On the All-Big Ten teams

What was supposed to be a day spent preparing for the impending Big Ten Tournament has, of course, become, instead, a figure-out-what-the-heck-might-have-happened-with-Roshown-McLeod day.

Indiana coach Tom Crean’s stance is that there’s no goodtime to fire an assistant coach. My stance is that there are probably less suspicious times to release the news to the media than 9:45 on a Sunday night.

Anyway, a few our peers in the Big Ten have shared thoughts on the All-Big Ten teams, and I’ll link to those here and share any quick reflections.

First, we have the Big Ten Geeks. They call themselves that, so don’t get mad at me.

These nerds (it’s a synonym, so you still can’t be upset) only named a first team. Predictably, there were no Hoosiers on it.

But the dorks (that was uncalled for) also got into a discussion of the freshmen. They see the race for top freshman coming down to Drew Crawford of Northwestern and D.J. Richardson of Illinois, with the edge going to Crawford.

Jordan Hulls and Christian Watford, say the dweebs (that’s just mean; gotta stop reading the comments on this blog), join Eric May of Iowa on the All-Freshman team.

For those wondering, here’s a stats comparison for Crawford, Richardson and Watford. I offer it without comment:


2009-10 31 27.065 9.935 45.5 35.2 63.6 1.903 3.871 0.677 0.548


2009-10 31 30.29 10.258 40.6 39.0 78.1 2.129 2.71 0.097 0.742


2009-10 30 28.3 12.067 37.9 31.8 79.7 0.567 6.033 0.6 0.533

[3:15 UPDATE]

Here are some thoughts from the esteemed Bob Baptist of the Columbus Dispatch.

He names three teams and includes no Hoosiers.

As for the freshmen, Bob’s got Eric May first, Watford second and Crawford third.

[3:25 UPDATE]

Jeff Goodman of Fox does have Watford as his FOY, and his post includes thoughts on every conference.

[6:05 UPDATE]

Our friend Mike Rothstein delivers here, with the results of an august panel’s take on year-end award. Dustin Dopirak was among the 11 anointed ones.

No Hoosiers earned first-team votes, but Christian Watford was a unanimous selection to the All-Freshman team. He got only two votes for Freshman of the Year, though, as Crawford (5) and Richards (4) took the bulk of the votes.


  1. Ha, Drew Crawford as freshman of the year? The guy averaged a shade under double figures and played on a team that went 7-11 in the Big Ten. Come on now. Its either Richardson (because his team was better) or its Watford (because he is better than Crawford and neither team is good). I guess in the end it doesn’t really matter because we all know Mo would have won it had he not went down with the injury.

  2. Watford is top freshman scorer and top rebounder. For him not to be mentioned in the top 2 buy these clowns is ridiculous.

  3. Agree with A501 and Brad. I can’t understand how Watford is not in the mix. Perhaps Watford is being overlooked because, had Creek stayed healthy, he (Creek) would have likely run away with it… Perhaps it hurts to be the #2 freshman on a team?

  4. I am totally 100% joking but I wonder if they factor smart play into it all??? Wat does not play smart basketball at all. How many times do you go in the lane soft with that floater and have it blocked over and over and over before you shot fake, hook it, a new post move, dunk it, etc. I love Wat really I do!

  5. Points and rebounds trump all other considerations if you are NOT a Point Guard! Watford is Freshman of the year!

  6. top scorer and top rebounder with similar stats acrossed the board….hands down its Watford. If these other players would of had less minutes per game than Watford I would say it goes to one of the other two, but the minutes and games played are too close. Watford is the freshman of the year.

  7. Imbeciles. This award should be Watford’s, hands down. The only argument I can think of against him, which is a bad one, is that he was thrust into a more prominent role because he was on a bad team, and that his higher points and rebounds are merely an indication of that. The corollary is that freshmen on “good teams” have to earn their points more.
    Still, that is a cruddy argument, and it would be a darned shame to take this award from CW.

  8. Kitty litter…you make a good point…but Watford played a similar amount of minutes. Its not like these other cadidates never got to play.

  9. Watford got screwed. It shouldn’t have even been close.
    Elston got screwed too, but not by the voters.

Comments are closed.