At what point...

[Floorslapper]

Question:

At what point does the coaching staff scrap the hard hedge by our big man on high ball screen action?  Matt and Harry certainly aren't fleet of foot enough to recover in a timely fashion.  Theo?  Maybe, but is just 18 games into his college career.  The risk factor of the opposition scoring 40 feet from the basket is about .05%.  Whereas the constant dump down beating our recovering big man for a layup is 95%. 

Additionally:

At what point after watching Butler get Elliott switched onto Martin creating a complete and total mismatch, do you not either change defenders (Sacar), or move to a zone?  Make Butler beat you over the top via the three, which a zone encourages.  We were shredded in the paint and mid-range.

[tower912]

The hedge on the high pick and roll is a staple of man defense at all levels.  Two 5'10 guards out front hurts the 2-3 zone as much as it does man to man.   Switching on to Martin is a choice.  Give Scar more minutes and watch him hurt the offense?   Bring in the other skinny freshman, Cain? (My choice).  Don't switch?  Also a viable option.

The way Sam was yelling, I have the impression a lot of guys weren't playing to the scouting report, weren't switching or rotating according to plan.

[Floorslapper]

Not sure the hard hedge is a staple of a pack line defense?  Need to play to your personnel.  Our bigs are not agile enough to effectively execute this approach.

Regarding zone against Butler, I'd have used a 1-3-1 with Markus at the point, Hauser at the bottom, Rowsey in middle at FT Line, Cain and Elliott on the wings.

Butler has no dominant big (no need for Heldt, Froling, Theo) and are a middling O-Rebounding team at 147 in country.  Felt we looked tired late in second half.  Zone conserves energy.  Butler ranks 35 in 2pt FG%, 167 in 3pt FG%.  Length of Cain and Elliott on wings would help contest the threes.  Placing Howard and Rowsey in the respective positions limits their defensive deficiencies. 

[NickelDimer]

I have no problem with the design but my god is Matt Heldt terrible at executing this. He commits way too hard and gets caught lagging behind and giving up easy baskets over and over. Very frustrating

[Daniel]

Question:

At what point does the coaching staff scrap the hard hedge by our big man on high ball screen action?  Matt and Harry certainly aren't fleet of foot enough to recover in a timely fashion.  Theo?  Maybe, but is just 18 games into his college career.  The risk factor of the opposition scoring 40 feet from the basket is about .05%.  Whereas the constant dump down beating our recovering big man for a layup is 95%. 

Additionally:

At what point after watching Butler get Elliott switched onto Martin creating a complete and total mismatch, do you not either change defenders (Sacar), or move to a zone?  Make Butler beat you over the top via the three, which a zone encourages.  We were shredded in the paint and mid-range.

Agree a lot here.  Statistically, how many times has our high hedge worked versus it breaking down?  I have no idea what the stat is, but the feel is it doesn?t work.  Our gett8ng burned 8n the paint is ongo8ng.  Something, and I do t know what, has to be adjusted to the players we have on the floor or who could be on the floor.   It is maddening

[GGGG]

The hard hedge has very rarely been a problem.  When it is, it looks really bad, but that is hardly been the main problem of the defense.  Last night it is just poor communication.  They couldn't handle pick and rolls without the hedge.

And you really want this team to play a pack line?  Teams would shoot right over it.  And it would slow down the game.

Tower did a good job summarizing the problems in the other thread.  80% of this is a personnel issue.

[tower912]

Not sure the hard hedge is a staple of a pack line defense?  Need to play to your personnel.  Our bigs are not agile enough to effectively execute this approach.

Regarding zone against Butler, I'd have used a 1-3-1 with Markus at the point, Hauser at the bottom, Rowsey in middle at FT Line, Cain and Elliott on the wings.

Butler has no dominant big (no need for Heldt, Froling, Theo) and are a middling O-Rebounding team at 147 in country.  Felt we looked tired late in second half.  Zone conserves energy.  Butler ranks 35 in 2pt FG%, 167 in 3pt FG%.  Length of Cain and Elliott on wings would help contest the threes.  Placing Howard and Rowsey in the respective positions limits their defensive deficiencies.

. No defense plays to MU's  personnel.
Young teams wear out with 10 minutes to go on the road.   You are thinking about an old school zone to conserve energy.  A modern zone chasing shooters off the 3 pt line is just as energy intensive.

