Another Theory Bites the Dust - Buzz and his "Maniacal" Substitutions Last Year

[GGGG]

Buzz never was a maniacal with his subbing patterns in any of his previous 5 years as he was last year. 

So I went back and looked at the 18 conference games in both 2012-13 (Conference championship and Elite 8 year) and 2013-14.  I used the "substitutions in" stat found on the play-by-play page on Marquette's statsheet site.

Number of substitutions per game:

2012-13:  42.8
2013-14:  43.2

So unless your definition of "maniacal" is one additional substitution every two and a half games, Buzz was substituting no differently last year than the year before.  If someone wants to look up the figures for his previous years, go right ahead.

[Texas Western]

So I went back and looked at the 18 conference games in both 2012-13 (Conference championship and Elite 8 year) and 2013-14.  I used the "substitutions in" stat found on the play-by-play page on Marquette's statsheet site.

Number of substitutions per game:

2012-13:  42.8
2013-14:  43.2

So unless your definition of "maniacal" is one additional substitution every two and a half games, Buzz was substituting no differently last year than the year before.  If someone wants to look up the figures for his previous years, go right ahead.

I agree with NersEllenson, Buzz was "maniacal". I don't think that necessarily relates to rate rather it relates to intent. In particular I felt JJJ felt the brunt of it.

[GGGG]

OK, I guess if people aren't shown to be objectively right, they can always fall back on his subjective "intent" for his substitutions patterns.  Which is (conveniently) impossible to prove or disprove....

[Tugg Speedman]

Sultan, 

Do they give a conference or D1 average to compare that too?

[mu03eng]

I agree with NersEllenson, Buzz was "maniacal". I don't think that necessarily relates to rate rather it relates to intent. In particular I felt JJJ felt the brunt of it.

I don't want to seem a Buzz defender, but this is ridiculous.  How do you prove intent or that JJJ somehow was subbed more than anyone else....pretty sure Ners would fight you on this as Dawson was jerked around way more than JJJ was.

[GGGG]

Sultan,  

Do they give a conference or D1 average to compare that too?

I found this as part of my search.  

http://www.nycbuckets.com/2013/12/army-lafayette-push-substitutions-limit/

Marquette would undoubtedly be in the top quarter or third of all teams based in this.  This one has Marquette at 37.3, but that is based on the games last year through Dec. 22.  Essentially the non-conference season where Buzz was rarely subbing in end of games situations like he did later on.

[Texas Western]

I don't want to seem a Buzz defender, but this is ridiculous.  How do you prove intent or that JJJ somehow was subbed more than anyone else....pretty sure Ners would fight you on this as Dawson was jerked around way more than JJJ was.

I felt Dawson was jerked around too. He had fewer chances to play than JJJ so he got jerked around less.

[NersEllenson]

So I went back and looked at the 18 conference games in both 2012-13 (Conference championship and Elite 8 year) and 2013-14.  I used the "substitutions in" stat found on the play-by-play page on Marquette's statsheet site.

Number of substitutions per game:

2012-13:  42.8
2013-14:  43.2

So unless your definition of "maniacal" is one additional substitution every two and a half games, Buzz was substituting no differently last year than the year before.  If someone wants to look up the figures for his previous years, go right ahead.

Thanks for taking the time to tally all of those - must be a slow day at the office.  

I stand corrected.  Oddly with what appears to be the same rates of substitutions between 2013 and 2014 seasons, Buzz refused to substitute out the 2 biggest liabilities on that team, but instead gave them more minutes than any other players.  That was the beef...he jacked around minutes of everyone on the roster other than Derrick and Jake!

 

[ChicosBailBonds]

My guess is the frustration was not about the number of substitutions, but who was being substituted.   It's a corollary to the "its not what is said here, but who says the what."

[Texas Western]

Thanks for taking the time to tally all of those - must be a slow day at the office.  

I stand corrected.  Oddly with what appears to be the same rates of substitutions between 2013 and 2014 seasons, Buzz refused to substitute out the 2 biggest liabilities on that team, but instead gave them more minutes than any other players.  That was the beef...he jacked around minutes of everyone on the roster other than Derrick and Jake!

 

Definition of Maniacal per Webster Dictionairy: affected with or suggestive of madness .

Giving minutes to Jake and Derrick at the expense of winning was certainly evidence of madness.

[GGGG]

Thanks for taking the time to tally all of those - must be a slow day at the office.   

I stand corrected.  Oddly with what appears to be the same rates of substitutions between 2013 and 2014 seasons, Buzz refused to substitute out the 2 biggest liabilities on that team, but instead gave them more minutes than any other players.  That was the beef...he jacked around minutes of everyone on the roster other than Derrick and Jake!

