[Paint Touches] A Brief History of the Modern College Basketball Rebuild

[Floorslapper]

In year two of Buzz's tenure, he had two future NBA first round draft picks on his roster, one of whom has become a four time NBA All-Star and Olympic gold medal winner.  In addition, two other players from that roster have earned NBA minutes, including one who is currently in the league.

No one on Wojo's first roster has played even one minute in the NBA.

Who brought those players to MU?  Didn't Wojo get Henry Ellenson to MU as well in Year 2?  Reality is, the program was far from a trainwreck when Wojo walked in the door.  All "rebuilds" are not equal.

[brewcity77]

Who brought those players to MU?  Didn't Wojo get Henry Ellenson to MU as well in Year 2?  Reality is, the program was far from a trainwreck when Wojo walked in the door.  All "rebuilds" are not equal.

Are we going back to that old "Top 100 recruits" saw that always comes out? Juan, Sandy, and Steve were not high major players. Duane, JJ, and Deonte were decent role-players, but certainly not the players they would later develop into. Luke and Matt Carlino were the only two players on the roster that were viably high-major starters that year. That's it.

So Wojo came in with one high-major starter who wouldn't be eligible until the year was half-gone. It was an absolute trainwreck and it was that way because that's what Buzz built.

And sure, Buzz brought in some nice JUCO talent that second year, but he had three starters that were inherited. One was the second all-time scorer in school history (Hayward) and two were guards that he tried desperately and repeatedly to run off (Acker and Cubillan).  Yes, having DJO, Jimmy, and Buycks helped, but if not for those other three inherited players, that team goes nowhere.

[skianth16]

Are we going back to that old "Top 100 recruits" saw that always comes out? Juan, Sandy, and Steve were not high major players. Duane, JJ, and Deonte were decent role-players, but certainly not the players they would later develop into. Luke and Matt Carlino were the only two players on the roster that were viably high-major starters that year. That's it.

Steve Taylor ended up being a pretty darn good player in his senior year. I don't care where you do it, averaging a double-double shows that you can play. I think we may have missed an opportunity with him. Deonte showed promise, but he didn't seem to be a Wojo program kind of guy. I would have liked to have kept him around as well.

I think the larger point that the program wasn't in bad shape is still very true, even if the roster at the time was sub-par. The reputation of MU hoops, great facilities, lots of resources (no bagdrops, though), solid NBA connections - those were all things that made Marquette a good program that didn't change when we  had a year or two of iffy rosters. That definitely helps in a rebuild.

[The Lens]

TAMU, great work.  Effort like this is why Scoop is really an amazing community.  Thank you.

My quibble...

How many of those programs had made 7 of 8 tourneys and finished 9-9 in conf the year before?  We can argue all day long about the cupboard but I think we can all agree the name on the front of the jersey was one that had enjoyed considerable very recent success...

7 of 8 NCAAs
3 S16s in the past 4 years
1 E8 only 12 months ago
9-9 in conf that season

All those things point to what should be an easier rebuild.  Apathy had yet to set in.

[mu03eng]

Steve Taylor ended up being a pretty darn good player in his senior year. I don't care where you do it, averaging a double-double shows that you can play. I think we may have missed an opportunity with him. Deonte showed promise, but he didn't seem to be a Wojo program kind of guy. I would have liked to have kept him around as well.

I think the larger point that the program wasn't in bad shape is still very true, even if the roster at the time was sub-par. The reputation of MU hoops, great facilities, lots of resources (no bagdrops, though), solid NBA connections - those were all things that made Marquette a good program that didn't change when we  had a year or two of iffy rosters. That definitely helps in a rebuild.

The first bolded is simply revisionist history. Deonte left because of the tragedy of his mom and what turned out to be depression. It had nothing to do with him not being a "Wojo guy". To say otherwise belies an obvious agenda.

As to the second bolded, the Philadelphia basketball scene would like to have a word with you.