[D'Lo Brown]

The hard hedge has very rarely been a problem.  When it is, it looks really bad, but that is hardly been the main problem of the defense.  Last night it is just poor communication.  They couldn't handle pick and rolls without the hedge.

And you really want this team to play a pack line?  Teams would shoot right over it.  And it would slow down the game.

Tower did a good job summarizing the problems in the other thread.  80% of this is a personnel issue.

Very rarely? I?d say about a half dozen buckets a game are directly attributable to it. I think it should be a major point of emphasis for Wojo to fix. I do agree with you on it being largely a personnel issue, though, that?s really what it comes down to.

The point I?d like to make is, teams are clearly scouting this and instantly make the pass for the easy bucket when it happens. There has to be a way to make an improvement here because if not, it?s only going to get worse as teams work it into their game plans.

If we are giving up a ridiculously easy 2 points 75% of the time we do this, then what is the point of it?

[GGGG]

Very rarely? I?d say about a half dozen buckets a game are directly attributable to it. I think it should be a major point of emphasis for Wojo to fix. I do agree with you on it being largely a personnel issue, though, that?s really what it comes down to.

The point I?d like to make is, teams are clearly scouting this and instantly make the pass for the easy bucket when it happens. There has to be a way to make an improvement here because if not, it?s only going to get worse as teams work it into their game plans.

If we are giving up a ridiculously easy 2 points 75% of the time we do this, then what is the point of it?

It's nowhere near six times a game.  I think the hard hedge was worth 2 or 3 yesterday. 

[Dr. Blackheart]

We'll try this again with numbers, although this won't move the Scoop Intelligencia.

>The average NCAA team, for every 10 shots taken, gives up 10.50 points on threes and 9.96 points on twos.
>For the total season, Marquette gives up 9.9 points on threes (good) and 11.1 on twos (really, really bad).
>In Big East play, MU gives up 9.7 points on threes and 11.8 on twos (very well coached by our opponents).

When Marquette over pressures the perimeter by moving 4-5 players out of the paint, our opponents go right to the paint because of high hedging by MU, outward spacing by MU, weak help defense available by MU, slow recovery by MU's bigs, and more fouling on their shooters. The result:

>The average team gives up 69.7% of their points via twos and free throws.
>For the season, MU gives up 75.6% this way.
>In the Big East, it is a whopping 80.3% as MU is more likely to foul scrambling on twos...and foul their best shooters.

On a per shot basis, MU's conference opponents would have to shoot 40%+ on treys to make it even in consideration not to keep attacking the freebies in the paint. There are about 25 teams that with only Nova and MU from the BE who shoot that.

Protect the paint! Build the defense from the baseline out and extend the pressure the threes like every top rated college defense. MU is very tall at the 3-4-5, but with has slow foot speed. Why scramble them?  You heard Jordan yesterday against us: Always three on the ball. Every time our guards penetrated, three players scrambled to the paint. Every shot, the same. This New Age Defense talk is whacko.

[GGGG]

No one has used New Age Defense except for you - it's actually a scheme very similar to what Buzz used. 

[Floorslapper]

No one has used New Age Defense except for you - it's actually a scheme very similar to what Buzz used.

This point, and the point Tower makes about it being personnel related would hold water, BUT, Buzz's midget team was ranked 55 in defense.

Wojo's teams are trending the wrong direction:

Year 1 - 69th
Year 2 - 88th
Year 3 - 165th
This year - 176th

Keep in mind this is a roster full of Wojo's players.  On the positive, love the offensive firepower Wojo has assembled.  Fun team to watch - yet frustrating considering we have 2 of the Top 10 players in all of college basketball in Pomeroy's O-Rating/High Usage category.  That's an incredible accomplishment - which you would hope would translate to more than a borderline NCAA team.

[GGGG]

This point, and the point Tower makes about it being personnel related would hold water, BUT, Buzz's midget team was ranked 55 in defense.

Wojo's teams are trending the wrong direction:

Year 1 - 69th
Year 2 - 88th
Year 3 - 165th
This year - 176th

Keep in mind this is a roster full of Wojo's players.  On the positive, love the offensive firepower Wojo has assembled.  Fun team to watch - yet frustrating considering we have 2 of the Top 10 players in all of college basketball in Pomeroy's O-Rating/High Usage category.  That's an incredible accomplishment - which you would hope would translate to more than a borderline NCAA team.

