Wisconsin Badgers 2019-20 Season Thread

[MickeyDavis]

New beginnings

[emunney]

No more pussyfooting around: time to win a game without scoring more than 20 points.

[HaroldinGMinor]

And this thread is off to a great start...

[wapith]

Another 5 seed... my early prediction.

I don't think they'll struggle to make the field, clearly.

[tski1972]

Pointers need someone to replace Nate Dodge.....Davison?

[Kerb Hohl]

Another 5 seed... my early prediction.

I don't think they'll struggle to make the field, clearly.

This seems about right. Conference should be very deep again this year. I could see even a little bit lower of a seed (6 or 7) due to some early struggles if Potter isn't eligible for Nov/Dec or acclimating to life without Happ...but they should be good come tournament time and will have essentially the whole team returning the following year.

[Kerb Hohl]

I think they'll finally break the seal and get a grad transfer or a JUCO this year. Too many open roster spots.

Will be interesting to see what they do. I can't imagine they're going to attract the major impact guys (maybe 10 or so out there). Beyond that, they have 7 guys that are either good or at least solid rotation players. They need help but not as dearly as some teams out there.

[humanrefutation]

This is my final response to Kerb's replies to me in the other thread:

From here:
viewtopic.php?p=73923376#p73923376

Through here:
viewtopic.php?p=74015299#p74015299
viewtopic.php?p=74016337#p74016337

I'll start by saying this - the bulk of your perspective on the Badgers is based on an optimistic outlook of what can happen moving forward. And as I've said many times before, I am open to the possibility that Gard will start showing me something that gives me more faith in his ability to drive our program's success. I don't think your optimism has much of a foundation in fact, but that's a matter that we clearly don't agree on.

I will also add that you're as much of a victim of confirmation bias as anyone here. Essentially any criticism of Gard has been met by vitriol by you - any win an indication that this is like "80% of Bo Ryan teams," any loss just a product of having a singular bad game where they missed shots. When I discuss better recruiting, you immediately pivot to accusing me of wanting us to become Kentucky or Duke (or, in football, Alabama). You complain that the smallest sign of struggle will lead fans to assume the worst because of the lack of cachet from Greg Gard, when that lack of cachet is PRECISELY why Bo Ryan was afforded the benefit of the doubt when things weren't going well. Bo Ryan started out his tenure in Madison with back-to-back Big Ten Titles and won the conference tournament and went to the Elite Eight in his third year. Of course he's going to get a longer leash than a guy without that resume. And Bo never missed a tournament and only once got knocked out in the first round.

That is where the bulk of my annoyance comes into play - there is absolutely nothing wrong with being Gard's biggest advocate on this board because any good discussion needs multiple perspectives. And it's clear you follow the team and are invested in their games. But refusing to see the shades of grey - too much sycophancy - ends to leading to a point where people don't want to even bother engaging with you. Cut out that BS nonsense and it'll actually make it easier to have a conversation in this thread.

As to your specific points - most of our disagreements are matters of degree, IMO. I don't need to rehash them all. But to just make a couple more points -

I think their offense was trash - in style and execution. You think it was just a matter of missing shots and could be better when more spacing and better shooting. You point to shooting stats at certain points of the season, as evidence of a successful offense. However, I believe that every team has good periods and bad periods, but what actually separates the good teams from the not-good ones are those which have some level of consistency. Consistency is what helps isolate those bad periods to a few minutes or a game or two, rather than going weeks at a time without being able to hit the broad side of a barn. Consistency is what helps prevent a team from getting run off so thoroughly in the first half that they can't possibly recover and win in the second half. Consistency is what helps extend those good periods so that you're not winning at Carver-Hawkeye in one week and losing to Western Kentucky and Minnesota the next.

You seem to think our late shot offense this season was the same as it was under Bo - and while I agree that Bo's worst offenses relied on contested shots late on the clock (that Jordan Taylor team that lost to Cuse in the tournament comes to mind), I'm not motivated by achieving the bottom rung of the Bo Ryan era. You think players developed. I don't see significant development - at least to the degree you're alleging.

