collapse

* Stud of Colorado Game

Tyler Kolek

21 points, 5 rebounds,
11 assists, 1 steal,
40 minutes

2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

2024 NCAA Tournament Thread by Plaque Lives Matter!
[Today at 01:02:54 AM]


45 minutes ago at the Dallas Westin by MuggsyB
[Today at 12:19:24 AM]


2024 Coaching Carousel by Plaque Lives Matter!
[Today at 12:10:57 AM]


2024 Transfer Portal by CountryRoads
[Today at 12:05:42 AM]


Are we still recruiting anyone for the 24-25 season. by Don_Kojis
[Today at 12:04:21 AM]


Where is Marquette? by marqfan22
[March 28, 2024, 09:29:52 PM]


Chicago bars for Fri game by Daniel
[March 28, 2024, 08:47:22 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: NC State

Marquette
81
Marquette vs

NC State

Date/Time: Mar 29, 2024, 6:09 pm
TV: CBS
Schedule for 2023-24
Colorado
77

Author Topic: C: past, present and future  (Read 8244 times)

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
C: past, present and future
« on: February 05, 2016, 06:43:07 PM »
Some perspective on how Luke Fischer compares to select four-year centers from Marquette's past. First, a look at some raw stats from their first 3 seasons:

Luke Fischer — 6'11"  245
2.8 ppg  2.1 rpg  0.3 apg  0.8 bpg
11.0 ppg  4.8 rpg  0.9 apg  2.2 bpg
12.4 ppg  6.8 rpg  1.0 apg  1.8 bpg

Chris Otule — 6'11"  275
1.3 ppg  1.1 rpg  0.0 apg  0.6 bpg
3.7 ppg  2.0 rpg  0.0 apg  1.7 bpg
5.1 ppg  3.6 rpg  0.1 apg  1.5 bpg

Ousmane Barro — 6'10"  235
2.0 ppg  2.3 rpg  0.3 apg  0.3 bpg
4.4 ppg  2.8 rpg  0.4 apg  0.5 bpg
8.1 ppg 6.9 rpg  0.4 apg  1.0 bpg

Scott Merritt — 6'10"  240
6.0 ppg  3.6 rpg  0.5 apg  0.9 bpg
5.9 ppg  4.4 rpg  0.7 apg  0.8 bpg
10.1 ppg  6.6 rpg  1.5 apg  1.2 bpg

Amal McCaskill — 6'11"  235
1.7 ppg  3.1 rpg  0.3 apg  0.8 bpg
5.2 ppg  3.3 rpg  0.5 apg  1.0 bpg
10.7 ppg  8.5 rpg  0.8 apg  2.3 bpg

Jim McIlvane — 7'1"  240
8.0 ppg  4.7 rpg  0.5 apg  3.3 bpg
10.3 ppg  4.6 rpg  0.6 apg  3.0 bpg
11.0 ppg  4.8 rpg  0.8 apg  2.8 bpg

A few basic takeaways for me: 1) Luke is possibly the best scoring center we've seen at Marquette in the past 25 years. He's on track with or even ahead of Big Mac's development. 2) The same goes for rebounding. He's ahead of McIlvane at this point in his career, roughly equal to Barro and Merritt. Only McCaskill posted better numbers. 3) Mac was likely the best shot blocker I'll ever see in a Marquette uniform. Fischer won't challenge his records, but chances are he'll occupy the next spot.

