Izzo: the best in the game?

GemStateJim,
I think you'll find that most of us like Izzo and are cheering for State. One of my best friends is a big State fan and I find myself cheering for them (when they're not playing Texas). Having said that, you can't discredit Lazy Engineer's work. A consensus ranking is the closest thing to a legit player ranking you can find. LE's work clearly shows Izzo has some talent to work with after all. Maybe we don't know much about that talent because Michigan State isn't exactly a media hotbed... but he clealy has talent and has had talent for the last several years. That doesn't take away from Izzo's coaching ability. He is still a top 5 coach without a doubt.
 
Tom Izzo is the best x's and o's coach in the country and it's not really close. When Michigan State and Texas were tied at Toyota Center and both teams started calling timeouts after every play, you knew it was all over for Texas. Same with KU on Friday.

What I saw Sunday was just freaking magic. It took the opening three minutes to see how well coached they were. Their press break was just perfect. It started with the tiny little trick of handing the ball to the ref so the 5 count doesn't start on the inbounds right away. Then watch their zone offense. I mean, everyone always talks about going to the elbow and then making diagonal passes, but have you ever seen it done that well? Just beautiful.

By the way, the Sweet 16 in San Antonio TJ Ford's year -- Izzo, Calhoun, Barnes, Gary Williams. Pretty darn stout.
 
Izzo gets the guys he wants. Whether he does more with less or not isn't too imporant to me. There are very few basketball players that he targets and doesn't get. After getting burned with players going pro (or trying to go pro) in a really short span - Richardson, Randolph, Marcus Taylor, Lorbek, he seems to have changed his recruiting targets.

Izzo is a great recruiter who gets the players he wants for his program, and he is a great game day coach. Best of both worlds.
 
izzo is one of the best. period. as far as the talent thing goes, i think that the perception that izzo does more with less is due to the fact that he hasn't had several of those top-20 guys. he gets great players, but he doesn't get those elite level athletes. (probably by his choice) the guy is just a gamer. if you love college basketball, you have to admire him.
 
I think the best case is to do like Kansas last year and North Carolina this year. They are getting the elite players and are getting them to stick around. Hansbrough, Lawson, Ellington were all in the top-8 Nationally out of High School and are Jrs and Srs.

Kansas last year had Chalmers, Rush, Collins, and Arthur - all top-18 players and all sticking around multiple years. Then they added in a punch of top-50 role players to fill in the gaps. Guys like Sasha Kaun (#35), Darnell Jackson (#69), Rodrick Stewart (#36).

I think the key is getting a slew of top-50 players EVERY year. If you have a lean year and then compound matters with DNQs you are going to have trouble. Next year is setting up to be pretty good because we will have the top-end elite talent and a whole ton of top-100 supporting players that have been in the system a long time.

For the last 5 years, we have had no more than 6 top-100 players on the roster in a given year. Next year we will have at least 7 and possibly up to nine - with some real headliners:
#7 Jordan Hamilton
#9 Avery Bradley
#15 Damion James (potentially)
#25 Gary Johnson
#32 Jai Lucas
#53 Shawn Williams
#59 J'Covan Brown (not holding my breath)
#82 Dexter Pittman
#75 Gary Chapman
 
In some ways, the "best" strategy depends on what stage your program is in. When you're trying to ascend to Elite program status, I think you need to reel in a guy like TJ Ford or Kevin Durant. Getting those types of guys helps you get the Top 35-50 players more consistently. Then you build around the buzz (and hopefully success) around your program, even after those guys are long gone. Those really-good-but-stick-around-for-3-year guys don't necessarily see themselves as a notch below. Most of them think they're pretty elite level players and are looking to go to the best program they can get in to. Just because you target them doesn't mean you'll get them. You end up with a few Top 100 players and a second round exit.

We all know that the TJ's Final Four team, without TJ, doesn't get out of the second round. I don't think we get a guy like Damion James, we weren't the program that already reeled in two McDonald's AA's the same year, in Durant and Augustin.
 
Gem, I'm not a big fan of stars, either. I'm not a huge fan of ranking recruits, as far as that goes. But if we're going to talk about "less with more" or "more with less" we have to start somewhere. I don't think RSCI's list is made up of your favorites and then a bunch of nobodies.

Izzo's a great coach... as I've said, my first call if Barnes were to give it up (although I think both of those windows are closing). I think he's a much better coach than Pitino, which is one reason why he beat him so badly on Sunday. But, as I've said in regard to other coaches, it's not like Izzo is running out the guys from Hoosiers.

Let's say you're right, that LE's system is full of holes (although I would disagree). Who has more talent than MSU? And, more importantly, how do you decide?
 
Gem, You're the 1st person Ive seen hold Rivals rankings in such high regard when it comes to basketball. They just recently started investing resources in their high school basketball scouting and were widely looked upon as 2nd tier for a long time. What exactly is your problem with consensus ranking? It's obviously the best way to get a true picture of the national high school talent. Evaluating basketball players (outside of the elite players) is much more difficult than evaluating football talent, therefore it's always best to get more data inputs when trying to rank players IMO.
 
Thanks to LE for some info regarding recruit rankings that I have never seen before. I also like the idea of a consensus ranking.
 
Wow, about 1/2 way through that 1st half, I didn't think MSU had a shot at winning. They weren't hitting perimeter shots and UConn was establishing it inside.

But they made great adjustments and won.

MSU vs. UNC in the Finals. The 2 top coaches in the NCAA (IMHO). Looking forward to Monday night. I think UNC is going to be tough to beat especially if the refs keep giving them so much respect.
 
I'd like to thank Tom for his part of the evening that sent the Little East home packing... or, fishing.

See ya, guys!!..

I say the two coaches in this final game are co-coaches of the year.
 
I had no idea MSU would actually win the game 10:00 minutes in. They seemed to be just barely staying in.

Then they did the same thing to UCONN they did to all of the others. Except I don't remember all of the other games the offensive rebounding edge going to MSU so much.

This should be a fantastic game tomorrow night. I don't see how MSU stays within 10 points, but you never know, if MSU wins this game, Izzo might be the coach of the decade!
 
Izzo is a great coach and recruits really well. I can't think of too many Xs and Os guys that are better.

He has talent. Not like UNC, which is why I think they lose in the championship game, but trying to say he has 'less' by any metric, and that he does so 'consistently,' is kind of silly.

He is better than Barnes, though Barnes has done really well at UT and no one can really complain. You can't always have the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top