Re: College Basketball 2012-2013

[Cubswin11]

The Badgers just keep doing Badger things, they are so untalented this year outside of Bergerren, Dekker, and Jackson and the latter two are both freshman (Jackson is a redshirt). Somehow they will manage 20ish wins and wins 2-3 tournament games despite having some of the least skilled players in D1 basketball.

[SouthSideRyan]

Crean blow by handshake lol

 

And against Minnesota he made Tubby wait around like an [expletive] while he probably did something annoying. He's just the worst.

 

ETA: Saw this on an Illinois board and can't stop watching it.

 

[Sosa21MVP]

Crean blow by handshake lol

 

And against Minnesota he made Tubby wait around like an [expletive] while he probably did something annoying. He's just the worst.

 

ETA: Saw this on an Illinois board and can't stop watching it.

 

 

Tubby deserved that based on his horrible mustache.

 

Who the hell wants to be near Thad Matta after a game? Dude is drenched in slimy sweat.

[rawaction]

[expletive] loss. Can't lose a game like this at home.

 

I think it's time to start evaluating if I'm an "IU hater" or if this team is actually all that good. Besides pounding crap teams, there's the win over Minnesota -- which sure felt like a loss to me. Slow the game down, make it a grinder, and viola, you beat Indiana.

How the hell did Minnesota feel like a loss? And slowing the game down only works if u are good. The only good team that is methodical is Wisconsin. Georgia slowing the game down just made IU take longer to win. IU gets so much off turnovers and from opportunistic 3s and Wisconsin took that away by sticking on Hulls and not giving the ball away. No other team currently on the schedule will be able to do that.

[hawkeyecub]

Crean blow by handshake lol

 

And against Minnesota he made Tubby wait around like an [expletive] while he probably did something annoying. He's just the worst.

 

ETA: Saw this on an Illinois board and can't stop watching it.

 

 

That's awesome.

[fiver]

that was a very disappointing loss at home for IU. IU shot 37% from the field and 25% from behind the arc. that's not going to get it done. The zone wasn't working for them, and they finally played some stingy man defense for a large stretch during the second half...needed to see more of that. What has happened to IU's bench?...no production the last couple of games.

[Exile on Waveland]

[expletive] loss. Can't lose a game like this at home.

 

I think it's time to start evaluating if I'm an "IU hater" or if this team is actually all that good. Besides pounding crap teams, there's the win over Minnesota -- which sure felt like a loss to me. Slow the game down, make it a grinder, and viola, you beat Indiana.

How the hell did Minnesota feel like a loss? And slowing the game down only works if u are good. The only good team that is methodical is Wisconsin. Georgia slowing the game down just made IU take longer to win. IU gets so much off turnovers and from opportunistic 3s and Wisconsin took that away by sticking on Hulls and not giving the ball away. No other team currently on the schedule will be able to do that.

 

I suppose if you want to be pleased with a second half collapse that saw a 23-point halftime lead turning into a 3-point game with under a minute left at Assembly Hall, that's your perogative. But that's IU's only win to brag about (only against top-35 Pomeroy teams) and they spent the end of the game praying for the buzzer to sound before they could complete the collapse.

 

So far, IU has played three competent teams that play methodical, disciplined, halfcourt ball. They won in overtime against Georgetown, lost to Butler, and lost to Wisconsin. That's a trend. At some point, you're going to have to stop rationalizing away IU's poor performances. Oh, Georgia was their first game away from Assembly Hall; oh, Butler was close to their campus; oh, Wisconsin plays a unique style. That said, I do agree that Wisconsin is somewhat an island and I'm not entirely sure last night forebodes all that much -- it's not like other Big Ten teams can learn that style overnight.

[BleacherBadger]

The Badgers just keep doing Badger things, they are so untalented this year outside of Bergerren, Dekker, and Jackson and the latter two are both freshman (Jackson is a redshirt). Somehow they will manage 20ish wins and wins 2-3 tournament games despite having some of the least skilled players in D1 basketball.

 

This year?

 

I'll ignore all your commentary and just correct you by saying that Jackson is a soph and did not redshirt.

 

At the college level, coaching beats talent nine times out of ten.

[Exile on Waveland]

Oh, nice . . . the fun "Wisconsin never has talent" meme. Never mind the 5-star player, the career back-up that's in the NBA, etc.

 

And nine times out of ten, huh . . . I guess that means teams with great coaches and mediocre talent win the national title a lot, right? Or, you know, basically never.

[Guest]

At the college level, coaching beats talent nine times out of ten.

Nice platitude.

 

1) Kinda depends on the gap between coaches and the gap in talent, doesn't it?

