Beating Bucky ugly

[Pops Sims]

Undercover Badger?

Who me?

[IrwinFletcher]

WarriorDad
The Badgers are not a very good team. They have one exceptional player and nothing else. If that is a slap at MU, you are looking to argue. How are things out in LA?

UW is #13 in KenPom.  #11 in NET.

Like them or not, they are a very good team and this was a great win for MU, especially come selection Sunday time.

[MU82]

UW is not a great team and perhaps not a "very good" team, depending upon one's definition of "very good."

But they obviously are a good team. They have an outstanding road win at Iowa, and their 2 losses were close defeats on the road against ranked teams. They have quality wins against teams from the ACC, Big East, Big 12 and Pac 12. They are ranked high, both by observers (sportswriters/coaches) and by every computer-based service that uses metrics to rank teams. In most games they have had and will have the best player on the court, and they also have decent role players who would get significant minutes at most D1 schools. They seem well-coached.

They are a good team ... and they lost a few days ago to a better one.

How many "great" teams are there? For that matter, how many "very good" teams are there?

[WarriorDad]

WarriorDad
The Badgers are not a very good team. They have one exceptional player and nothing else. If that is a slap at MU, you are looking to argue. How are things out in LA?

Ken Pom says they are a good team, 13th in the nation.  They may not be very good, but to say they are not a very good team is indefensible in my opinion unless your definition is everyone but a few teams are not very good.

Do not very good teams make the NCAA tournament as an at large bid?  This Badgers team is extremely likely to make the NCAA tournament with an at large bid.   

The new NCAA NET system has them 11th.  The Associated Press Poll 16th.  Coaches poll at 19th.  ESPN power rankings, 13th.  USA Today power rankings 15th. They are currently in first place in the Big Ten.

What is it that you see that the rest of the nation doesn't?  Before you answer, I am in agreement that they have one very good player, but they also have some good supporting cast in Trice and others.  There have also been a successful teams in NCAA that have a dominant player that go a long way.  They are not a great team, I'm not sure they are very good, but to say they aren't a very good team as you have just defies all the data out there.

LA?  Los Angeles? Louisiana?  I'm in neither location, but why do you ask?

[Goose]

MU82
The lack of very good teams definitely has my expectations higher for this season. My gut says, that about 20-30 teams all fall into that UW, KState camp. Overall, it appears that there are 5-6 very good or better teams out there. Based on a decent sample size, MU has opportunity to make some noise if they take care of business.

[WarriorDad]

MU82
The lack of very good teams definitely has my expectations higher for this season. My gut says, that about 20-30 teams all fall into that UW, KState camp. Overall, it appears that there are 5-6 very good or better teams out there. Based on a decent sample size, MU has opportunity to make some noise if they take care of business.

Does this mean in your evaluation of NCAA teams?

5-6     VERY GOOD TEAMS
20-30 NOT VERY GOOD TEAMS
330    BAD TEAMS

[JakeBarnes]

Does this mean in your evaluation of NCAA teams?

5-6     VERY GOOD TEAMS
20-30 NOT VERY GOOD TEAMS
330    BAD TEAMS

1     MARQUETTE (VERY GOOD TEAMS)
352 NOT VERY GOOD TEAMS

[Goose]

WarriorDad

How many very good teams in the BE this year?

[WarriorDad]

WarriorDad

How many very good teams in the BE this year?

Right now, none.  Many good teams, none today that are very good.   Are you trying to say there are only two categories?  Very good and not very good?  That is quite a spot to land on if that is what you are implying. 

[MU82]

MU82
The lack of very good teams definitely has my expectations higher for this season. My gut says, that about 20-30 teams all fall into that UW, KState camp. Overall, it appears that there are 5-6 very good or better teams out there. Based on a decent sample size, MU has opportunity to make some noise if they take care of business.

Seems reasonable, Goose.

Semantically, when one calls another team "not very good," some immediately interpret that to mean "bad."

"The Panthers? Oh man, they're not very good." That means: "They suck!"

I'm going to assume you weren't using that version of "not very good" when talking about Wisconsin, a team that certainly doesn't look like it sucks. I'm assuming you were saying they simply weren't among those you deem to be "very good." And that's an opinion, and it's fair. If you were saying Wisconsin is "bad," that's also an opinion but it would seem to be a not very sound one.

I have a very high bar for "great" teams; I think that means a championship-level team that folks will remember (for the right reasons) for a long time. As such I don't know if there is a single great team this year. Duke is the most likely team to emerge as such IMHO, as they have several very-high-ceiling freshmen.

I do think there are a half-dozen, maybe even 10, "very good" teams - teams that might be flawed in some way but otherwise would be top-3 NCAA seeds most seasons. I'd love for MU to join that list, but I don't think we're quite there yet. Maybe by this time next month I'll put them there.

After that, lots of good teams. I think we're one of them, and I also think Wisconsin is. When you've played 10 games, avoided "bad" losses, have a number of "good" wins and are ranked high by all the rating systems, you are pretty much by definition "good."

Based on what we've seen from Nova, X and other BEast teams, I definitely have raised my expectations of where our alma mater should finish in the conference standings. I think a conference title is very realistic, and anything lower than third would be disappointing. (Barring a huge injury or two, or some other unforeseen situation.)

Have a good very good one.