So have past centers saved the best for last? Judge for yourself from their senior stats:

Chris Otule
5.8 ppg  4.3 rpg  0.2 apg  1.0 bpg

Ousmane Barro
5.5 ppg  5.5 rpg  0.3 apg  1.2 bpg

Scott Merritt
11.2 ppg  7.1 rpg  1.0 apg  0.7 bpg

Amal McCaskill
10.3 ppg  8.9 rpg  1.3 apg  1.8 bpg

Jim McIlvane
13.6 ppg  8.3 rpg  1.3 apg  4.3 bpg

Based on what I've seen from Luke so far, there's good reason to look forward to next year.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 08:59:03 PM by Marcus92 »
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2016, 08:23:56 PM »
       good stuff-excellent diligence.  luke loves the books and is really taking advantage of his educational opportunities-good for him.  hope we have him for the duration of his eligibility
don't...don't don't don't don't

rocky_warrior

  • Global Moderator
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9002
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2016, 11:37:16 PM »
No Davante Gardner?  Luke probably still gets the edge in every stat, but Davante gives him a run for the money in scoring compared to the other guys.

4.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.3 rpg, 0.2 bpg
9.5 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 0.7 rpg, 0.2 bpg
11.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 0.9 rpg, 0.6 bpg
14.9 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 1.3 rpg, 0.5 bpg

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2016, 11:54:12 PM »
No Davante Gardner?

Good point. I know Davante certainly played like a center. But I figured the others (apart from maybe Otule) make a better comparison for Luke's height, weight, strength, etc.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

Dr. Blackheart

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13006
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2016, 06:59:38 AM »
No Davante Gardner?  Luke probably still gets the edge in every stat, but Davante gives him a run for the money in scoring compared to the other guys.

4.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.3 rpg, 0.2 bpg
9.5 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 0.7 rpg, 0.2 bpg
11.5 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 0.9 rpg, 0.6 bpg
14.9 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 1.3 rpg, 0.5 bpg

On a per pound basis, Luke is clearly the heavier weight.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26360
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2016, 07:13:02 AM »
Luke may average more points as a junior, but he's not remotely the offensive force Davante was. Luke is averaging 12.4 ppg in 28.8 minutes while Davante averaged 11.5 ppg in 21.4 minutes. So Luke scores 8% more points in 35% more minutes played.

Davante also wins the efficiency battle. Both have done well, but Davante was a top-40 player with a 122.4 ORtg while Luke's 115.5 ORtg is 335 in the country.

Down low, there was never a question if Davante could bang with other bigs. Luke is probably the better all around player, and certainly the better defender, but when it came to the offensive end, Davante was superior, and also would have been the kind of guy that would have abused Luke.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22730
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2016, 07:25:25 AM »
Luke may average more points as a junior, but he's not remotely the offensive force Davante was. Luke is averaging 12.4 ppg in 28.8 minutes while Davante averaged 11.5 ppg in 21.4 minutes. So Luke scores 8% more points in 35% more minutes played.

Davante also wins the efficiency battle. Both have done well, but Davante was a top-40 player with a 122.4 ORtg while Luke's 115.5 ORtg is 335 in the country.

Down low, there was never a question if Davante could bang with other bigs. Luke is probably the better all around player, and certainly the better defender, but when it came to the offensive end, Davante was superior, and also would have been the kind of guy that would have abused Luke.

I agree with all of this, while also appreciating the things Luke does well (as I know you do, too, brewski).
“It’s not how white men fight.” - Tucker Carlson

MarquetteDano

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3230
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2016, 09:35:23 AM »
Luke may average more points as a junior, but he's not remotely the offensive force Davante was. Luke is averaging 12.4 ppg in 28.8 minutes while Davante averaged 11.5 ppg in 21.4 minutes. So Luke scores 8% more points in 35% more minutes played.

Davante also wins the efficiency battle. Both have done well, but Davante was a top-40 player with a 122.4 ORtg while Luke's 115.5 ORtg is 335 in the country.

Down low, there was never a question if Davante could bang with other bigs. Luke is probably the better all around player, and certainly the better defender, but when it came to the offensive end, Davante was superior, and also would have been the kind of guy that would have abused Luke.

