"Buzz has not installed the offense yet..."

[The Equalizer]

No one said that losing in November makes a team stronger in the March. The point is that Buzz isn't going to install every play and every set that he has right away because 1) it would be overwhelming, especially for the frosh, 2) he stresses defense first and 3) he doesn't want all of his sets on film this early in the season, if at all. Advanced scouting and film study are MAJOR aspects of modern sports. Buzz obviously knows that so he's not going to draw up and show his "best" plays in a November non-conf game. If using one of those plays meant the difference between winning and losing, sure, he's going to use it. But burning a play in order to cut a 10-point lead to 8 with 2 minutes left isn't something that Buzz, or any other successful D1 coach is going to do.

Teams typically get better as seasons progress and a big part of that is the coach figuring out his rotations and who plays well together and another important part is a coach using those rotations to install more of what he thinks will be the most beneficial down the stretch.

Please don't interpret this as trying to put words in your mouth, but do you think that Ohio State will be suffering in March because they played better than us on Saturday?  

Did Thad share too much and gave other teams a gameplan on how to beat them?  Did it look like he was still struggling to get his players ready to play?

The two arguments that people keep making--Buzz hasn't had time to fully install his system, and it takes a while for freshmen  to contribute--don't make sense when you realize that Buzz had exactly as much time as Thad Matta to install his system, and Buzz went with a lineup that included a 6th year senior, two 5th year seniors, one true senior, two juniors and a soph.    

--Yes, we'll get better over the course of the year. But that's the case for all 347 D1 teams.
--No, Buzz doesn't have everying perfected in November.  But neither do any other coaches.  
--Yes, Buzz wants to hide some aspects of his offense--but other coaches have exactly the same motivation.

What's different about Buzz and Marquette than any other coach and/or team?

One more thing--I agree that that game film and analysis is a big part of the game--but do you really think coaches dig back to November when they're gameplanning for March?  For example, wouldn't you think that Davidson relied far more heavily on the Notre Dame BET and St. Johns games to learn how to beat us, than anything that happened in November?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Some people here don't understand all of the kenpom formula apparently, at least the way they are using the results.

Through the first of January, you typically play cupcakes and a few tough opponents.  For high major teams playing tough schedules, they typically will improve their rating if they play about .500 ball due to the schedule strength portion of the formula.  You can lose, and move up is one way to put it.  Now, if you lose too many, it will go the other way, but from a calendar perspective, comparing to first of January to end of March has a few issues.  One is strength of schedule.  Two is the number of games played is small (smaller sample size).

Feel free to email Ken Pom on this if you wish.


To be clear, I am not saying we don't play better at the end of the year IN SOME YEARS, but the way the data is used here has some biases that have not been stated.  Happy to have done so for everyone.  Carry on.

[The Equalizer]

1. I actually graduated at 21, but I did recently turn 65.

2. I am old but not bitter. I have a beautiful wife, four wonderful children and two awesome granddaughters (and look forward to many more). I'm active (I can still run a 5K in 21 minutes), healthy and think living in the USA in 2013 is terrific. You can find bitter, turn back the clock 60 years to the "good old days" folks here but I'm not one of them. I'm open to multiple perceptions on a myriad of topics and have even agreed with you a time or two. What I'm not open to is a guy who massages the facts to fit a false narrative. Too often you are that person.

3. Half? Really? That would be over 2300 posts, (aren't you an auditor?) which is, of course, preposterous. I do plead guilty to swapping personal insults with you from time to time. That's on both of us.

What false narrative are you talking about here?

Someone said we were playing stronger in March.  I listed the 8 games we played in March.  The results of those games (even those we won) sugggest that those games did not characterize "strong play."

So what part was false?  
Did we squeak by bottom-half teams like St. Johns & Rutgers?  Well, that's true.
Did we lose matchups to Notre Dame and Syracuse--teams we beat earlier in the season?  True again.
Did we require 14th seed Davidson to make a mistake in their last play in order for us to avoid a first round upset?  Yes again.
Did we have exactly the same game end situation with Butler as we had at the beginning of the season?  yes.
Did Miami lose a key player the game before we played them?  Absolutely.