2) With a few exceptions, the guys who get the reps as great coaches are the ones who get great talent

3) Wouldn't the same teams win the tournament every year? Oh, wait, that's usually the teams with tons of talent that win that.

[bcl412]

Iowa beating Wisconsin on Saturday would now be a pretty big win for them.

 

And Fran owns Bo now :D

[Magnetic Curses]

 

At the college level, coaching beats talent nine times out of ten.

 

that is just highly inaccurate. if true, kentucky was the luckiest team in the history of college basketball last year, we're talking miracle country.

[Thed Hoyerstein]

Creighton's 10 point win over Wisconsin in November is starting to look better and better. Thanks, Badgers!

[Magnetic Curses]

no one cares

[Exile on Waveland]

Starting in 2003, Wisconsin recruiting classes by Rivals star rankings (because it's easier for me to compile):

 

2003 -- 5-star, two 3-stars

2004 -- 4-star, two 3-stars, (2-star intra-Big Ten transfer)

2005 -- 5-star, 3-star

2006 -- two 4-stars, 3-star

2007 -- two 4-stars, 3-star

2008 -- 4-star, three 3-stars, 2-star

2009 -- two 3-stars

2010 -- four 3-stars

2011 -- four 3-stars

2012 -- 5-star

2013 -- 4-star, three 3-stars

 

Nope, no talent there at all (agreed that the 2009-2011 dip with no 4- or 5-stars does make this team less talented than typical). But those 5-star kids would be walk-ons at most schools, I guess.

[Smack]

Starting in 2003, Wisconsin recruiting classes by Rivals star rankings (because it's easier for me to compile):

 

2003 -- 5-star, two 3-stars

2004 -- 4-star, two 3-stars, (2-star intra-Big Ten transfer)

2005 -- 5-star, 3-star

2006 -- two 4-stars, 3-star

2007 -- two 4-stars, 3-star

2008 -- 4-star, three 3-stars, 2-star

2009 -- two 3-stars

2010 -- four 3-stars

2011 -- four 3-stars

2012 -- 5-star

2013 -- 4-star, three 3-stars

 

Nope, no talent there at all (agreed that the 2009-2011 dip with no 4- or 5-stars does make this team less talented than typical). But those 5-star kids would be walk-ons at most schools, I guess.

 

Their current roster has one 5 star and one 4 star player right?

[SouthSideRyan]

Oh, nice . . . the fun "Wisconsin never has talent" meme. Never mind the 5-star player, the career back-up that's in the NBA, etc.

 

And nine times out of ten, huh . . . I guess that means teams with great coaches and mediocre talent win the national title a lot, right? Or, you know, basically never.

 

Who are you to argue with Bo Ryan's national titles?

[Exile on Waveland]

Starting in 2003, Wisconsin recruiting classes by Rivals star rankings (because it's easier for me to compile):

 

2003 -- 5-star, two 3-stars

2004 -- 4-star, two 3-stars, (2-star intra-Big Ten transfer)

2005 -- 5-star, 3-star

2006 -- two 4-stars, 3-star

2007 -- two 4-stars, 3-star

2008 -- 4-star, three 3-stars, 2-star

2009 -- two 3-stars

2010 -- four 3-stars

2011 -- four 3-stars

2012 -- 5-star

2013 -- 4-star, three 3-stars

 

Nope, no talent there at all (agreed that the 2009-2011 dip with no 4- or 5-stars does make this team less talented than typical). But those 5-star kids would be walk-ons at most schools, I guess.

 

Their current roster has one 5 star and one 4 star player right?

 

Yes. Dekker was a 5-star (No. 13 overall) and Berggren was a 4-star (No. 74 overall). Dekker had the highest class ranking of anyone on the floor last night -- yes, higher than any IU player.

[Smack]

 

 

Their current roster has one 5 star and one 4 star player right?

 

Yes. Dekker was a 5-star (No. 13 overall) and Berggren was a 4-star (No. 74 overall). Dekker had the highest class ranking of anyone on the floor last night -- yes, higher than any IU player.

 

IU has two 5-stars, five 4-stars, and six 3-stars.

 

Who has fewer average 'stars' in the B1G? Off the top of my head I know Purdue, Michigan, MSU, OSU, IU, and Illinois have more 'stars'. Nebraska, Penn St. and NU obviously fewer. Iowa is about even probably, and Minny probably has fewer. Wisconsin is in the bottom half of the B1G in terms of 'star' talent. That doesn't mean they don't have talented players compared to most other schools in the country.