As I have said all along, it's mostly the players.  Yes, Wojo recruited those players so it's his fault, but I don't care what the scheme is, this isn't going to be a good defensive team.

[Daniel]

The hard hedge has very rarely been a problem.  When it is, it looks really bad, but that is hardly been the main problem of the defense.  Last night it is just poor communication.  They couldn't handle pick and rolls without the hedge.

And you really want this team to play a pack line?  Teams would shoot right over it.  And it would slow down the game.

Tower did a good job summarizing the problems in the other thread.  80% of this is a personnel issue.

 If 80% is personnel issues and 20% is coaching i assume, who is responsible for the personnel we have?  The coaching staff brought these guys in and the coaching staff is teaching them defense.  No?

[GGGG]

If 80% is personnel issues and 20% is coaching i assume, who is responsible for the personnel we have?  The coaching staff brought these guys in and the coaching staff is teaching them defense.  No?

Correct.  I have never stated otherwise.

[tower912]

This point, and the point Tower makes about it being personnel related would hold water, BUT, Buzz's midget team was ranked 55 in defense.

Wojo's teams are trending the wrong direction:

Year 1 - 69th
Year 2 - 88th
Year 3 - 165th
This year - 176th

Keep in mind this is a roster full of Wojo's players.  On the positive, love the offensive firepower Wojo has assembled.  Fun team to watch - yet frustrating considering we have 2 of the Top 10 players in all of college basketball in Pomeroy's O-Rating/High Usage category.  That's an incredible accomplishment - which you would hope would translate to more than a borderline NCAA team.

How many freshmen played on Buzz's midget teams?     Offensively, what did that team do that required other teams to alter their personnel groupings?     Yes, Buzz's offense with the midget team caused other teams to take their bigs off of the floor more often.  How often does an opponent this year have to change their rotations to compensate for the team Wojo puts on the floor.    The midgets had five guys who would drive and dish, drive and dish, until somebody missed a rotation, got their head turned around, and MU got either an open 3 or a lay up.    Huggins, for one, had to take size off of the floor because of an inability to stop the drive and dish.    So MU's offensive structure and the players who ran it, helped the defense by cutting down on the mismatches.     

You're  not wrong.    But understand why.      This year's team doesn't have tough minded seniors,  doesn't have a Lazar or Butler.   Doesn't have an offense that requires the other team to play something other than their normal rotation. 

[Floorslapper]

How many freshmen played on Buzz's midget teams?     Offensively, what did that team do that required other teams to alter their personnel groupings?     Yes, Buzz's offense with the midget team caused other teams to take their bigs off of the floor more often.  How often does an opponent this year have to change their rotations to compensate for the team Wojo puts on the floor.    The midgets had five guys who would drive and dish, drive and dish, until somebody missed a rotation, got their head turned around, and MU got either an open 3 or a lay up.    Huggins, for one, had to take size off of the floor because of an inability to stop the drive and dish.    So MU's offensive structure and the players who ran it, helped the defense by cutting down on the mismatches.     

You're  not wrong.    But understand why.      This year's team doesn't have tough minded seniors,  doesn't have a Lazar or Butler.   Doesn't have an offense that requires the other team to play something other than their normal rotation.

While I agree that our team this year is not as experienced as was the midget team, I disagree that we are not the offensive juggernaut that was the midgets team.  I believe we are much more skilled and present more problems to opposing coaches this year, than that year. 

Having 3 ELITE, high usage, high efficiency players puts a ton of stress on opposing coaches to match personnel/gameplan.  The volume of floor space we force a defense to defend is huge, and leads to great driving lanes for Sacar, as well as "roll" opportunities for our big.  Furthermore the shot-making and ability of both Rowsey and Howard to hit at an uncanny percentage highly contested and high degree of difficulty 3's further challenges defenses.  They cannot be allowed ANY airspace.

Hauser is every bit the player Lazar or Jimmy was.  Hauser is a VERY good defender, and elite offensively. 

As I posted above, I'd like to see how other coaches would react to us going to a lineup of Howard, Rowsey, Hauser, Elliott, Cain.  The slashing and athletic ability of Cain and Elliott would be maximized playing with the Big 3.