I look at all of that and conclude we weren't plaing "strong" at the end of the season.  

Good enough?  Yes  
Strong?  Don't think so.

So please explain what facts were massagd to make this a "false narrative."

If anything, the facts make this a "true but unpleasant" narrative.  

Sorry, but I don't see it as Buzz's finest coaching job that we were in so many near-loss sitations in March, and didn't improve on any of our rematches (Butler was the same, ND and Syracuse we performed far worse).

[jesmu84]

Real question... does any of this matter? Does it matter if we're stronger in March vs. November? Does it matter when Buzz implements things for the team? Does it matter if we're blowing out teams or winning by close margins? Does it matter whatever argument you're making? No. Most of these are just dumb, meaningless arguments. Unless, of course, you've got an agenda and are trying to paint Buzz in a good/bad light.

What does matter? Winning. And, regardless of how it's done, Marquette is doing that. And doing it at a pretty impressive level.  All the rest is background noise.

[MerrittsMustache]

Please don't interpret this as trying to put words in your mouth, but do you think that Ohio State will be suffering in March because they played better than us on Saturday?  

Did Thad share too much and gave other teams a gameplan on how to beat them?  Did it look like he was still struggling to get his players ready to play?

The two arguments that people keep making--Buzz hasn't had time to fully install his system, and it takes a while for freshmen  to contribute--don't make sense when you realize that Buzz had exactly as much time as Thad Matta to install his system, and Buzz went with a lineup that included a 6th year senior, two 5th year seniors, one true senior, two juniors and a soph.    

--Yes, we'll get better over the course of the year. But that's the case for all 347 D1 teams.
--No, Buzz doesn't have everying perfected in November.  But neither do any other coaches.  
--Yes, Buzz wants to hide some aspects of his offense--but other coaches have exactly the same motivation.

What's different about Buzz and Marquette than any other coach and/or team?

One more thing--I agree that that game film and analysis is a big part of the game--but do you really think coaches dig back to November when they're gameplanning for March?  For example, wouldn't you think that Davidson relied far more heavily on the Notre Dame BET and St. Johns games to learn how to beat us, than anything that happened in November?

Why would OSU suffer in March because they beat MU in November? Not sure where you pulled that one.

Do you think OSU played well? Do you think Matta pulled out all the stops in that game? How many sets did you see OSU run offensively? Do you think Matta is pleased with shooting 3-18 on 3s and 5-15 from the free throw line? How about allowing 18 offensive rebounds? Think that was part of the gameplan?

OSU returned 4 starters and played 7 upperclassmen (6 of whom saw significant minutes last season), 1 soph and 1 freshman. MU returned 2 starters and their two new guards are in completely different roles than they were previously. Think any of that makes a difference early in the season?

Buzz's teams have a history of playing better late in the season. No, that's not true of every team but it's true for most of the good teams. All successful coaches save plays and sets for more crucial games. That's not a secret.

I'm sure coaches pay more attention to more recently played games, but yes, coaches go back to November when reviewing game film in March. They even go back to previous seasons when reviewing film. The way that MU plays against OSU in November isn't the same as they'd play against Creighton in January or Davidson in March. No coach is going to watch film of the MU-OSU game and think, "Wow! OSU doesn't guard the 3 at all! That's where we can get them!" They look at teams similar to theirs. If OSU's opposing team in March has a strong post presence but can't shoot from the outside, they'll look at the OSU-MU game film to see where the OSU D could be exploited, among other hours and hours of film.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand.

[Lennys Tap]

So please explain what facts were massagd to make this a "false narrative."

If anything, the facts make this a "true but unpleasant" narrative.  