I'm also not throwing out 2017-18. As I've said before, those injuries were to players who should not have been significant contributors, anyway. You're acting like King, Davison, and Trice were supposed to come in as freshman and a sophomore and all of a sudden drive this team to success. The reason this team was dependent on those guys in your POV is because of the massive failure of the 2015 class - those juniors who, on any Bo Ryan team, would have been the primary contributors to the team.

I know you've said in your now-edited comment that the 2015 class was simply devoid of talent. But who recruited those guys, Kerb? I mean, either Gard failed by recruiting them, or Gard failed in his development of them, or some combination of both. This is not some smaller D1 or D2 program - you don't get mulligans for an entire class of failures, especially when that class came off of the back of the most attractive period in the history of the program.

And yet! Even if I were to accept your perspective on that issue (which I decidedly do not), isn't the fact that this team wasn't especially good this year proof that they wouldn't have looked much better even if they did play last season? I mean, the absurdity of your 80% comment aside, this was a team that would have finished in the bottom echelon of Bo Ryan seasons. That's despite the fact that they had a preseason All-American and Wooden Award candidate anchoring both the offense and defense.

Anyway, there's no more need to belabor the point. Gard is unlikely to be canned this offseason and it's time to move to 2019-2020. In the future, if I criticize Greg Gard for suffering a terrible loss and you want to @ me, please reflect my perspective accurately and refrain from asking me to root for someone else.

[Kerb Hohl]

I will also add that you're as much of a victim of confirmation bias as anyone here. Essentially any criticism of Gard has been met by vitriol by you - any win an indication that this is like "80% of Bo Ryan teams," any loss just a product of having a singular bad game where they missed shots. When I discuss better recruiting, you immediately pivot to accusing me of wanting us to become Kentucky or Duke (or, in football, Alabama). You complain that the smallest sign of struggle will lead fans to assume the worst because of the lack of cachet from Greg Gard, when that lack of cachet is PRECISELY why Bo Ryan was afforded the benefit of the doubt when things weren't going well. Bo Ryan started out his tenure in Madison with back-to-back Big Ten Titles and won the conference tournament and went to the Elite Eight in his third year. Of course he's going to get a longer leash than a guy without that resume. And Bo never missed a tournament and only once got knocked out in the first round.

Bo Ryan was not afforded the benefit of the doubt by the fans. Read any postseason thread on this board not from 2014 or 2015. You very well might have given it to him but there was always a large crowd of fans ready to move on after nearly every season.

That is where the bulk of my annoyance comes into play - there is absolutely nothing wrong with being Gard's biggest advocate on this board because any good discussion needs multiple perspectives. And it's clear you follow the team and are invested in their games. But refusing to see the shades of grey - too much sycophancy - ends to leading to a point where people don't want to even bother engaging with you. Cut out that BS nonsense and it'll actually make it easier to have a conversation in this thread.

As to your specific points - most of our disagreements are matters of degree, IMO. I don't need to rehash them all. But to just make a couple more points -

Oddly enough, I think it's the other way around at times. To the point where my "80%" idea was maybe slightly overboard (I typed it in like 5 seconds) but now is being run around by those who post 80% negative stuff (this is actually correct, not pointing at you, ehem) will just bring that up every post.

Maybe 50-60% of Bo Ryan teams did stuff like this? Not 80%?

I understand that I can be a dick responding to stuff on here but I'm just wondering if you also notice that you talk down to me on the majority of these threads just the same? And you're a mod?

I think their offense was trash - in style and execution. You think it was just a matter of missing shots and could be better when more spacing and better shooting. You point to shooting stats at certain points of the season, as evidence of a successful offense. However, I believe that every team has good periods and bad periods, but what actually separates the good teams from the not-good ones are those which have some level of consistency. Consistency is what helps isolate those bad periods to a few minutes or a game or two, rather than going weeks at a time without being able to hit the broad side of a barn. Consistency is what helps prevent a team from getting run off so thoroughly in the first half that they can't possibly recover and win in the second half. Consistency is what helps extend those good periods so that you're not winning at Carver-Hawkeye in one week and losing to Western Kentucky and Minnesota the next.