[Shark]

Y?all need to calm down Holy crap

[Stretchdeltsig]

I agree with many here that Wojo has to change the defense so teams can't take advantage of our 5'11" guards by picking.  And our bigs should not be guarding 25' away from the rim.  The bigs should protect the rim at all times. 
We are capable of much better defense.  Surprised that Wojo isn't a better defensive coach.  Our offense is a given.  If we defend we will win.

[GGGG]

While I agree that our team this year is not as experienced as was the midget team, I disagree that we are not the offensive juggernaut that was the midgets team.  I believe we are much more skilled and present more problems to opposing coaches this year, than that year. 

I don't agree with that at all.  That team had seven players who averaged 10+ per game.  (This one has three.) 

That team shot just as good from the 3 as this one does, but it also had multiple players who could put the ball on the floor and score. 

And while I like Sam, Lazar was a very efficient, high usage player as a senior.  Sam isn't at that level yet.

[tower912]

While I agree that our team this year is not as experienced as was the midget team, I disagree that we are not the offensive juggernaut that was the midgets team.  I believe we are much more skilled and present more problems to opposing coaches this year, than that year. 

Having 3 ELITE, high usage, high efficiency players puts a ton of stress on opposing coaches to match personnel/gameplan.  The volume of floor space we force a defense to defend is huge, and leads to great driving lanes for Sacar, as well as "roll" opportunities for our big.  Furthermore the shot-making and ability of both Rowsey and Howard to hit at an uncanny percentage highly contested and high degree of difficulty 3's further challenges defenses.  They cannot be allowed ANY airspace.

Hauser is every bit the player Lazar or Jimmy was.  Hauser is a VERY good defender, and elite offensively. 

As I posted above, I'd like to see how other coaches would react to us going to a lineup of Howard, Rowsey, Hauser, Elliott, Cain.  The slashing and athletic ability of Cain and Elliott would be maximized playing with the Big 3.

Then we disagree.  And this team is a really good offensive team.   But our roster does not force other teams to adjust to us.   Lazar and Jimmy were first round draft picks.    Are you predicting that for Sam?    And yes, a coach has to plan for this offense.    He can do it with his normal line up with extending the man, no help off of Markus or Rowsey, have the bigs show all of the time, and bet that the other two guys can't score enough to hurt.     With any kind of size or defensive ability at guard, it can be done.     Buzz's midget team required slow bigs who couldn't defend in space to come off the floor.   
    They have played that line up.   It was the comeback at Villanova.    It worked for a few minutes.   Eventually, they ran out of gas and time.    It is a nice change up in the right circumstances.    It isn't going to be the base. 

[Daniel]

Correct.  I have never stated otherwise.

Ok ty. That really makes it 100% coaching and staff. But maybe we have seen the recruiting shift now from finesse to more physical or defensive minded guys like John, Cain, Elliot and Morrow as latest recruits. 

[GGGG]

Ok ty. That really makes it 100% coaching and staff. But maybe we have seen the recruiting shift now from finesse to more physical or defensive minded guys like John, Cain, Elliot and Morrow as latest recruits. 

Yes ultimately it's on Wojo.  It's just my opinion that the scheme they use is fine.  It's the players that are a problem.  They are young and small on the perimeter.

[Daniel]

Yes ultimately it's on Wojo.  It's just my opinion that the scheme they use is fine.  It's the players that are a problem.  They are young and small on the perimeter.

Hopefully we recruit some defensive force next year and hereafter.  No one would have passed on Howard or a Rowsey for sure. Outstanding offensive players. But teams cannot go deep without very good defense.  Hoping for the best in future.  Need a great point next year

[GGGG]

Hopefully we recruit some defensive force next year and hereafter.  No one would have passed on Howard or a Rowsey for sure. Outstanding offensive players. But teams cannot go deep without very good defense.  Hoping for the best in future.  Need a great point next year

I think Wojo figured it out late.  Cain, Elliott and John will be very good defensively.

[Daniel]

I think Wojo figured it out late.  Cain, Elliott and John will be very good defensively.

Agreed. I said same thing elsewhere. I think Wojo went with Duke finesse first, saw the Big East up close, and started switching bringing in our three freshmen who are defensively oriented.  Couple more years or next?

[Room510]

Honest Question - What was the difference between the good defensive game vs Seton Hall and the poor one at Butler ?  I think it  MU played the same defensive scheme.  Was it poor execution by MU, better scheme by Butler, better personnel for Butler ?

