2018-2019 B1G Basketball Thread

[ELA]

Carsen Edwards won the Jerry West award, awarded to the best SG in the nation.

Pretty impressive to win the award before the season even starts.  

[medinabuckeye1]

2002-2018 B1G (includes all current B1G teams even though they were not all in the B1G for that entire timeframe) NCAA tournament records sorted by wins, then appearances (resorted from an earlier post in roughly the order of success over that stratch, IMHO):

• 32-17:  Michigan State
• 29-16:  Wisconsin
• 20-11:  Ohio State
• 17-8:  Michigan
• 15-8:  Maryland
• 14-9:  Indiana
• 13-11:  Purdue
• 13-9:  Illinois
• 2-4:  Iowa
• 1-5:  Minnesota
• 1-1:  Northwestern
• 0-1:  Nebraska
• 0-1:  Penn State
• 0-0:  Rutgers

Since none of our teams have won an NC in that timeframe the number of losses for each team is also the number of NCAA tournament appearances in those 17 years.  

The huge drop-off between #8 Illinois and #9 Iowa was somewhat surprising to me.  The top eight all have at least eight NCAA appearances (in 17 years so at least roughly every other year) and at least 13 wins.  None of the bottom six have more than five appearances or two wins.  

[Brutus Buckeye]

Kinda surprised Rutgers was that awful over that stretch, as the Big East that they were a part of was all about some men's hoops. 

[ELA]

Kinda surprised Rutgers was that awful over that stretch, as the Big East that they were a part of was all about some men's hoops.

I think Rutgers has the longest active NCAA tournament drought of any P5 school

[medinabuckeye1]

How would you rank "success" over this 17 year period?  

In my view, for the top eight teams you can pretty much ignore performance in non-tournament years and just rank off of the NCAA tournament records.  Within that though, how would you weight appearances as compared to wins?  

The top three are obvious.  MSU has the most appearances and the most wins and UW is second in both of those categories.  Ohio State is third in wins and tied for third in appearances.  

Then it gets debatable.  Michigan is fourth in wins but Purdue is tied for third in appearances.  I can recognize an argument for either.  

Maybe a compromise is to rank at least the top eight by number of NCAA Tournament games played:

• #1 Michigan State, 49
• #2 Wisconsin, 45
• #3 Ohio State, 31
• #4 Michigan, 25
• #5 Purdue, 24
• #6 (tie) Maryland, 23
• #6 (tie) Indiana, 23
• #8 Illinois, 22

[betarhoalphadelta]

Pretty impressive to win the award before the season even starts.  

Well, nobody's going to read the 2018-19 thread anymore. But assuming returns, he'd probably be on the watch list for it again.

[ELA]

Then it gets debatable.  Michigan is fourth in wins but Purdue is tied for third in appearances.  I can recognize an argument for either.  

I would say Michigan has had much higher highs than Purdue, but Purdue was more consistently good.  I would give the edge to Michigan simply from a perception point because Michigan has had a couple of memorable tourney runs, while Purdue has not.  If you asked the casual non-Big Ten basketball fan, my guess is that based on those two NC appearances, they would say Michigan.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I would say Michigan has had much higher highs than Purdue, but Purdue was more consistently good.  I would give the edge to Michigan simply from a perception point because Michigan has had a couple of memorable tourney runs, while Purdue has not.  If you asked the casual non-Big Ten basketball fan, my guess is that based on those two NC appearances, they would say Michigan.

And actually, across that stretch it's hard to say Purdue was more consistently good, at least until Painter took over. The start of that 2002 and onward stretch was the late days of Keady, with Keady only making the tournament in 2003 and going 1-1 (making 2nd round). Keady's last 4 seasons (2002-2005) were 13-18, 19-11, 17-14, and 7-21, finishing below .500 in conference three of those four years. Likewise Beilein took over for Amaker. So I think you have to rate them based Painter vs Beilein, not on what occurred before that.
Painter had a rough go in 2005-06 with the depleted roster he had, going 9-19 (3-13) his first year, but he's been pretty consistently good since then. Outside of a rough stretch of 2013-14 and 2014-15 seasons (coinciding with some recruiting busts and--not surprised if this had an effect--following his divorce), he's been over 20 wins every season and over 25 wins 7 times.
Michigan is very similar. Beilein took over two years after Painter, and had a rough first year but mostly solid success since. He's had a rougher go in conference play than Painter has (.561 to .617), but as you point out his highs in the tournament have been higher.
I would say they're pretty darn close. How you rate them is more related to whether you are rating regular season and conference finishes more highly, or whether you're rating the tournament more highly. 
Conference play, I'd give the edge to Painter. Higher win percentage, more often finishing in the top 3 in conference, etc.
Beilein has been to the tournament 9 of 11 years, Painter has been there 10 of 13 years. Beilein has made the second weekend 4 times, Painter has made the second weekend 4 times. The difference is that all Beilein has made the third weekend twice, and all 4 of those trips for Painter has ended in the Sweet 16. So tournament-wise, it goes to Michigan.