Well, most Bo Ryan teams would go something like 14-6 in a good conference and not lose by more than 10 points until they got desperate to good/hot teams in the final 2 games of the season. This team seemed about as consistent as a Bo Ryan team to me.

Hell, one of the Final Four Bo teams lost like 4 out of 5 games in the middle of the season and had the doors blown off at home by a terrible Northwestern team. The National runner up team lost @ an awful Rutgers team. Long season.

You seem to think our late shot offense this season was the same as it was under Bo - and while I agree that Bo's worst offenses relied on contested shots late on the clock (that Jordan Taylor team that lost to Cuse in the tournament comes to mind), I'm not motivated by achieving the bottom rung of the Bo Ryan era. You think players developed. I don't see significant development - at least to the degree you're alleging.

I think it'll be better. There were like 3 or 4 teams that Bo Ryan had that were like this - struggled mightily on offense, good/great defense.

I'm pretty confident that the offense will at least look prettier next year. I think it should be better as well, but we'll have to see how things mesh.

I'm also not throwing out 2017-18. As I've said before, those injuries were to players who should not have been significant contributors, anyway. You're acting like King, Davison, and Trice were supposed to come in as freshman and a sophomore and all of a sudden drive this team to success. The reason this team was dependent on those guys in your POV is because of the massive failure of the 2015 class - those juniors who, on any Bo Ryan team, would have been the primary contributors to the team.

Bo Ryan had plenty of failure players on his bench. On the bench of some of the Final Four teams were Jordan Hill, Evan Anderson, and Riley Dearring - all on scholarship. Ian Markolf and JP Gavinski weren't too much earlier. This isn't to belittle those because they happen to anyone but it's entirely possible that they got 2-3 duds + 2 solid players in a 5 person class.

So then they were forced to go to freshmen as their 5th-8th men on the depth chart. Then they got hurt. So then they only had basically 4 decent players left.

Again, this would be a giant warning flag if he wasn't able to...win with decent, Big 10 caliber players like a bulked up Reuevers + healthy Trice and King the following year as we had promised he would.

I know you've said in your now-edited comment that the 2015 class was simply devoid of talent. But who recruited those guys, Kerb? I mean, either Gard failed by recruiting them, or Gard failed in his development of them, or some combination of both. This is not some smaller D1 or D2 program - you don't get mulligans for an entire class of failures, especially when that class came off of the back of the most attractive period in the history of the program.

This was touched on earlier in the thread, but Bo had a lame duck status on him and recruiting was not as great as it may seem. Those guys were recruited completely by Bo Ryan as head coach. Bo Ryan was still head coach when those guys suited up for their first game. If you want to lay some blame on Gard as "lead recruiter," well then you can also compliment him on being lead recruiter for much of the studs that they got in that era.

[Kerb Hohl]

I'll start by saying this - the bulk of your perspective on the Badgers is based on an optimistic outlook of what can happen moving forward. And as I've said many times before, I am open to the possibility that Gard will start showing me something that gives me more faith in his ability to drive our program's success. I don't think your optimism has much of a foundation in fact, but that's a matter that we clearly don't agree on.

Here's my final point on difference of opinion and my dumb explanation as to why I am over-protective of a solid, yet unproven at the highest point coach:

Take a look at this Counsell thread:
viewtopic.php?f=110&t=1574870&start=20#wrap

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=110&t=1574870&start=20#wrap

I can't link to the specific post, but there's an exchange we had 1.5 years ago. You, "weren't sure" about Counsell. Again, you weren't going too much further on him than you are on Gard. You weren't throwing him to the curb. Nothing really wrong with it. I'm not insulting you with this. Keep reading at the bottom.

My view on coaches and GMs is "trust the process." My comments were that I could tell that as long as he trust the analytics (he clearly does) that he'll be a great manager. Same with my ardent defense of Stearns. I've stopped paying as much attention to the Bucks but I'd have the same support of Bud I'm sure. I generally think the same about the Badger football program.