Sorry, but I don't see it as Buzz's finest coaching job that we were in so many near-loss sitations in March, and didn't improve on any of our rematches (Butler was the same, ND and Syracuse we performed far worse).

1. Miami did not lose a "key" player. They lost a guy who was playing less and less as the season went on. Miami fans celebrated the fact that it meant more minutes for the better guy who replaced him. the Vegas line didn't even move 1/2 point due to his absence.
2. No coach and no team has been as good at upping their level of play in March during the past 5 years as Brad Stevens and Butler. "Staying the same" with them would have have been awesome. We didn't. We outdid them, winning in March after losing in November.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Some people here don't understand all of the kenpom formula apparently, at least the way they are using the results.

Through the first of January, you typically play cupcakes and a few tough opponents.  For high major teams playing tough schedules, they typically will improve their rating if they play about .500 ball due to the schedule strength portion of the formula.  You can lose, and move up is one way to put it.  Now, if you lose too many, it will go the other way, but from a calendar perspective, comparing to first of January to end of March has a few issues.  One is strength of schedule.  Two is the number of games played is small (smaller sample size).

Feel free to email Ken Pom on this if you wish.


To be clear, I am not saying we don't play better at the end of the year IN SOME YEARS, but the way the data is used here has some biases that have not been stated.  Happy to have done so for everyone.  Carry on.

Except the improvement comparison was a non-parametric statistic...a ranking, so thus valid.  No adjusted measures were being compared directly, just their ranks, for example Pomeroy adjusted Offensive efficiency went from 101 to 108 would not be totally correct, but a team rank of 50 to 13 is okay because it is relative (other teams face similar conditions).

But if just a raw Point per Possession Statsheet metric, which is unadjusted, one could compare that like I did the other day with the Mother of All Stinkers Orating for the tOSU game.  A point is a point, and a possession is a possession....no matter the opponent.

non-parametric statistics (in the sense of a statistic over data, which is defined to be a function on a sample that has no dependency on a parameter), whose interpretation does not depend on the population fitting any parameterised distributions. Order statistics, which are based on the ranks of observations, are one example of such statistics and these play a central role in many non-parametric approaches.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Except the improvement comparison was a non-parametric statistic...a ranking, so thus valid.  No adjusted measures were being compared directly, just their ranks, for example Pomeroy adjusted Offensive efficiency went from 101 to 108 would not be totally correct, but a team rank of 50 to 13 is okay because it is relative (other teams face similar conditions).

But if just a raw Point per Possession Statsheet metric, which is unadjusted, one could compare that like I did the other day with the Mother of All Stinkers Orating for the tOSU game.  A point is a point, and a possession is a possession....no matter the opponent.

Precisely. Happy to have cleared up Chicos' erroneous correction. The overall rank is relative to all other teams in Division I.

[bilsu]

I think it is safe to say that all teams in March are significantly better than they were in November. The question is whether team A will improve more than team B. Also, style of play matters. Crean's one and one dribble drive offense is very hard for teams to defend in November. By time March rolls around team defenses are much more sound and Crean's offensive style becomes less successful even though the Indiana team is better at running it.

[madtownwarrior]

So what advantage does Buzz really have to limiting the offense in the early season.   Losing games in Nov count as much as losing in February / early March.  Impact to RPI likely the same.

And by limiting the offense in early season, is it not more likely that he could play freshman?    That's what puzzles me about the OSU game.

The only good answer so far is - that's just how Buzz does it....

[GGGG]

So what advantage does Buzz really have to limiting the offense in the early season.   Losing games in Nov count as much as losing in February / early March.  Impact to RPI likely the same.

And by limiting the offense in early season, is it not more likely that he could play freshman?    That's what puzzles me about the OSU game.

The only good answer so far is - that's just how Buzz does it....

The answer is that he devotes a great deal of limited practice time to defense.

[Silkk the Shaka]

The answer is that he devotes a great deal of limited practice time to defense.