Agree for the most part but two things: 1) Davante couldnt be on the floor more because of his conditioning and 2) if Davante would abuse Luke as would Luke abuse Davante. Especially in transition as Luke runs the floor well.

willie warrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9472
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2016, 10:46:11 AM »
Agree for the most part but two things: 1) Davante couldnt be on the floor more because of his conditioning and 2) if Davante would abuse Luke as would Luke abuse Davante. Especially in transition as Luke runs the floor well.
Don't agree. Luke would be in foul trouble almost immediately.
I thought you were dead. Willie lives rent free in Reekers mind.

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2016, 11:09:37 AM »
I loved Davante at Marquette. Talent isn't the reason he's not on the original list. I was just looking at players most similar to Luke to see how they developed over their careers. To my mind, Davante's body, skill set and playing style were one of a kind.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

MarquetteDano

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3230
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2016, 12:04:15 PM »
Don't agree. Luke would be in foul trouble almost immediately.

Games where refs calls fouls  on all the flailing yes.

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2016, 01:04:03 PM »
Maybe a bigger takeaway is that Fischer is performing at or above the level of two players who spent multiple seasons on NBA rosters (McIlvane and McCaskill). And he's doing so against top competition in the Big East, at least equal to if not better than the Great Midwest or Conference USA in terms of conference strength.

McIlvane was a truly gifted shot blocker. McCaskill was probably a better athlete. But to even include Fischer in the same conversation says a lot. Only 1.2% of all college players go to the NBA. Luke is playing at an elite level.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

WarriorFan

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1629
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2016, 12:03:17 AM »
Robert Jackson  Senior year  10.4, 7.5, 0.8
And this was considered a HUGE contribution for an MU center at the time. 
"The meaning of life isn't gnashing our bicuspids over what comes after death but tasting the tiny moments that come before it."

CAINMUTINY

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 447
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2016, 07:47:41 AM »
While I like Luke, I think you'll see some serious regression on his part next year.  Without Ellenson drawing double and triple teams he won't have nearly as many wide open looks. I hope i'm wrong, but very doubtful if HE leaves.

tower912

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 23355
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2016, 09:09:55 AM »
While I like Luke, I think you'll see some serious regression on his part next year.  Without Ellenson drawing double and triple teams he won't have nearly as many wide open looks. I hope i'm wrong, but very doubtful if HE leaves.

The counter to that is that he will have a full off season in the weight room for the first time and there will be more shooters on next year's team to make the double teams pay.   
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2016, 10:39:00 AM »
While I like Luke, I think you'll see some serious regression on his part next year.  Without Ellenson drawing double and triple teams he won't have nearly as many wide open looks. I hope i'm wrong, but very doubtful if HE leaves.

Anything's possible, I guess. But I don't see the evidence of it. Luke is a former state player of the year (same as Henry) and top 100 recruit. He's been recognized as an elite talent for some time. And he's shown steady improvement as a player year-over-year.

Based on the historical examples, that kind of progression typically continues into senior year. None of the other players above had someone like Henry drawing double-teams. The bigger point is, experience makes a tremendous difference in a player's development.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

Dr. Blackheart

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13006
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2016, 11:32:31 AM »
nm
« Last Edit: February 07, 2016, 11:35:08 AM by Dr. Blackheart »

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9022
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2016, 11:37:29 AM »
A few basic takeaways for me: 1) Luke is possibly the best scoring center we've seen at Marquette in the past 25 years. He's on track with or even ahead of Big Mac's development. 2) The same goes for rebounding. He's ahead of McIlvane at this point in his career, roughly equal to Barro and Merritt. Only McCaskill posted better numbers. 3) Mac was likely the best shot blocker I'll ever see in a Marquette uniform. Fischer won't challenge his records, but chances are he'll occupy the next spot.

wat? Basic stats won't tell you much...

1) That's crazy. Davante was a better scorer and it's not even close. Others are right there as well. One of the many reasons to slow down when looking at basic statistics... remember that MU is average 10% more possessions per game this season than in Davante's senior year, for example.