Overall, we live in a what have you done for me lately society so having a year or two of crappy basketball because of bad rosters can absolutely negatively impact MU's ability to recruit. And no matter how good the program is that doesn't put years of experience on the roster which we've so badly needed.

[MU82]

It was only a matter of time before "the program actually was doing fine when Wojo arrived" folks got their say. Which is OK.

I happen to disagree, but we've all got opinions here.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Think where there is conflicting opinion on the concept of the Marquette "rebuild" is that Wojo walked into a program that made the NCAA in 5 of 6 years, 3 of the last 4 which were Sweet 16, Sweet 16, Elite 8, and inherited 8 Top 100 recruits.  Does that really qualify as a rebuild?

Furthermore, where some discord lies, is that Wojo like Hank, had a hard act to follow.  We didn't skip a beat with Buzz, and he inherited a train wreck of a roster Year 2 of his tenure.

FS, I'm still waiting for you to answer my question. Find me a coach that took over a program that missed the NIT, lost 6 of its 7 top players (in terms of minutes), and all but one player in the incoming recruiting class and still managed to make the NCAA the following year. Bonus points if you can find one where the one returning top player (in terms of minutes) is a Derrick Wilson caliber player.

It was a rebuild.

[skianth16]

The first bolded is simply revisionist history. Deonte left because of the tragedy of his mom and what turned out to be depression. It had nothing to do with him not being a "Wojo guy". To say otherwise belies an obvious agenda.

As to the second bolded, the Philadelphia basketball scene would like to have a word with you.

Overall, we live in a what have you done for me lately society so having a year or two of crappy basketball because of bad rosters can absolutely negatively impact MU's ability to recruit. And no matter how good the program is that doesn't put years of experience on the roster which we've so badly needed.

For Deonte, his family and internal issues definitely played a big, big role in him leaving, but I still think if he were part of a program he liked at the time, he might have stayed. Call it an agenda, if you want. He still wanted to play basketball, but he wanted a different environment to do it in. Being a Milwaukee kid, I would think in a lot of ways, there would have been plenty of non-basketball reasons for him to want to stay close to home. I can understand the stated reason for leaving that he wanted a change of scenery, but to say that changes to the program didn't have any impact on his decision to leave seems to also "belie an obvious agenda."

As for Marquette's status as a good program, we'll just agree to disagree. Banners don't fall down from the rafters when a bad roster steps out onto the court.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

TAMU, great work.  Effort like this is why Scoop is really an amazing community.  Thank you.

My quibble...

How many of those programs had made 7 of 8 tourneys and finished 9-9 in conf the year before?  We can argue all day long about the cupboard but I think we can all agree the name on the front of the jersey was one that had enjoyed considerable very recent success...

7 of 8 NCAAs
3 S16s in the past 4 years
1 E8 only 12 months ago
9-9 in conf that season

All those things point to what should be an easier rebuild.  Apathy had yet to set in.

Fair question. I'll answer you question with another question.

How does making previous postseasons (more than a year before Wojo took over) make the roster Wojo inherited in year one better? Especially considering that the only "contributor" from any of those teams left was Derrick Wilson.

I put this argument into the same category as those who want to quote high school rankings of upperclassmen who have already proved that they are not as good as the expectations their rankings gave them. Why would use data from two, three, four years ago when there is more recent and relevant data?

The last season is the one that matters. Missed the NIT. Lost 6 of 7 top players (in terms of minutes). Lost entire recruiting class except for one. Only returning player who averaged more than 13.5 minutes a game was Derrick Wilson. These facts matter a lot more than "two years ago we made the Elite 8."

[GGGG]

Who brought those players to MU?  Didn't Wojo get Henry Ellenson to MU as well in Year 2?  Reality is, the program was far from a trainwreck when Wojo walked in the door.  All "rebuilds" are not equal.

YOU were the one who said the year 2 roster was a "trainwreck."  It wasn't.