So, as a guy that wastes too much time reading advanced stats, doing several projects of data collection and comparison to sports, and correlation to gambling (which generally correlates to winning games), all of these coaches/GMs are doing generally the right thing. It gets a bit more nuanced with the Badgers because you also have to compare to expectation level and recruiting.

There's a debate on how easy it should be to bring in good players for the football or basketball program but the idea remains that, in my opinion, in the state of Wisconsin, in the way the school forces them to run things the process is nearly optimal. I'm not saying that you can't do better but I think that being on the forefront of turnover aversion and defense (what Bo Ryan was doing) and continuing it with Gard is good. Now, things may change as the rest of the nation continues to catch on, but the numbers at least back up that Gard is doing things that help a team win. Same with the football program trying to modernize a scheme that caters to the strength (offensive line and linebackers) available to them in Wisconsin.

So I think the difference is that you will define success only when it hits you in the head and makes you notice. * - (read below)

I will look to retain coaches that do things that statistically trend toward winning. I'll defend the coaches and GM in the good times and bad because if the process is correct, they will always give the team the best chance to win. There may be variance from year-to-year but they will always have the bar higher than most other programs.

* - This is not necessarily a bad trait on your part. I held on way too long with the Packers with TT and to an extent, MM. He went senile and I started to turn my opinion in 2014 or 2015 but some saw the writing on the wall much earlier than I did on the "draft and develop."

[DingleJerry]

Only thing I would add to this for the most part well thought out debate on both sides is that it's very difficult to blame GG for the 2015 class while simultaneously saying you only hold him accountable for when he was head man. That was Bo's class by that standard. If you can blame him for that you also have to give him credit for two Sweet 16s in his first two years before the terrible '15 class led to the horrible '18 season.

I'd also add that I was definitely one throughout the late Bo years say 2010-13ish saying I was ready to move on and play modern basketball. Basically those Bruiser/Evans teams were it for me. Then the perfect storm happened in 14-15. I was far from the only one with that take at the time though.

Overall I'm skeptical too at this point. I know I was fairly adamant on here on the mistakes made being all in on the Herro/Hauser class among other things. Bo was simply an incredible basketball coach. Forgetting recruiting, talking actual coaching. GG is doing his best to run the same model (likely the only model that can work under current UW rules) but the chances of him being such a good coach to make up for the lack of talent could be too much to overcome. Bo being a freak was able.

Plus I think GG is gong to try his best to modernize and somewhat have his cake and eat it too with the Bo style mixed with modern stuff. Not sure how that will play out, might just be better off being all in on the old way. On the other hand, if it leads to most of our future offenses looking like 14-15 in style of play (not saying results) but just free flowing and everyone can shoot and has the freedom to shoot when open maybe it will work long term. Basically, the next two years are critical for GG and at this point it could go either way.

[Kerb Hohl]

Only thing I would add to this for the most part well thought out debate on both sides is that it's very difficult to blame GG for the 2015 class while simultaneously saying you only hold him accountable for when he was head man. That was Bo's class by that standard. If you can blame him for that you also have to give him credit for two Sweet 16s in his first two years before the terrible '15 class led to the horrible '18 season.

I'd also add that I was definitely one throughout the late Bo years say 2010-13ish saying I was ready to move on and play modern basketball. Basically those Bruiser/Evans teams were it for me. Then the perfect storm happened in 14-15. I was far from the only one with that take at the time though.

Overall I'm skeptical too at this point. Bo was simply an incredible basketball coach. Forgetting recruiting, talking actual coaching. GG is doing his best to run the same model (likely the only model that can work under current UW rules) but the chances of him being such a good coach to make up for the lack of talent could be too much to overcome. Bo being a freak was able.

Plus I think GG is gong to try his best to modernize and somewhat have his cake and eat it too with the Bo style mixed with modern stuff. Not sure how that will play out, might just be better off being all in on the old way. On the other hand, if it leads to most of our future offenses looking like 14-15 in style of play (not saying results) but just free flowing and everyone can shoot and has the freedom to shoot when open maybe it will work long term. Basically, the next two years are critical for GG and at this point it could go either way.