2) Rebounding - Luke's defensive rebounding is - I don't mean this in the wrong way - but terribly low. He's never been above 13%. It's no small wonder why MU's DR% is #244 in the nation and second-worst in BEast play.

"He's ahead of McIlvane at this point in his career"... how do you reach this conclusion? Cripes, I did a quick calc and come up with 12.2 DR% for Luke and 16.8% for McIlvaine in his jr year.... edge to Luke on OR% thus far 13.7% to 11.9%.. overall rebounding to JM.

3) wat? Look no further than Otule. Luke is at a 5.8% block percentage this year.. down from career numbers... Chris' worse year was senior year.. at 6.4%.. 6.7% as a junior.
Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2016, 12:24:12 PM »
Agree that using raw stats is a crude measure at best. And appreciate some actual statistical analysis on this.

The thing is, as good a player as Davante was in production per minute, he simply didn't put enough minutes on the floor. It's not fair to compare someone who played 21.5 mpg (Davante his junior year) with someone playing 29 mpg (Luke this season, 2nd most on the team, roughly 35% more floor time). Efficiency counts — but so does reliability.

Minutes played is the simplest statistic in basketball; it indicates how often the coach can count on you as one of the five best players on the floor. In Davante's case, poor conditioning was only part of the reason for his limited minutes. He was also such a defensive liability that he was regularly substituted out of the game for Otule or another better defender. In other words, Buzz couldn't rely on him. In this regard, Luke is the far superior all-around player.

I'll defer on the statistical breakdown. Clearly, that's not my forte. But I do feel Luke at least belongs in the conversation with the best centers to play at Marquette over the past couple decades. He doesn't deserve all the criticism he's gotten this year.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

MarquetteDano

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3230
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #19 on: February 07, 2016, 12:31:53 PM »
The thing is, as good a player as Davante was in production per minute, he simply didn't put enough minutes on the floor. It's not fair to compare someone who played 21.5 mpg (Davante his junior year) with someone playing 29 mpg (Luke this season, 2nd most on the team, roughly 35% more floor time). Efficiency counts — but so does reliability.

Minutes played is the simplest statistic in basketball; it indicates how often the coach can count on you as one of the five best players on the floor. In Davante's case, poor conditioning was only part of the reason for his limited minutes. He was also such a defensive liability that he was regularly substituted out of the game for Otule or another better defender. In other words, Buzz couldn't rely on him. In this regard, Luke is the far superior all-around player.

Completely agree. Loved Davante but he was the American League's equivalent of a DH. For all everyone complains about Luke's foul trouble still averages more than min than Davante in league play.

If Davante had to expend what Luke does on D for 30 min would be interesting to see how his numbers would look then.

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #20 on: February 07, 2016, 12:33:35 PM »
While I like Luke, I think you'll see some serious regression on his part next year.  Without Ellenson drawing double and triple teams he won't have nearly as many wide open looks. I hope i'm wrong, but very doubtful if HE leaves.

Then again, with HE gone, Luke will be THE man on the blocks, and probably have more scoring opportunities, as a result.
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #21 on: February 07, 2016, 12:45:09 PM »
Agree that using raw stats is a crude measure at best. And appreciate some actual statistical analysis on this.

The thing is, as good a player as Davante was in production per minute, he simply didn't put enough minutes on the floor. It's not fair to compare someone who played 21.5 mpg (Davante his junior year) with someone playing 29 mpg (Luke this season, 2nd most on the team, roughly 35% more floor time). Efficiency counts — but so does reliability.

Minutes played is the simplest statistic in basketball; it indicates how often the coach can count on you as one of the five best players on the floor. In Davante's case, poor conditioning was only part of the reason for his limited minutes. He was also such a defensive liability that he was regularly substituted out of the game for Otule or another better defender. In other words, Buzz couldn't rely on him. In this regard, Luke is the far superior all-around player.