To be fair, the standard deviation of the 2012-13 data was 7.8, while the standard deviation for 2013-14 was 10.3.

What does that mean?  It means that in 2012-13, the number of substitutions was much more consistent from game to game.  There was one at 62, two in the 50s.  The smallest was 34 - three times.

In 2013-14, there was one at 63, three in the 50s, but the smallest was 26 and another at 29.

So in 2013-14, he substituted a lot more in some games...but he also substituted less in others.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Buzz coached the same way in 2013-2014 that he did in all the previous seasons of his tenure.

Only difference is that it didn't work this time, so we got sick of it.

He had to choose between doubling down on what he knew or risk trying something new. In hindsight, he made the wrong choice. But if we had won, we would have called him a genius.

[dgies9156]

Look, no one is questioning the number of substitutions. heck, Half of them probably were Oxtule changes.

What I did have a problem with was when it became apparent the season was lost, there was no effort to get experience for our freshmen for this year. I thought with six or seven games left, while most of this board was thinking "NCAA," I was thinking 2014-2015. I was hoping that Jujuan, for instance, would have more time. I was hoping John Dawson could make his mistakes last year.

When I think maniacal substitutions, that's what I think.

[mug644]

To be fair, the standard deviation of the 2012-13 data was 7.8, while the standard deviation for 2013-14 was 10.3.

What does that mean?  It means that in 2012-13, the number of substitutions was much more consistent from game to game.  There was one at 62, two in the 50s.  The smallest was 34 - three times.

In 2013-14, there was one at 63, three in the 50s, but the smallest was 26 and another at 29.

So in 2013-14, he substituted a lot more in some games...but he also substituted less in others.

The standard deviations are useful, but interpreting them must involve a thinking of why there were games with "a lot more" substitutions. I wonder if that plays into the idea that Buzz really was trying to win games, as we were losing a helluva lot more during games in the 13-14 season. Was he possibly substituting more to try to find a combination that would work? Or, as conspiracists might postulate, was he actually 'throwing' games with the substitutions (or lack thereof, in regards to Jake and Derrick)?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Buzz coached the same way in 2013-2014 that he did in all the previous seasons of his tenure.

Only difference is that it didn't work this time, so we got sick of it.

He had to choose between doubling down on what he knew or risk trying something new. In hindsight, he made the wrong choice. But if we had won, we would have called him a genius.

Exactly.

[77ncaachamps]

It also "skews" the data from last year when you consider the quality of subs (compared to the previous year).

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Look, no one is questioning the number of substitutions. heck, Half of them probably were Oxtule changes.

What I did have a problem with was when it became apparent the season was lost, there was no effort to get experience for our freshmen for this year. I thought with six or seven games left, while most of this board was thinking "NCAA," I was thinking 2014-2015. I was hoping that Jujuan, for instance, would have more time. I was hoping John Dawson could make his mistakes last year.

When I think maniacal substitutions, that's what I think.

I understand the logic, but its "fan" logic, not "coach" logic. There are no draft picks in college basketball. You play to win every game until there is 0% chance you can earn an at large bid. And even then, you prepare for the conference tournament because you could run the table there. As CGandA brought up in another thread, game time accounts for less than 1% of the basketball development that our players do. Sure it probably helps more than any other 1%, but it is such a small part of their growth and development. Coaches are willing to sacrifice that 1% of development if they think it means a better chance at the big dance. After all, there are countless examples of players who turned into studs despite limited playing time in previous years (Think Frank Kaminsky). There are no provable cases of studs who only became studs because they got big minutes the previous season.

[tower912]

Dawson was what he needed to be as a freshman.   A back up PG.   Compared to the starter, he had more turnovers per minute.   He was not as good defensively.   He exceeded my expectations.   
JJJ showed flashes early, but as Mayo got more minutes as the season progressed, there were less for JJJ.  Again, typical for a freshman.  Buzz was coaching to win every game last year.   IMO, he believed going into the BEast tourney that this team could get hot and steal a bid.   His substitution patterns looked the same.   The substitutes were different and the results were different.    IMO, he should have started Burton sooner and ended Oxtule much sooner.    He didn't.   His reasons were his reasons but I categorically reject all of the conspiracy theories. 