[Floorslapper]

FS, I'm still waiting for you to answer my question. Find me a coach that took over a program that missed the NIT, lost 6 of its 7 top players (in terms of minutes), and all but one player in the incoming recruiting class and still managed to make the NCAA the following year. Bonus points if you can find one where the one returning top player (in terms of minutes) is a Derrick Wilson caliber player.

It was a rebuild.

Why is Year 1 the only year of relevance?  Why not Year 2?  And in Year 3, he made the NCAA tourney, albeit with healthy contributions from the empty cupboard garbage of Duane, JJJ, Luke that was left behind from the previous coach.  Now in Year 4, we are a bubble team at best.

Agree to disagree on the what defines a "rebuild."  However, to answer your question Cuonzo Martin is doing quite well at Mizzou in Year 1, and he came into a program that was 8-24 last year and ranked 156th.  He's also had a number of injuries to deal with and transfer.  Buzz walked into a program that was 9-22 and 174th in the country and hadn't sniffed an NCAA tournament in years.

Call me crazy but those qualify as rebuilds to me, much more than what Wojo encountered upon arriving in MU. (As Lens also pointed out).  But, nice research nonetheless.  Unfortunately it is flawed from the start by calling the MU program/job a rebuild.

[mu03eng]

For Deonte, his family and internal issues definitely played a big, big role in him leaving, but I still think if he were part of a program he liked at the time, he might have stayed. Call it an agenda, if you want. He still wanted to play basketball, but he wanted a different environment to do it in. Being a Milwaukee kid, I would think in a lot of ways, there would have been plenty of non-basketball reasons for him to want to stay close to home. I can understand the stated reason for leaving that he wanted a change of scenery, but to say that changes to the program didn't have any impact on his decision to leave seems to also "belie an obvious agenda."

He literally said he had to get away from Milwaukee multiple times, all of his non-basketball reasons were to leave Milwaukee. Again, I'm not advancing this as an opinion, this is stuff Deonte himself said on multiple occasions including when he announced he was diagnosed with clinical depression. I have no reason to believe he hated Wojo but is also going out of his way to cover up this "fact".

[GGGG]

Steve Taylor ended up being a pretty darn good player in his senior year. I don't care where you do it, averaging a double-double shows that you can play. I think we may have missed an opportunity with him.

Taylor had better accumulation stats because he played more.  He would have been backing up Fischer and Ellenson.  He would have been a nice back up and that's about it.

[Floorslapper]

YOU were the one who said the year 2 roster was a "trainwreck."  It wasn't.

What part of "inherited a train wreck" of a roster don't you understand?  Buzz had scraps to work with in Year 2 from the previous administration.  He went out and got a couple of difference makers, coached them up, and made the NCAA tournament as a 6 seed.  Far cry from missing the NIT in Year 2.

[mu03eng]

Why is Year 1 the only year of relevance?  Why not Year 2?  And in Year 3, he made the NCAA tourney, albeit with healthy contributions from the empty cupboard garbage of Duane, JJJ, Luke that was left behind from the previous coach.  Now in Year 4, we are a bubble team at best.

Agree to disagree on the what defines a "rebuild."  However, to answer your question Cuonzo Martin is doing quite well at Mizzou in Year 1, and he came into a program that was 8-24 last year and ranked 156th.  He's also had a number of injuries to deal with and transfer.  Buzz walked into a program that was 9-22 and 174th in the country and hadn't sniffed an NCAA tournament in years.

Call me crazy but those qualify as rebuilds to me, much more than what Wojo encountered upon arriving in MU. (As Lens also pointed out).  But, nice research nonetheless.  Unfortunately it is flawed from the start by calling the MU program/job a rebuild.

How many bags has Cuonzo dropped at Mizzou?

Also some of the explanation for the "see-saw" in outcomes over the last season can be attributed to the Ellensons. We put a big hole in our roster experience-wise because we tried to band-aid with a one and done. Not saying we shouldn't have done it, but it contributes significantly to the young roster this year.