I'll defer on the statistical breakdown. Clearly, that's not my forte. But I do feel Luke at least belongs in the conversation with the best centers to play at Marquette over the past couple decades. He doesn't deserve all the criticism he's gotten this year.

Completely agree. Loved Davante but he was the American League's equivalent of a DH. For all everyone complains about Luke's foul trouble still averages more than min than Davante in league play.

If Davante had to expend what Luke does on D for 30 min would be interesting to see how his numbers would look then.

I think that both of you are missing an obvious contribution to Davante's lower minutes; he was really the only center being discussed who played on a team with a credible second option at center, Otule.  Mac could be spelled for a few by Key, but Key, like HE this year, couldn't contribute much time at center since he was holding down the PF position full time.  I believe that there is a consensus that neither Otule nor Gardner could handle more than a very limited amount of time at PF, so a Mac/Key type of combination wasn't feasible, and both Otule's and Gardner's minutes suffered, as a result.

On another note, I've always been a McCaskill fan, but his numbers look even better than I expected.  IMO, O'Neil's best recruiting find.  He didn't even start in high school, he did show well in AAU, I guess.  He'd be a great prototype for the defensive stopper/rebounding PF that many here covet.  (He was more than athletic enough to move over to the PF).
« Last Edit: February 07, 2016, 12:52:12 PM by Crean to Ann Arbor »
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #22 on: February 07, 2016, 01:12:37 PM »
McIlvane averaged just 19 mpg his junior year (1992-93). That year, Marquette had a three-man rotation down low: Mac, Key and Ron Curry — the team's leading scorer and rebounder as a senior at 14.5 ppg and 8.3 rpg, respectively.

From what I remember, McIlvane's biggest struggles in his first 3 seasons were with establishing and maintaining position. He was 7'1" but lanky and could get pushed around on the blocks. He also had a bad habit of bringing the ball down and dribbling after entry passes or offensive rebounds, where defenders could swat at the ball.

The next season, McIlvane improved to 28.6 mpg. He had attended Pete Newell's big man camp in the offseason and came in much stronger and with more confidence.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #23 on: February 07, 2016, 01:55:31 PM »
McIlvane averaged just 19 mpg his junior year (1992-93). That year, Marquette had a three-man rotation down low: Mac, Key and Ron Curry — the team's leading scorer and rebounder as a senior at 14.5 ppg and 8.3 rpg, respectively.

From what I remember, McIlvane's biggest struggles in his first 3 seasons were with establishing and maintaining position. He was 7'1" but lanky and could get pushed around on the blocks. He also had a bad habit of bringing the ball down and dribbling after entry passes or offensive rebounds, where defenders could swat at the ball.

The next season, McIlvane improved to 28.6 mpg. He had attended Pete Newell's big man camp in the offseason and came in much stronger and with more confidence.

IIRC, McIlvane's freshman season got off to a very slow start on account of him suffering multiple concussions during the preseason, and Key was the starter at center for much of his freshman year, as a result.

Glad to see you mention Ron Curry.  IMO, Ron Curry gets overlooked a lot.  He transferred from Arizona when O'Neill got the Marquette job because Arizona's attempt to convert him to a small forward wasn't working.  O'Neill couldn't make the switch work either and when he got back to his true position at PF, he really got a chance to shine.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2016, 02:00:21 PM by Crean to Ann Arbor »
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

Marcus92

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2513
Re: C: past, present and future
« Reply #24 on: February 07, 2016, 02:11:40 PM »
Searching even deeper into the memory banks, I think 1993 is when O'Neill took the team on a summer trip to Russia. (I could easily have the year or destination wrong.) Marquette was coming off its first NCAA appearance since 1983 and was really starting to realize its potential.

I remember scouring the paper each day for any information on how the games went. It was usually nothing more than a brief paragraph with the score. Think we won them all except one — which was suspended due to a fight breaking out. I saw that as a sign of a tough team that wasn't going to back down from anything.
"Let's get a green drink!" Famous last words

 

feedback