[GGGG]

Honest Question - What was the difference between the good defensive game vs Seton Hall and the poor one at Butler ?  I think it  MU played the same defensive scheme.  Was it poor execution by MU, better scheme by Butler, better personnel for Butler ?

I think Butler attacked it better.  wades mentioned it earlier, but they picked to create mismatches. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I agree with others that it is a mostly a personnel issue. But I don't think its youth and size (though those certainly doesn't help) Rowdy and M2N are just horrible on ball defenders. Like two of the worst we have seen in a Marquette uniform, specifically Markus. The rest of our team isn't nearly good enough defensively to compensate for the two of them. Markus is to defense what Derrick Wilson was to offense, he makes the rest of his teammates worse simply by being on the floor.

But the reality is that the offense provided by Rowdy and Howard is worth significantly more than what they take away on the defensive end. As a result, we are going to be a high offense no defense run and gun squad. We could run a pack line or a zone and it would improve our defense but it would harm our offense more. We may not like it but trying to outscore the opponent is the best way to win with this roster. Which at least is a lot more fun to watch than the opposite.

Honest Question - What was the difference between the good defensive game vs Seton Hall and the poor one at Butler ?  I think it  MU played the same defensive scheme.  Was it poor execution by MU, better scheme by Butler, better personnel for Butler ?

This is a good question. As others have said, Butler attacked it much better than Seton Hall did. And there did seem to be a lot of communication errors based on how much Sam was yelling. The main thing is we didn't force nearly enough turnovers. My eye test tells me that we ran a lot more junk defense against Seton Hall and were able to confuse them into turnovers. We played a lot more of our base defense against Butler and when we pressed it was only token pressure. Not sure if that was the result of gameplanning or poor execution.

Another factor, only a small one is the refs in the Butler game called it differently than the Hall refs did. Certainly not the deciding factor in either game but I think we got a majority of the 50-50 calls against Hall and Butler got a majority of them last night.

[Stretchdeltsig]

I don't agree with that at all.  That team had seven players who averaged 10+ per game.  (This one has three.) 

That team shot just as good from the 3 as this one does, but it also had multiple players who could put the ball on the floor and score. 

And while I like Sam, Lazar was a very efficient, high usage player as a senior.  Sam isn't at that level yet.

False news.

[bilsu]

Honest Question - What was the difference between the good defensive game vs Seton Hall and the poor one at Butler ?  I think it  MU played the same defensive scheme.  Was it poor execution by MU, better scheme by Butler, better personnel for Butler ?

Seton Hall was the difference. They were never mentally into the game. Butler was ready to play from the start. Martin was also  having a great game, which made our defense look really bad. I not sure there was much any team could of done to stop Martin last night.

[GGGG]

False news.

You think that sophomore Sam is better than senior Lazar???

[Lennys Tap]

Hauser is every bit the player Lazar or Jimmy was.  Hauser is a VERY good defender, and elite offensively. 

Sam is an elite shooter, not an elite offensive player. OK defender, but he looks better than he is compared to his teammates.Nowhere near JFB level. Right now, no way he's near the player Lazar or Jimmy was.

[Floorslapper]

Sam is an elite shooter, not an elite offensive player. OK defender, but he looks better than he is compared to his teammates.Nowhere near JFB level. Right now, no way he's near the player Lazar or Jimmy was.

JFB was marginal (at best) as an offensive player at MU, during his entire time at MU.  Sam showed against Butler he is an Elite offensive player.  The way he took advantage of mismatches on the low block was beautiful, efficient, and productive.  He's an elite 3-ball shooter.  JFB's one elite quality while at MU offensively was drawing fouls and getting to the line.

Sam may never be the NBA player JFB has evolved into, because he simply will never be able to jump as high, and be as athletic as JFB - but Sam is a tremendously effective, efficient, and talented college ballpayer.

Mo and Cooby were nowhere near the offensive talents Rowsey and Howard are  (nor were they supreme defenders) - which makes my point:  How could Buzz get that team to 55th nationally defensively, and into the NCAA, while this year's team looks to be a bubble team?  #coachingmatters.

[GGGG]

JFB was marginal (at best) as an offensive player at MU, during his entire time at MU.  Sam showed against Butler he is an Elite offensive player.  The way he took advantage of mismatches on the low block was beautiful, efficient, and productive.  He's an elite 3-ball shooter.  JFB's one elite quality while at MU offensively was drawing fouls and getting to the line.