[Goose]

MU82

Well said. My comments, or grading, really is based off comparison to years past. I do not see the quality of teams this year, and hope it is just an overall down year. My optimism for MU having success this year is much higher than a month ago. As an MU fan, I could not care less if we succeed in up or down year in college ball. You can only beat teams to you play. My bar for success this year is no longer a bubble team in March.

That said, regardless of outcome, I would grade performance based off season, and compare this season/team to past seasons/teams.

[Goose]

MU82

My bad. To answer your question on "not a very good team", in today's game, The Badgers would be considered a good team. By standards 3-4 years ago, they probably suck.

[wadesworld]

MU82

My bad. To answer your question on "not a very good team", in today's game, The Badgers would be considered a good team. By standards 3-4 years ago, they probably suck.

Where would you have categorized Wisconsin's team 3-4 years ago (when Gard was showing up Wojo by coaching an entire roster of Bo's players to back to back Sweet 16s)?

In my opinion, if you're a Sweet 16 team you're a good team, so Wisconsin would've been considered a "good team" in those years.  And in my opinion this year's Wisconsin team is better than those years' Wisconsin teams.  Happ this year is far and away better than either Koenig or Hayes was those years, and while those 2 are better than UW's 2nd best player this year (Trice), I think Trice and Davison are both better than Showalter was.

[tower912]

I can see it now.   This team comes together and goes 13-5/14-4 and wins the Big East.    The narrative will be 'the Big East was down' and 'Wojo only wins the easy Big East Championships.'

[Goose]

wades

What are you smoking? Four years ago the Badgers played for national championship.

[wadesworld]

wades

What are you smoking? Four years ago the Badgers played for national championship.

Okay, sorry.  Remove the "-4."  Where would you classify the Wisconsin team from 3 years ago, the one that went to the Sweet Sixteen.

Not smoking anything.  Just thought common sense would kick in, you'd read "the team that made the Sweet Sixteen" and the players referred to (Hayes, Koenig, Showalter) and know which team I was referring to.

[MU82]

MU82

My bad. To answer your question on "not a very good team", in today's game, The Badgers would be considered a good team. By standards 3-4 years ago, they probably suck.

I disagree that this Wisconsin team would have "sucked" 3-4 years ago. They'd have been in the top half of the Big 14 and would have made the tournament, IMHO. Every bit as good as, say, some of the Butler, Texas or NC State teams that made the tourney.

[Cheeks]

MU82

My bad. To answer your question on "not a very good team", in today's game, The Badgers would be considered a good team. By standards 3-4 years ago, they probably suck.

Los Angeles is fine.

Why wouldn't you compare this year's teams to this year's teams, rather than teams of the past?  They cannot compete against teams of the past, only those that play this year.  Just my opinion.

[4everwarriors]

Dis chit is just two good ta put down, hey?

[wadesworld]

WarriorDad
My post had zero to do with MU performance. It had to do with the two opponents noted. You obviously only read what you want to read. On numerous posts I have stated positives shown over the past couple of weeks.
Did you read my last line in the quote you noted? Did you read any other posts in this thread from me?

Last year I called MU in a blowout. This year, my confidence level is not high for a victory. I feel that we will struggle scoring points. I wish we could have carried over some of the fireworks from last season. My only hope for victory is home cooking. Very much hoping that MU faithful are loud and into the game.

I think where the confusion comes in is that going into the game you seemed to think we didn't have much of a chance. Which would seem to suggest either you thought Wisconsin was good and this would be tough to beat or you think Marquette is so bad that we can't even beat a not very good team at home.

[Goose]

wades


No confusion on my side. If I thought we didn't have much of a chance, I would not have added home court advantage. As I noted, I thought MU would have trouble scoring points, and believe they will all season. As for UW, my opinion on their team changed a great after watching them in person.

[wadesworld]

wades


No confusion on my side. If I thought we didn't have much of a chance, I would not have added home court advantage. As I noted, I thought MU would have trouble scoring points, and believe they will all season. As for UW, my opinion on their team changed a great after watching them in person.

Fair. I don't agree because I think Ethan Happ is as good of a college basketball player as any this year and having a true star in the college game goes a long way. But I am very interested to see what they look like next year without him. I don't think the guys behind Happ are very good, but it's possible that they're simply taking a back seat to their star senior and with more opportunity they'll show more consistency.

[brewcity77]

wades


No confusion on my side. If I thought we didn't have much of a chance, I would not have added home court advantage. As I noted, I thought MU would have trouble scoring points, and believe they will all season. As for UW, my opinion on their team changed a great after watching them in person.

I think that's fair, though that was also the worst performance I've seen from the Happ supporting cast outside maybe the Virginia game. Against Xavier, NC State, Oklahoma and others they've had far more significant contributions from Trice, Davison, Reuvers, Pritzl, and others. Last Saturday may have been a great Happ performance, but it wasn't a great Wisconsin team performance.

[Goose]

brew

You might be right, but the supporting cast really is not special. If it was, no one on here but be making comments about Badger prospects for next season in just a negative tone.

[jesmu84]

I think that's fair, though that was also the worst performance I've seen from the Happ supporting cast outside maybe the Virginia game. Against Xavier, NC State, Oklahoma and others they've had far more significant contributions from Trice, Davison, Reuvers, Pritzl, and others. Last Saturday may have been a great Happ performance, but it wasn't a great Wisconsin team performance.

Isn't at least some of that on MU?