2026 Coaching Carousel

[tower912]

Tony Miller is on Line 1....

Absolutely agree.  He made it go.  Which further makes my point about MU going as far as guard play take them.  However, that was the team that came closest to being dominant up front.


Butler/Crowder not guards?  Meh.  Ok.  Not worth getting briefs in a bundle over.

[Billy Hoyle]

Operative phrase being first half of the year.

 And in my 42 years of following MU hoops, with one exception (hello, Key/Mac/Amal), the success of MU's seasons are related to how good the guard play is.

I think the 93-94 Kentucky Wildcats and Slick Rick would disagree.

[tower912]

Read again what I wrote about Key/Mac/Amal.  We are citing the same possible exception.  Though 83 is absolutely right about Tony Miller needing to be recognized.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Yes, because I judge the success of a season based on how often the team wins, not what an algorithm tells me about the efficiency of its play.
A win that the KenPom algorithm hates is still a win. A loss that the Torvik data says was well played is still a loss.

Now, if you're talking about the quality of the team, that kind of data is essential to the discussion. But we're not talking about which teams were better. We're talking about which seasons were better. I'll take actual wins over moral victories all season.

I'm sure you'd agree that SOS matters. Unless you are suggesting that 30-8 Tulsa had a better season than most of the tournament field last season.

[Pakuni]

I'm sure you'd agree that SOS matters. Unless you are suggesting that 30-8 Tulsa had a better season than most of the tournament field last season.

I'm suggesting a 30-win season for Tulsa is in all probability a greater success than a 22-win season for Tulsa, even if their KenPom ranking is 10 slots lower.
Normal fans aren't swapping wins for computer rankings. Nobody goes to a big rivalry game just hoping, win or lose, that their team is more efficient than the other guys.

KenPom ranked Marquette higher in 2008, 2023 and 2024 than 2003. Were those also more successful seasons?
 

[Pakuni]

nm

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'm suggesting a 30-win season for Tulsa is in all probability a greater success than a 22-win season for Tulsa, even if their KenPom ranking is 10 slots lower.
Normal fans aren't swapping wins for computer rankings. Nobody goes to a big rivalry game just hoping, win or lose, that their team is more efficient than the other guys.

KenPom ranked Marquette higher in 2008, 2023 and 2024 than 2003. Were those also more successful seasons?

Of course not. You seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing that KenPom ratings are the only thing that matters. That's never been my argument. In this thread I said that Wojo's second year is "better" than last season despite having a lower KenPom ranking. You aren't responsible for reading all my posts, but in another thread a few days ago I said that last season was one of the three worst of the 2000s (despite it only being the 6th lowest KenPom rating of the 2000s).

The only argument I've been making with you is that using straight wins/losses without factoring in SoS is a poor way to measure the quality of the season.

[Small Orange Soda]

The season being over before conference play started was the issue.

[GoFastAndWin]

Read again what I wrote about Key/Mac/Amal.  We are citing the same possible exception.  Though 83 is absolutely right about Tony Miller needing to be recognized.

KO most certainly recognized him:

"If Tony goes in front of a bus today, I go in front of one tomorrow."

[muwarrior69]

Of course not. You seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing that KenPom ratings are the only thing that matters. That's never been my argument. In this thread I said that Wojo's second year is "better" than last season despite having a lower KenPom ranking. You aren't responsible for reading all my posts, but in another thread a few days ago I said that last season was one of the three worst of the 2000s (despite it only being the 6th lowest KenPom rating of the 2000s).

The only argument I've been making with you is that using straight wins/losses without factoring in SoS is a poor way to measure the quality of the season.

Winning is all that matters and winning when it counts matters even more. Just ask all the NY Giant and New England Patriot fans about the 2007/2008 season. Sure last season sucked, but can you imagine if we won 4 straight in the BET and then 6 straight or 7 if they put us in the First 4 to win the Championship. No one would care if we lost 20 games because in the end we were winners.

[The Sultan]

Winning is all that matters and winning when it counts matters even more. Just ask all the NY Giant and New England Patriot fans about the 2007/2008 season. Sure last season sucked, but can you imagine if we won 4 straight in the BET and then 6 straight or 7 if they put us in the First 4 to win the Championship. No one would care if we lost 20 games because in the end we were winners.