[GGGG]

Players inherited in Year 2:

Buzz:  Acker, Cubillan, Hayward, Otule
Wojo:  Duane, Sandy, Johnson, Luke

Doesn't seem like a substantial difference to me.  Buzz just did a better job of surrounding his inherited guys with good players - all of whom were Jucos.  And he's a better coach.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Why is Year 1 the only year of relevance?  Why not Year 2?

Okay. Find me one who did it in year one or year two.

And in Year 3, he made the NCAA tourney, albeit with healthy contributions from the empty cupboard garbage of Duane, JJJ, Luke that was left behind from the previous coach.  Now in Year 4, we are a bubble team at best.

Who called them garbage? They were who they were. And even as seniors, the best they amounted to was a 10 seed in the NCAA.

However, to answer your question Cuonzo Martin is doing quite well at Mizzou in Year 1, and he came into a program that was 8-24 last year and ranked 156th.

Sorry that answer is not correct. Cuonzo got to keep 5 out Mizzou's 7 top players. He also hired the dad of two All Americans in order to secure their commitments (though the better of the two never got to play).

However, to answer your question...Buzz walked into a program that was 9-22 and 174th in the country and hadn't sniffed an NCAA tournament in years.

Sorry this answer is also incorrect. Buzz kept 4/7 of VT's top players and got to take his recruiting class from Marquette with him. Still he needed 3 years in order to get back to the tournament.

Agree to disagree on the what defines a "rebuild."

Call me crazy but those qualify as rebuilds to me, much more than what Wojo encountered upon arriving in MU. (As Lens also pointed out).  But, nice research nonetheless.  Unfortunately it is flawed from the start by calling the MU program/job a rebuild.

If all you are trying to say is that not all rebuilds are created equal than yes, of course that is true. I would even agree that both Cuonzo and Buzz walked into more difficult situations than Wojo did. Buzz is doing a fantastic job at Virginia Tech. Cuonzo is having a good year at Mizzou though I will withhold judgement for a few years. He took a smoking dump on Cal's program in his three years there. None of those things mean that Marquette didn't need to rebuild after Buzz left. Because if it wasn't a rebuild....why hasn't any other coach in modern history managed to turn around a situation similar to Wojo's in 1 or 2 years?

[Its DJOver]

I think some people are of the opinion that a "rebuild" and what I call a "reload" are the same thing.  IMO if the new head coach has already been with the program, it cannot be considered a "rebuild".  Gard is not rebuilding at UW, Jordan is not rebuilding at Butler, even though he was away from the program for a while, Buzz did not have to rebuild at MU.  The system that the teams play may alter under the new coach, ie. Buzz and JUCOs, but the new coach is already familiar with the players/organization. 

If a coach is an outside hire, then they could be facing a rebuild.  This would mean that Wojo had a rebuild, Crean had one at I4, and Buzz had one at VT.  This idea of rebuilds is even true for some blue bloods.  Cal had a rebuild at UK, although with his recruiting abilities it was fast.  Self had a rebuild at KU, although with his recruiting abilities it was fast. Alford had a rebuild at UCLA, and even with his recruiting abilities, he is still rebuilding.  Some coaching changes that fall under the rebuild category take no time at all, KU and UK.  Just because a rebuild is happening at a blue blood, does not mean it happens fast.  Even with his S16's, I bet many UCLA fans think that Alford is underachieving, because he hasn't gotten further, just the same way the MU fans thing Wojo is underachieving. 

I'm sure that there is some example that suggests opposite of my idea, but for the most part, familiarity with the system/organization allows for transitions to be easier. The point is, that as TAMU pointed out, no rebuild is the same, and IMO a rebuild is different than a reload, and should thus be treated differently in expectations.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Players inherited in Year 2:

Buzz:  Acker, Cubillan, Hayward, Otule
Wojo:  Duane, Sandy, Johnson, Luke

Doesn't seem like a substantial difference to me.  Buzz just did a better job of surrounding his inherited guys with good players - all of whom were Jucos.  And he's a better coach.

