, he scored 27...the next highest scorer had 7.

Another problem for Shaq is he tried to do too much.  He was awful...awful if more than 2 feet from the basket.  In their tournament loss in the 90-91 season he was 11-22 (not awful stat line).  If you remove dunks he was 3-13.  He had massive flaws in his game, but had a unique body to dominate.  If he had a cast around him so that he could kick the non-dunks back out, they would have one more than 1 game.

Notre Dame had a supporting cast good enough to play better without Gody.

[Lennys Tap]

I'm asking why Shaq, a dominant player by any measurement, had trouble racking up wins in the NCAA tournament?  I'm happy to provide other dominant players that had ZERO or ONE wins if you wish, but I figured with Shaq no one can deny the dominance and we can just keep it clean without the histrionics on whether said player was dominant or not.

So why with a man so dominant, especially in the college game with is size and agility, only a 2-3 NCAA record in three years?  I'm just curious.  I'll hang up and listen.

The key, of course, is ONE man. Shaq's teams didn't lose in the NCAAs because "it's a crapshoot". They lost because they weren't all that good (9 losses was the FEWEST for any LSU team he played on).

Of course, when a team has TWO top five picks, two four star four year starters, a McDonald's All American point guard and the sixth man of the year in the BIG yet almost loses in the  round of 32 and is subsequently routed in the round of 16 - well, that's very different. The "crapshoot" apologist crowd  insists that the coin almost landed on its edge against Temple and then did against Syracuse. Non-apologists look elsewhere and find, among other things, a coach whose teams shine early but have trouble down the stretch when the lights are the brightest. Can you honestly tell me IU didn't look tight against Temple and Syracuse? To me it was obvious.

I'll hang up and listen.

[tower912]

You forgot the two guys who made the team that Davante wasn't good enough to make. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

One difference between the two is the supporting cast.  Gody got injured and Notre Dame played its best ball of the year.  In the 1990-1991 season, Shaq got injured at the end of the season (fracture in leg below the knee) and they lost 2 straight, including a 15 point laugher to Auburn, who they previously beat by 12. 

Shaq had to play on the injured leg so they could have a chance to win.  In their loss to Auburn, he scored 27...the next highest scorer had 7.

Another problem for Shaq is he tried to do too much.  He was awful...awful if more than 2 feet from the basket.  In their tournament loss in the 90-91 season he was 11-22 (not awful stat line).  If you remove dunks he was 3-13.  He had massive flaws in his game, but had a unique body to dominate.  If he had a cast around him so that he could kick the non-dunks back out, they would have one more than 1 game.

Notre Dame had a supporting cast good enough to play better without Gody.

Forget Gody comparison....there has been so much hype here on this board that one or 2 guys should lead you to the promised land, especially a dominant player, I'm curious why it didn't happen in Shaq's case (or the many other examples I can give).  I think the answer is obvious

[ChicosBailBonds]

The key, of course, is ONE man. Shaq's teams didn't lose in the NCAAs because "it's a crapshoot". They lost because they weren't all that good (9 losses was the FEWEST for any LSU team he played on).

Of course, when a team has TWO top five picks, two four star four year starters, a McDonald's All American point guard and the sixth man of the year in the BIG yet almost loses in the  round of 32 and is subsequently routed in the round of 16 - well, that's very different. The "crapshoot" apologist crowd  insists that the coin almost landed on its edge against Temple and then did against Syracuse. Non-apologists look elsewhere and find, among other things, a coach whose teams shine early but have trouble down the stretch when the lights are the brightest. Can you honestly tell me IU didn't look tight against Temple and Syracuse? To me it was obvious.

I'll hang up and listen.

The crapshoot apologist crowd?  Like Jay Bilas, Al McGuire, Bill Raftery, John Wooden, etc?  That crowd?  LOL.

Lots of teams look tight in the NCAA tournament, that's part of the deal...you are playing for your lives. You lose, you are gone.  It's a different pressure that even the PROS do not have to go through.  You keep ignoring this.

Did Davidson look tight the last 20 seconds as they pissed down their leg?  Of course.  Welcome to the NCAA tournament.  Did MU look tight against Syracuse? Did IU?  Yup.   Did Duke against LeHigh?  Did Marquette against Miami U back in the day?  Would MU have beaten Miami 9 out of 10 times...most likely.

Tournament is a different animal.  One and done changes the equation radically.  There's a reason why one of the top 4 seeds in the NBA wins the NBA title almost always....same as there is a reason that one of the top 4 seeds in the NCAAs has a far worse record winning the title.  Margin for error is zero.   There's also a reason why a team with supposedly better talent can get knocked out much more easily.  In the NBA, the Heat lost 6 of their last 14 games in the playoffs, nearly half....yet they are the champions.  They get do overs all the time, despite having a stacked lineup.  In college, you don't get that luxury.

Biggest crapshoot in all of sports.

[Lennys Tap]

Forget Gody comparison....there has been so much hype here on this board that one or 2 guys should lead you to the promised land, especially a dominant player, I'm curious why it didn't happen in Shaq's case (or the many other examples I can give).  I think the answer is obvious

There has been ZERO hype on this board that ONE dominant guy should lead you to the promised land. As usual, you're trying to move the goalposts.  The observation made was that in the 9 seasons where a team had two players selected in the top 5 in the NBA draft, all nine reached the Elite 8 and 7 of 9 made the final four. Indiana was the 10th such team and the first one not to make it past the round of 16. When you add 2 four star, four year starters, a Mickey Ds All American point guard and one of the top 2 sixth men in college bball to that equation,  that's an epic failure by anyone's standards. Except maybe yours.