[Exile on Waveland]

More fun with talent. Last night, Wisconsin played eight players (one 5-star, one 4-star, five 3-stars, and one 2-star). Indiana played nine players (two 5-stars, three 4-stars, and four 3-stars). However, the minute distribution probably is more telling, as two of the 4-star players IU played combined for eleven total minutes. Wisconsin got 23 minutes from 5-star players, 28 minutes from 4-star players, 116 minutes from 3-star players, and 33 minutes from a 2-star player. Indiana got 69 minutes from 5-star players, 40 minutes from 4-star players, and 91 minutes from 3-star players. Indiana has more talent, sure, but this wasn't exactly 2012 Kentucky against 2009 Indiana.

[BleacherBadger]

 

At the college level, coaching beats talent nine times out of ten.

 

that is just highly inaccurate. if true, kentucky was the luckiest team in the history of college basketball last year, we're talking miracle country.

 

Right, because John Calipari never had any success before he had those players last year. I mean, he never once got close to the tournament

[Exile on Waveland]

 

 

Their current roster has one 5 star and one 4 star player right?

 

Yes. Dekker was a 5-star (No. 13 overall) and Berggren was a 4-star (No. 74 overall). Dekker had the highest class ranking of anyone on the floor last night -- yes, higher than any IU player.

 

IU has two 5-stars, five 4-stars, and six 3-stars.

 

Who has fewer average 'stars' in the B1G? Off the top of my head I know Purdue, Michigan, MSU, OSU, IU, and Illinois have more 'stars'. Nebraska, Penn St. and NU obviously fewer. Iowa is about even probably, and Minny probably has fewer. Wisconsin is in the bottom half of the B1G in terms of 'star' talent. That doesn't mean they don't have talented players compared to most other schools in the country.

 

Certainly, this is one of the least, if not the least, talented Wisconsin team Bo Ryan has had. That three-year recruiting dip that garnered no 4- or 5- star players made sure of that. I take no issue with that; I take issue with the statement that Wisconsin never has much talent and/or that this team has no talent.

 

As for IU, the overall star numbers look better than what's actually on the court. One 4-star is legless Maurice Creek, another is Derek Elston who has been hurt and played only 35 minutes. Two more 4-stars are freshman fringe rotation players. I'm not saying anyone should feel sorry for IU's talent level, but the rotation is now basically two 5-stars, a 4-star, and four 3-stars.

[Smack]

 

Certainly, this is one of the least, if not the least, talented Wisconsin team Bo Ryan has had. That three-year recruiting dip that garnered no 4- or 5- star players made sure of that. I take no issue with that; I take issue with the statement that Wisconsin never has much talent and/or that this team has no talent.

 

As for IU, the overall star numbers look better than what's actually on the court. One 4-star is legless Maurice Creek, another is Derek Elston who has been hurt and played only 35 minutes. Two more 4-stars are freshman fringe rotation players. I'm not saying anyone should feel sorry for IU's talent level, but the rotation is now basically two 5-stars, a 4-star, and four 3-stars.

 

You can cross off Creek and Elston, but Oladipo is also playing well above a 3-star rating. Plus you've got Hulls playing at an NBA level.

 

I hate Bo's style but it's damn effective in conference. Even when he just gets system talent he runs it out there with success.

[Exile on Waveland]

 

Certainly, this is one of the least, if not the least, talented Wisconsin team Bo Ryan has had. That three-year recruiting dip that garnered no 4- or 5- star players made sure of that. I take no issue with that; I take issue with the statement that Wisconsin never has much talent and/or that this team has no talent.

 

As for IU, the overall star numbers look better than what's actually on the court. One 4-star is legless Maurice Creek, another is Derek Elston who has been hurt and played only 35 minutes. Two more 4-stars are freshman fringe rotation players. I'm not saying anyone should feel sorry for IU's talent level, but the rotation is now basically two 5-stars, a 4-star, and four 3-stars.

 

You can cross off Creek and Elston, but Oladipo is also playing well above a 3-star rating. Plus you've got Hulls playing at an NBA level.

 

I hate Bo's style but it's damn effective in conference. Even when he just gets system talent he runs it out there with success.

 

Well, I used stars without looking deeper because talent is amorphous/arbitrary and the stars are at least quantifiable (if not also arbitrary). There's no doubt that Oladipo is now playing at well above a 3-star level (and haha on Hulls). But that seems to me to be sort of the point -- Ryan deserves credit for developing and having 3-star kids play at a higher level, but so should Crean with Oladipo/Sheehey (just as Elston's lack of development as a 4-star could be used against Crean). I'm counting Ryan Evans as a 2-star player when he's obviously not on the court, same with Oladipo.

[abuck1220]

At the college level, coaching beats talent nine times out of ten.

 

lol. scott drew says otherwise.