[Brutus Buckeye]

I'd say Purdue is the stronger Hoops program, but I am obviously bias. 

B-Line has had a few runs to the NC game, which you can't take away from him.

But he also got beat by Ohio U, after clownishly aping Hoke's "Ohio" shtick the whole season leading up to the ironic Bobcat loss. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Not sure where this belongs so I'll toss it out here:

During the tournament last year we had some discussion about the ridiculous shortage of eastern sites (talking first/second round here).  I looked some things up to flesh out our argument:

• Per this site, 47.1% of the US population lives in EST.  
• 29% lives in CST.  
• 6.7% lives in MST.  
• 16.6% lives in PST.  
• 0.7% lives west of PST (Alaska and Hawaii).  

The first/second round sites in the 2018 tournament were located:

• 3/8 or 37.5% in EST (Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Detroit) underrepresented by 9.6%
• 3/8 or 37.5% in CST (Nashville, Wichita, Dallas) overrepresented by 8.5%
• 1/8 or 12.5% in MST (Boise) overrepresented by 5.8%
• 1/8 or 12.5% in PST (San Diego) underrepresented by 4.1%
• 0/8 or 0% West of PST underrepresented by 0.7%

I realize that they can't hit it exactly but it seems like they consistently underrepresent EST.  Combining PST with everything west of it and working on a four year cycle (32 locations) it should be:

• 15 in EST (.471*32=15.07) so the EST should get four sites in three of every four years with three sites once every four years.  
• 9 in CST (.29*32=9.28) so the CST should get two sites in three of every four years with three sites once every four years.  
• 2 in MST (.067*32=2.14) so the MST should get a site every other year.  
• 6 in PST and west of PST ((.166+.07)*32=5.54) so the PST and points west of there should alternate between getting one and two sites.  

Further it would make sense to link the top two and the bottom two such that:

• Three of four years EST would get 4 and CST would get two then the fourth year EST and CST would get three each.  
• PST and MST should alternate such that PST gets two and MST none, then PST and MST get one each.  

An additional problem with this year's sites was that the sites leaned west within each timezone:

• Two of the three EST sites (Pitt, Charlotte) were central to EST and the third (Det) was West.  
• One of the CST sites (Nashville) was in the eastern part of CST but the other two (Wichita, Dallas) were in the western part.  
• The MST site was about as far west as you can get in MST.  

[ELA]

Ward's father came out and said there is no Europe or tramsfer plan.  That if he doesn't hear what he likes, he'll be back at MSU.  I am legitimately surprised.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Jacquil Taylor (5th year senior) to transfer from Purdue.

I know, most of you are probably saying "Who?" Which is incredibly sad, because Taylor showed a lot of promise but was continually hobbled by injury issues his entire career. He was a 6'10" 240# athletic center, but consistently had lower extremity injuries that impacted his minutes. This past season, he played quite a bit in the World University Games (Matt Haarms was excluded as he's not American), and was expected to be Isaac Haas' backup at the 5. But again, a foot injury gave Haarms the lead and he never gave it up.

Purdue has a lot of young big men coming in, but I think a lot of us were hoping that Taylor might get to play this season [and next if he applies/gets a 6th year waiver] and give us some experience and calmness that one might not expect out of a freshman. But it seems he decided it was no longer the right situation. And as a 5th year senior, we assume he'll be a grad transfer and can play immediately for his next team.

What I see from the fanbase so far is more along the lines of "sad to see him go, but wish him the best" response. So at least the fans don't have hard feelings here.

[ELA]

Sounds like Purdue should have been trying to get Haas to put a wrap on something other than his elbow.

[HailHailMSP]

Sounds like Purdue should have been trying to get Haas to put a wrap on something other than his elbow.

Ha. This the kind of thing you pay high sums to settle out of court to manage your reputation, especially with the text messages.
Based on some recent posts it looks like Haas is back with original girl in this case. I guess a long leash is given, including a handful of STD’s, for that NBA payday.