And he also tailors each squad's style of play to the talent at hand. It's pretty clear that this team has some troubles shooting the ball, so we will have to hang our hats on the defensive end this year to have the success that is expected. If the current returns in that department hold up (#7 overall in defenive efficiency) and the offense starts to come around, we will be where we want to be in March. Until it proves out otherwise, my bet is on Buzz to get this done.

[The Equalizer]

1. Miami did not lose a "key" player. They lost a guy who was playing less and less as the season went on. Miami fans celebrated the fact that it meant more minutes for the better guy who replaced him. the Vegas line didn't even move 1/2 point due to his absence.

He was their leading rebounder, one of only three players in thier rotation over 6'6", and in their top six scoring and minutes.  Put that in the context of 25 combined points from Otule and Gardner (nearly 10 points above their combined average), which suggests Jackson was missed.

I put less credence in the Vegas Line or fan bravdo than actual stats and results.

2. No coach and no team has been as good at upping their level of play in March during the past 5 years as Brad Stevens and Butler. "Staying the same" with them would have have been awesome. We didn't. We outdid them, winning in March after losing in November.

I think you're mistaken.

They started 16-2 last year including wins over North Carolina, Gonzaga and Indiana.  After that point, they were only 15-7, without a single win over a team in Pomery's top 50.

Maybe in past years they were stronger late in the year.  Not in 2013.  Their ranking peaked in January, and by season's end they were out of the top 25.

[NersEllenson]

I'd just love to hear what Equalizer thinks Buzz has done well since he's been at MU.  Can't recall 1 post that hasn't been critical, or downplaying his achievements..

[Silkk the Shaka]

I think you're mistaken.

They started 16-2 last year including wins over North Carolina, Gonzaga and Indiana.  After that point, they were only 15-7, without a single win over a team in Pomery's top 50.

Maybe in past years they were stronger late in the year.  Not in 2013.  Their ranking peaked in January, and by season's end they were out of the top 25.

Duh, that's the point. We improved from the November meeting while Butler did not. Exactly what people have been saying about Buzz's teams in general and last year specifically this entire thread. As a lawyer, is arguing just so ingrained in every fiber of your being that you end up confused and argue for your opponent's side? A shoddy barrister indeed.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Except the improvement comparison was a non-parametric statistic...a ranking, so thus valid.  No adjusted measures were being compared directly, just their ranks, for example Pomeroy adjusted Offensive efficiency went from 101 to 108 would not be totally correct, but a team rank of 50 to 13 is okay because it is relative (other teams face similar conditions).

But if just a raw Point per Possession Statsheet metric, which is unadjusted, one could compare that like I did the other day with the Mother of All Stinkers Orating for the tOSU game.  A point is a point, and a possession is a possession....no matter the opponent.

Like I said, a simple email to Ken Pom is always good.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'd just love to hear what Equalizer thinks Buzz has done well since he's been at MU.  Can't recall 1 post that hasn't been critical, or downplaying his achievements..

That's because you have a bias.  Click on his name and his posts, there is plenty to be found.

For example, "I thought Crean did a great job.  I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."

[Silkk the Shaka]

Like I said, a simple email to Ken Pom is always good.

Insufferable. And I will take you up on that. Just to be clear - you're saying that a team ranked 100 at one point in the season then ranked 20 at another point in the season did not improve on a relative basis to the rest of DI college basketball? Utterly brain dead.

[Lennys Tap]

He was their leading rebounder, one of only three players in thier rotation over 6'6", and in their top six scoring and minutes.  Put that in the context of 25 combined points from Otule and Gardner (nearly 10 points above their combined average), which suggests Jackson was missed.

I put less credence in the Vegas Line or fan bravdo than actual stats and results.

I think you're mistaken.

They started 16-2 last year including wins over North Carolina, Gonzaga and Indiana.  After that point, they were only 15-7, without a single win over a team in Pomery's top 50.

Maybe in past years they were stronger late in the year.  Not in 2013.  Their ranking peaked in January, and by season's end they were out of the top 25.