[79Warrior]

Dawson was what he needed to be as a freshman.   A back up PG.   Compared to the starter, he had more turnovers per minute.   He was not as good defensively.   He exceeded my expectations.   
JJJ showed flashes early, but as Mayo got more minutes as the season progressed, there were less for JJJ.  Again, typical for a freshman.  Buzz was coaching to win every game last year.   IMO, he believed going into the BEast tourney that this team could get hot and steal a bid.   His substitution patterns looked the same.   The substitutes were different and the results were different.    IMO, he should have started Burton sooner and ended Oxtule much sooner.    He didn't.   His reasons were his reasons but I categorically reject all of the conspiracy theories. 

I tend to agree with you. As far as JJJ is concerned, lets see how he plays this season. If he lights it up, then it might be fair to question why he hardly played last season. If he is a bust, then perhaps Buzz was correct and many heads will explode.

[dgies9156]

I understand the logic, but its "fan" logic, not "coach" logic. There are no draft picks in college basketball. You play to win every game until there is 0% chance you can earn an at large bid. And even then, you prepare for the conference tournament because you could run the table there. As CGandA brought up in another thread, game time accounts for less than 1% of the basketball development that our players do. Sure it probably helps more than any other 1%, but it is such a small part of their growth and development. Coaches are willing to sacrifice that 1% of development if they think it means a better chance at the big dance. After all, there are countless examples of players who turned into studs despite limited playing time in previous years (Think Frank Kaminsky). There are no provable cases of studs who only became studs because they got big minutes the previous season.

Perhaps.

But where I differ from you thought process was that the season was a loss by Valentine's Day, maybe sooner. Thinking Marquette was somehow going to steal a bid in the Big East tournament is like thinking the Chicago Bears at this point in the season are going to make the playoffs. Neither was or is likely. At this point, the only reason you don't play for tomorrow (as in next year) is if you don't think there's going to be a next year. Perhaps either Buzz was going to be gone or Jujuan was going to be gone? Ya think he knew?

[GGGG]

Perhaps.

But where I differ from you thought process was that the season was a loss by Valentine's Day, maybe sooner. Thinking Marquette was somehow going to steal a bid in the Big East tournament is like thinking the Chicago Bears at this point in the season are going to make the playoffs. Neither was or is likely. At this point, the only reason you don't play for tomorrow (as in next year) is if you don't think there's going to be a next year. Perhaps either Buzz was going to be gone or Jujuan was going to be gone? Ya think he knew?

I don't think many coaches by Valentine's Day play for next year.  I think most of them play to win the games right in front of them.

[mu03eng]

Look, no one is questioning the number of substitutions. heck, Half of them probably were Oxtule changes.

What I did have a problem with was when it became apparent the season was lost, there was no effort to get experience for our freshmen for this year. I thought with six or seven games left, while most of this board was thinking "NCAA," I was thinking 2014-2015. I was hoping that Jujuan, for instance, would have more time. I was hoping John Dawson could make his mistakes last year.

When I think maniacal substitutions, that's what I think.

This basically boils down to two schools of thought....by the last three weeks of the season were we playing for a tourney spot or were we out.

If we thought we were out of the tournament than yes, playing the younger players makes all the sense in the world and I would openly advocate for such a move (assuming the players were staying...more on this in a minute),

If we were competing to win a tournament spot the conclusion is more murky.  At that point it comes down to opinion of who gives you a better chance to win, veteran but limited players or unproven, but potentially more talented players?  Buzz always went with veteran over unproven, like it or not that's they way he rolled.

Throw in their by the end of the season, we know players were planning to leave, if Buzz had any thought that he was staying why would you play players that are going to leave and might or might not help you in the here and now?

[WarriorInNYC]

I tend to agree with you. As far as JJJ is concerned, lets see how he plays this season. If he lights it up, then it might be fair to question why he hardly played last season. If he is a bust, then perhaps Buzz was correct and many heads will explode.

I think it would be fair to question why he hardly played, but not necessarily the reason.

It could also be that he had a strong offseason and drastically improved his game.  Maybe extra time in the weight room.  Maybe a different culture under Wojo helped to "unlock" him.  There could be several reasons as to why he hardly played, rather than he deserved to but Buzz just didnt.

I'm not saying that you were assuming that, just wanted to point it out.

[GooooMarquette]

I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I think the difference was in the type of substitutions.  In previous years, he'd often do "line changes" - substituting more guys at once, but keeping them in longer.  Last season, line changes were infrequent (I honestly don't recall a single one), but there seemed to be more instances of guys getting on the court and then pulled quickly.

Not saying one is necessarily better or worse - depends on your personnel - but that's what I saw...

[tower912]

Providence.   Spent the first half and (if IIRC) the start of the second half running 4-5 guys out there at once to wear down the only-6-deep Friar team.