[GGGG]

There has been ZERO hype on this board that ONE dominant guy should lead you to the promised land. As usual, you're trying to move the goalposts.

That is the essence of Chico's "debating."

[MU82]

Crean won four NCAA tourney games in 2003. For that, he deserves credit and for that, I will be grateful.

In his other eight years at Marquette -- combined -- he won 1 NCAA tournament game. One. Among the players on those teams were arguably the best player in school history and 4 others who played multiple NBA seasons.

Aside from that Final Four appearance in 2003, Crean has won a total of 5 NCAA games in his other 13 years as an NCAA basketball coach despite teams that included the aforementioned Marquette players plus two Indiana players who were among the first four selected in the 2013 NBA draft.

(By comparison, Buzz has won 5 NCAA tourney games the last two years alone.)

I will agree that the NCAA tournament is a crapshoot. And I submit that Crean is among the very best at crapping his pants when the lights shine brightest.

[keefe]

And I submit that Crean is among the very best at crapping his pants when the lights shine brightest.

He also sh1t his pants in the dim, dreary candle light of the NIT First Round...

[ChicosBailBonds]

The team with the best player in the world by a far margin, along with excellent players in Bosh, Wade, Allen, etc, needed 6 do-overs in the last 14 games.  Six...43% of their last two series were do-overs. 

College teams get zero.

It's a crapshoot, biggest in all of sports.  Bar none.

[MerrittsMustache]

The team with the best player in the world by a far margin, along with excellent players in Bosh, Wade, Allen, etc, needed 6 do-overs in the last 14 games.  Six...43% of their last two series were do-overs. 

College teams get zero.

It's a crapshoot, biggest in all of sports.  Bar none.

How'd they do in backs-against-the-wall elimination games?

[jmayer1]

% of times the "best team" wins the title

NBA - 50%
NCAAB - 33%
MLB - 29%
NFL - 24%
Crean's teams crap the bed in the postseason - 93%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=5075

The biggest crapshoot in all of sports, what a joke. Of course, when someone can't comprehend a simple point that a team who has 2 of the top 4 picks in the NBA draft has pretty good talent compared to other teams from that season, stuff like this shouldn't be surprising.

[willie warrior]

Love the classy discussion about Crean crapping his pants. While I agree it is a crapshoot, you lower your odds of carping out with studs, and also with good coaching. Those are two things that Duke has had over Coach K's career. Meanwhile, the jury is definitely in on Crean's coaching ability--it is crappy.

[4everwarriors]

I'd say its full blown diarrhea.

[Lennys Tap]

% of times the "best team" wins the title

NBA - 50%
NCAAB - 33%
MLB - 29%
NFL - 24%
Crean's teams crap the bed in the postseason - 93%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=5075

The biggest crapshoot in all of sports, what a joke. Of course, when someone can't comprehend a simple point that a team who has 2 of the top 4 picks in the NBA draft has pretty good talent compared to other teams from that season, stuff like this shouldn't be surprising.

So the numbers say that the NCAAs are a bigger crapshoot than the NBA playoffs but less of a crapshoot than the MLB playoffs and the NFL playoffs. You can add the NHL to the list of statistically lesser crapshoots, but why rely on the facts when a biased, statistically false opinion is available. LOL

[Lennys Tap]

How'd they do in backs-against-the-wall elimination games?

Like any champion they won all of their win or go home "crapshoots".

[jmayer1]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323936404578577752033384718.html?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs%3Darticle

[ChicosBailBonds]

I found this an interesting question so went back through the last 20 years (don't have the time to go back farther) and the answer over that time is "no".  Two players from the same college team have gone Top 5 in NBA Draft 9 times since 1993:

2012    Kentucky   1st & 2nd picks   NTL Champ.
2010    Kentucky   1st & 5th picks    Elite 8
2008    UCLA         4th & 5th picks   Final 4
2007    OSU          1st & 4th picks    NTL Runner Up
2005    UNC          2nd & 5th picks   NTL Champ.
2004    UCONN      2nd & 3rd picks   NTL Champ.
2002    Duke         2nd & 3rd picks   Elite 8
1998    UNC          4th & 5th picks    Final 4
1995    UNC          3rd & 4th picks    Final 4

Your data was wrong.

UNC with Michael Jordan and Sam Perkins failed to get past the Sweet 16 in 1984.
Duke, with two top 5 picks failed to get past the Sweet 16 in 2002....they lost to...INDIANA 74-73 in the Sweet 16 game.

Coach Smith, Coach K...both failed

[MU82]

Your data was wrong.

UNC with Michael Jordan and Sam Perkins failed to get past the Sweet 16 in 1984.
Duke, with two top 5 picks failed to get past the Sweet 16 in 2002....they lost to...INDIANA 74-73 in the Sweet 16 game.

Coach Smith, Coach K...both failed

As soon as Coach Crean manages to average more than 0.6 NCAA tournament victories per season -- a ratio that is a tad behind those of Coach Smith and Coach K -- your comparison will be relevant.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Your data was wrong.

UNC with Michael Jordan and Sam Perkins failed to get past the Sweet 16 in 1984.
Duke, with two top 5 picks failed to get past the Sweet 16 in 2002....they lost to...INDIANA 74-73 in the Sweet 16 game.

Coach Smith, Coach K...both failed

Regarding UNC in 1984:  If you could read I said I only went back 20 years.  Data not wrong.

Regarding Duke in 2002:  you are correct.  You are totally vindicated.  Crean doesn't suck ass.  Happy?