Interesting to look back.  What I did was immediately go to "who would I pick?" if you could pick a hybrid?  (Btw, Sandy was a Wojo recruit as he resigned under Wojo after decommitting).

I would pick Duane, JJJ, Luke and Zar as the core.  The sum of the pieces of that Buzz team plus the JUCO's were a result of a magical piece of rebuilding and coaching.

Wojo had to go to the rent a player approach early and it wasn't very effective in terms of program building.  JUCOs weren't an option.  As I said before, it would have been a quicker rebuild for Wojo to have Pole Axed from the get go to get his guys in here.  Thus, we are in Year 2 of the Wojo rebuild. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Wojo had to go to the rent a player approach early and it wasn't very effective in terms of program building.  JUCOs weren't an option.  As I said before, it would have been a quicker rebuild for Wojo to have Pole Axed from the get go to get his guys in here.  Thus, we are in Year 2 of the Wojo rebuild.

I was skeptical when you first said this, but I see what you mean now. It would have meant even worse performances in year 1 and 2 and likely no postseason in year 3, but we likely could have started a tournament streak in year 4 and been done with the rebuild by now. Instead we got slightly better (but not great basketball) in years 1-3 and have to wait until year 5 for the rebuild to be done.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

What part of "inherited a train wreck" of a roster don't you understand?  Buzz had scraps to work with in Year 2 from the previous administration.  He went out and got a couple of difference makers, coached them up, and made the NCAA tournament as a 6 seed.  Far cry from missing the NIT in Year 2.

I was amongst those calling quite loudly for Ners to be banned from this site.

This Floorslapper person, however, seemed OK.

A friendly suggestion: Don't revert to Ners.

[The Lens]

Fair question. I'll answer you question with another question.

How does making previous postseasons (more than a year before Wojo took over) make the roster Wojo inherited in year one better? Especially considering that the only "contributor" from any of those teams left was Derrick Wilson.

I'll using a doctor analogy...

Getting a guy who has a heart attack back on his feet is a lot easy that getting a guy who died back on his feet.  Some rebuilds are resurrection projects.  The team would have slipped so far out of the national limelight that getting recruits, fans, media to care is a big deal.  Take for instance what KO did.

[Floorslapper]

Players inherited in Year 2:

Buzz:  Acker, Cubillan, Hayward, Otule
Wojo:  Duane, Sandy, Johnson, Luke

Doesn't seem like a substantial difference to me.  Buzz just did a better job of surrounding his inherited guys with good players - all of whom were Jucos.  And he's a better coach.

Fair point. Especially agree with the bolded. 

[brewcity77]

I would pick Duane, JJJ, Luke and Zar as the core.  The sum of the pieces of that Buzz team plus the JUCO's were a result of a magical piece of rebuilding and coaching.

I'd pick Acker, Lazar, Luke, and JJ. But that said, Lazar is a spectacular outlier on that list. I think you can pretty safely say Lazar Hayward is one of the 20 best players in Marquette history. If we were all making All-American style first, second, and third all-Marquette teams, Lazar would land on a ton of lists. In terms of both offense and defense, he was a fantastic college player. Nothing against those other 7 players, but they have absolutely nothing on Lazar.

[mu03eng]

I'd pick Acker, Lazar, Luke, and JJ. But that said, Lazar is a spectacular outlier on that list. I think you can pretty safely say Lazar Hayward is one of the 20 best players in Marquette history. If we were all making All-American style first, second, and third all-Marquette teams, Lazar would land on a ton of lists. In terms of both offense and defense, he was a fantastic college player. Nothing against those other 7 players, but they have absolutely nothing on Lazar.

Honestly, I think it depends on who's coaching: Buzz or Wojo. If it's Buzz I take Duane, Johnson, Hayward, and Otule....If Wojo I take Acker, Hayward, Luke and Duane.