Is this team really better than last year's?

[michigancat]

Probably didn't take any kind of behavior classes then unless you took some psychology course for the general education requirements. You don't think there's any kind of "chemistry" in a team?

I think "chemistry" is a factor, but it's a small factor when it comes to wins and losses.

Here is my official "important factor" breakdown (modified w/ a little more thought.):

1.  Talent:  60%
2.  Coaching:  35%
3.  Chemistry:  3%
4.  Crowd Size:  1.5% 
5.  Other factors:  0.5%

[mjrod]

Interesting mix.

Do you think Roy Williams could do more with the kids at ku than Self?  What about Roy Williams with our kids?

[michigancat]

Interesting mix.

Do you think Roy Williams could do more with the kids at ku than Self?  What about Roy Williams with our kids?

Ummm.  Yeah.  Coaching should be higher.  I didn't exactly think about this for very long.  Roy Williams would have won by 20+ against us with that team.

[mjrod]

Interesting.  I would think that not one area would have a majority.   A lousy coach would take points away from a greatly talented team.

[michigancat]

Bad coaches have success in spite of themselves all the time due to great talent:



Quin Snyder could take teams with Kareem Rush, Ricky Paulding, and the gang to the NCAA Elite Eight.

Ricardo Patton can make it to the tourney with David Harrison and Michel Morandis or Chauncey Billups.

Wayne Morgan can make it to the NCAA tourney with Curtis Stinson and Hank Blalock.

Steve Fisher can win an NCAA tourney with Rumeal Robinson and Glen Rice and take the Fab Five to the Final Four.

Danny Nee went to the NCAA tourney several times thanks to players like Erik Piatowski and Tyrone Lue.



It all starts with talent.

[sys]

agreed that talent can make bad coaches look good.  coaching is important, but nowhere near as important as most internet geeks think.  good players and a bad coach will kill bad players and a good coach 19.3 times out of 20.

diarra is a dramatically better defender than massey.  massey wasn't bad exactly, but he certainly wasn't a defensive specialist.  diarra on the other hand is one of the better post position defenders i've seen in college bball.  there is a reason diarra is the starter even though hughes gets as many rebounds as diarra in 1/3 the minutes (and is shooting like 65% from the field).

[Saulbadguy]

So far, yeah.

[BarryMcCockner]

Sys, you are dead on regarding Diarra.  His defense is a huge key to the improvement on this team.  The fact that he is starting to score 8 or so a game is just gravy.

[fatty fat fat]

f(defense) = Massey>>>Diara

[BarryMcCockner]

Back to the original point....I'm not sure that we have many guys that have improved significantly individually, but a couple of things seems to have occured.  The biggest, I think, is the change in the offense, which has made up for losing some production from Massey and Peete.  The other is increased depth at certain positions, point guard being a big one.  Clent not having to play 30+ minutes a game is big.  Having multiple options at the 5 (Diarra, Hughes, Martin when needed) is big.  Also, Wright's defense has helped alot....Peete was a good defender, but Akeem is better...

[michigancat]

ttt

[fatty fat fat]

Oh man. This one is embarrassing.