1.if you think you know more than Vegas there's big money to be made. Anyone can belittle MU's win over Miami as a big underdog AFTER it's already happened, but I bet you didn't liquidate your assets to take the 7 points or, better yet, get almost 3-1 even on the money line.

2. Read my post. I said last 5 years. In 3 NCAA tournaments with his own players, Brad Stevens was 11-2 with both losses coming in championship games when he played Marquette. At freaking Butler. Please name a coach in recent times who has been better when the stakes were highest. Beating them was a big deal (as was beating Miami). You minimizing the accomplishment speaks to your bias.

[tower912]

I'd just love to hear what Equalizer thinks Buzz has done well since he's been at MU.  Can't recall 1 post that hasn't been critical, or downplaying his achievements..

Careful, don't victimize him again. 

[Dr. Blackheart]

Like I said, a simple email to Ken Pom is always good.

I email him from time to time.  What's your point?  There is no need to ask him such a simple question. On his home page, in the very first column, he labels it "rank".  It is a sort of his adjusted ratings.  The majority of the top ranked teams stay in the same "rank" range most of the season.  You don't think those top teams aren't the best in the land?  Louisville, Ok St., OSU, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan St.?  And barring injury, they will be there at the end. 

Rank is a relative comparison and worthy of a valid argument.  Ken Pomeroy did not invent the metric called "rank".  But if it didn't matter, I am sure he wouldn't feel the need to label it in his adjusted ratings. Lame.

[chapman]

And by limiting the offense in early season, is it not more likely that he could play freshman?    That's what puzzles me about the OSU game.

Or if the offense Buzz plans on installing is not entirely new from last year, none of the freshmen are playing and the veteran players either should have some familiarity and be able to execute to some extent, or they have rather short memories. 
Anyhoo, despite circular talk history shows us how we play is certainly different later in the season...we'll soon all forget about the horror until we go to OSU or have some other bad OOC performance next year.

[Stretchdeltsig]

It's hard to believe Buzz hasn't installed the offended yet.  Not very bright.  Although after watching the OSU game it appears to be the case.  If true it's fair to say that Buzz is a young coach who is still learning D1 competition.  C'mon Buzz it's time to play ball.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I email him from time to time.  What's your point?  There is no need to ask him such a simple question. On his home page, in the very first column, he labels it "rank".  It is a sort of his adjusted ratings.  The majority of the top ranked teams stay in the same "rank" range most of the season.  You don't think those top teams aren't the best in the land?  Louisville, Ok St., OSU, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan St.?  And barring injury, they will be there at the end.  

Rank is a relative comparison and worthy of a valid argument.  Ken Pomeroy did not invent the metric called "rank".  But if it didn't matter, I am sure he wouldn't feel the need to label it in his adjusted ratings. Lame.

Yes, he responds to emails quite frequently which is terrific.

Define "majority of top ranked teams" and define "most of the season" for me.  That would help for starters.  Yes, some of those teams will be there the entire year at the top, no different than RPI, Sagarin, etc.  Others will slides, while others will move up because of the mathematical portions of the formula.  Teams that move up tend to improve because they play tougher schedules after January, just as you will see some teams early in the top 50 that will never finish there there as they are mid majors to low majors who play "tough" teams early and build up that side of the formula to enhance their ranking until it is diluted by their very soft non-conference schedules.

[NersEllenson]

That's because you have a bias.  Click on his name and his posts, there is plenty to be found.

For example, "I thought Crean did a great job.  I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."

Ahh the height of irony...I have a bias.  And comes as no surprise you'd roll out a "I though Crean did a great job.  I think Buzz is doing a great job as well."

You see Chicos, that would have some merit, if such a statement - which you too have made on occasion - wasn't offset about 100 to 1 skewing the other way/negative toward Buzz and his accomplishments while at MU.

But well were at it - where do you think Indiana will finish in the Big 10 this year?