Why do you think TAMU would disagree with that?

[muwarrior69]

Why do you think TAMU would disagree with that?

Because he said this:

The only argument I've been making with you is that using straight wins/losses without factoring in SoS is a poor way to measure the quality of the season.

[Uncle Rico]

Because he said this:

The only argument I've been making with you is that using straight wins/losses without factoring in SoS is a poor way to measure the quality of the season.

He wouldn't use that if Marquette had gone 20-13 and run the table or gone 37-0 and lost in the title game

[The Sultan]

Because he said this:

The only argument I've been making with you is that using straight wins/losses without factoring in SoS is a poor way to measure the quality of the season.

Again, go back and read what he has been saying from the beginning. You know...the context to which this discussion applies. You will see that he doesn't disagree with you.

[Scoop Snoop]

Imagine if we won 4 straight in the BET and then 6 straight or 7 if they put us in the First 4 to win the Championship. No one would care if we lost 20 games because in the end we were winners.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I think somewhere in your posting history, you said that anything less than a natty is failure, but an EE is a step in the right direction. Your "imagine" scenario above dovetails with that. And yet you dismissed our upset of UCONN because it was an end-of-the-season road game for them, they were tired and then added that if we held Karaban to only two points again in a rematch, "I will concede that the team has improved."

Unfortunately, we did not win our first BET game and even if we had, I think it is a good guess that Marquette would not be able to both hold Karaban once again to his career low and also win the game enroute to winning the BET and then the NCAA as you outlined.

Maybe this will be the year that your MUBB fantasies become reality. But only if Marquette finally lives up to your lofty standards.

[muwarrior69]

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I think somewhere in your posting history, you said that anything less than a natty is failure, but an EE is a step in the right direction. Your "imagine" scenario above dovetails with that. And yet you dismissed our upset of UCONN because it was an end-of-the-season road game for them, they were tired and then added that if we held Karaban to only two points again in a rematch, "I will concede that the team has improved."

Unfortunately, we did not win our first BET game and even if we had, I think it is a good guess that Marquette would not be able to both hold Karaban once again to his career low and also win the game enroute to winning the BET and then the NCAA as you outlined.

Maybe this will be the year that your MUBB fantasies become reality. But only if Marquette finally lives up to your lofty standards.

What is wrong with lofty standards and as a NY Giants football fan 2007/2008 was no fantasy, the 1980 Olympic Gold in Hockey was no fantasy either. Well if I did say anything less than a natty is failure then I am wrong, but anything less than having the resources and players to compete for a Natty is failure.

[Scoop Snoop]

What is wrong with lofty standards and as a NY Giants football fan 2007/2008 was no fantasy, the 1980 Olympic Gold in Hockey was no fantasy either. Well if I did say anything less than a natty is failure then I am wrong, but anything less than having the resources and players to compete for a Natty is failure.

You have positioned yourself very well as Scoop's Scold. That's what's wrong with your lofty standards. Pretension, condescension, and constant bitching are your calling cards. "Then I will concede..."    As if anyone gives a rat's ass.

[MU82]

Maybe, if Marquette wins 7 straight natties, eeyore69 might concede that the first 6 might not have been flukes. Perhaps.

[Pakuni]

Of course not. You seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing that KenPom ratings are the only thing that matters. That's never been my argument. In this thread I said that Wojo's second year is "better" than last season despite having a lower KenPom ranking. You aren't responsible for reading all my posts, but in another thread a few days ago I said that last season was one of the three worst of the 2000s (despite it only being the 6th lowest KenPom rating of the 2000s).

The only argument I've been making with you is that using straight wins/losses without factoring in SoS is a poor way to measure the quality of the season.

I don't really think that. And if you did think KenPom ratings are all that matters, that's fine. Everyone is free to choose how they personally measure a season.
I think we agree that those kinds of metrics are important in evaluating the quality of a performance/team. I just don't find it particularly important when judging a season. Nobody's hanging a banner for having the best Torvik rating in their conference or finishing first in KenPom's rankings (Sorry, Gonzaga). I don't believe fans look back fondly on that time they were in the building when their team put up a 98 Torvik score. They'll remember the wins along the way, though.
But again, I don't mean to tell you how to fan. Like I said, my initial comment probably read harsher than intended.