Yeah, I'm pretty much with you on all of this though I am a bit more optimistic about it. But I can change my opinion with how this year goes.

I also noted that top paragraph about the recruiting thing in my long reply. The 2015 class was recruited by Bo and he coached their first offseason and first month of their regular season. Gard wasn't the head coach recruiter.

[Ron Swanson]

Gard deserved a pass for one down year (after over-achieving with Bo's leftovers) when a bunch of you guys were crucifying him. But this year was pretty underwhelming and simply making the tournament next season shouldn't be where the bar is set. He'll rightfully be on the hot seat depending on the results.

[Je K]

Love Happ but I'm definitely interested and excited to see how the play next year. The staple of pretty much every Bo team was a big man who could shoot and invert the offense. We haven't had that the past few years with Happ. Hopefully Potter can step in and be that guy. Wisconsin offenses have (obviously) been the most dangerous when they have 5 players who are a threat to shoot fro outside, but Happ and Iverson really messed up the spacing. It's hard to drive when there are multiple guys waiting for you in the paint. I'm hoping a more spaced offense will give guys like King more confidence to be assertive.

[mattg]

I mean if you truly believe that how Wisconsin basketball recruits is nearly an optimal process then just cop to being a delusional homer. There is no universe where what they do is optimal even assuming UW is the hardest school to qualify for for athletes in the country like Kerb seems to think.

[trwi7]

Early prediction is they miss the tournament and are a mid seed NIT team.

[Kerb Hohl]

I mean if you truly believe that how Wisconsin basketball recruits is nearly an optimal process then just cop to being a delusional homer. There is no universe where what they do is optimal even assuming UW is the hardest school to qualify for for athletes in the country like Kerb seems to think.

I’m not the person talking about academic standards on here but you do you.

That’s a small piece of the puzzle but not my slant.

[DingleJerry]

I think it's a fairly important piece of the puzzle and that combined with their terrible slow style leads them down the road they go in recruiting. As matt is saying though, there just has to be a way to do better on getting talent/athleticism here though. Sure you're going to run into academic and pay crap with some but there still has to be plenty of fish in the sea. Regardless of athleticism, they just have to be better on shooting. If they want to play this scared way of recruiting, at least nail the one thing you can get, and that should be shooting. There's no reason every kid shouldn't be able to shoot.

One thing I've long advocated is not wasting time on the top top guys as we've seen so much time wasted the last 5 years on these guys that aren't going to end up at WI, and if they do it's only a year. Just punt on Jalen Johnsons and go all in on the 3rd tier guys in the 40-100 range that likely stay all 4 years so should have some care about academics/culture. Prioritize them early, not just after you lose out on the top guys and maybe then you can get them due to having a relationship built before others. Who knows, maybe it doesn't make a difference and they still go elsewhere but that's the area I think they should target. Essentially Villanova has done great in this area and led to their success. I'd assume Mich and MSU as well without digging deeper. IDK that's one tweak I'd make.

Also, someone mentioned Potter and the spread offense. Remember a lot tiem Reavers will be the sole big so you already have it on the roster. Potter is there for depth and when you need multiple bigs at once.

[Kerb Hohl]

That’s not true about Potter - he’ll probably start at the 5 with Reuvers at the 4 (or vise versa) assuming that he’s eligible right away.

[DingleJerry]

That’s not true about Potter - he’ll probably start at the 5 with Reuvers at the 4 (or vise versa) assuming that he’s eligible right away.

You don't think it's true that Reuvers will play a lot of mins as the sole big? That's all I said, everything doesn't have to be an argument. After Reavers you have no bigs with experience so getting Potter was huge to add. Maybe he starts, maybe he doesn't, idc. I like he can step out, all good. But you already have the stretch 5 on the roster like we had all those years like the poster was referencing. Sometimes you'll need both out there like vs an MSU. But a lot of times it's going to be one big and then shooters/wings and that's what I want as that is modern basketball.