Sam may never be the NBA player JFB has evolved into, because he simply will never be able to jump as high, and be as athletic as JFB - but Sam is a tremendously effective, efficient, and talented college ballpayer.

Mo and Cooby were nowhere near the offensive talents Rowsey and Howard are  (nor were they supreme defenders) - which makes my point:  How could Buzz get that team to 55th nationally defensively, and into the NCAA, while this year's team looks to be a bubble team?  #coachingmatters.

Jimmy's OR at MU his last two years:  135 and 126.  Really, you have to be smarter than this.

And again, the 2008-09 team was just as good a 3 point shooting team and this year's team is.

[Stretchdeltsig]

You think that sophomore Sam is better than senior Lazar???

I know that sophomore Sam is better than sophomore Lazar.
Sam is very, very good.  Please don t under estimate him or his value to this team.

[GGGG]

I know that sophomore Sam is better than sophomore Lazar.
Sam is very, very good.  Please don t under estimate him or his value to this team.

I'm certainly not under estimating him.  But the entire discussion was comparing this team to Lazar's senior year team.

[1SE]

You can't teach length and you can't teach size, but most of D is coaching. I'd love some advanced stats on the midgets when playing together/playing apart. Of course they both need to be on the floor as much as possible, but giving them 60 min total (distribution depending on who is on) means you'd only have to have them together for 10 minutes - and you can have Theo and Cain out there then.

It is what it is, but just feels like we're wasting so much potential with these offenses the past two years. If we could just figure out a way to cobble together a 60th percentile high-major D (so 75ish kenpom?) we'd probably be hoping for the S16 rather than just squeaking into the tourney.

[THRILLHO]

I'm certainly not under estimating him.  But the entire discussion was comparing this team to Lazar's senior year team.

The midget team is a good comparison because of their shooting ability, small guards, and yet superior defense. They were also very bad at defensive 2p% (thought not as bad, only 263rd compared to 317th this year), but overall defensive efficiency was good enough because they forced a lot of turnovers. My recollection is that a lot of this was Lazar stripping entry passes against bigger players - he was 88th in steal%. Then to compare Lazar and Sam, it doesn't really matter whether Sam is "better" or whatever, but Lazar was better at steals, Sam plays excellent face up, team defense. For this team, the face up team defense only helps so much because they eventually move the ball and find the weak link. Incidentally, IMO this is also one of the biggest things the freshman offer -- the length and quickness to make steals, as well as the fact that if they pick up foul trouble early going for steals it's not as big of a deal on the other end.

[Floorslapper]

Jimmy's OR at MU his last two years:  135 and 126.  Really, you have to be smarter than this.

And again, the 2008-09 team was just as good a 3 point shooting team and this year's team is.

I stand corrected.  Saying Jimmy was a marginal offensive player at MU was an understatement/inaccurate.  He was very effective and efficient, much like Sam - just in different ways - Jimmy by getting to the FT Line at an extraordinary rate, and getting a lot of 2pt FGs.  Sam, of course gets a ton from 3pt FG.

According to Pomeroy Jimmy's OR as a Senior was 121.2, and his Junior year a 128.5 on 21.4 and 20.6% usage.  Jimmy's eFG as a Junior was 55.9% and 51.6% as a senior.

Sam's O-Rating at present is 135.2 (8th in the country), on 18.2% usage, with an eFG of 65.7%

End of the day, the midgets team of Buzz, and this year's team are strikingly similar - both shoot 41% from 3 point line, although this year's team shoots the 3 with much more frequency 47% of all field goal attempts whereas the midgets team shots 3's 35% of FGA.

The big difference of course is that the midgets team was significantly better defensively - and it didn't even have an option to play a big.  In my view Buzz simply did a better job coaching that team up defensively, than is Wojo doing with our team this year.

[The Lens]

You can't teach length and you can't teach size, but most of D is coaching. I'd love some advanced stats on the midgets when playing together/playing apart. Of course they both need to be on the floor as much as possible, but giving them 60 min total (distribution depending on who is on) means you'd only have to have them together for 10 minutes - and you can have Theo and Cain out there then.

It is what it is, but just feels like we're wasting so much potential with these offenses the past two years. If we could just figure out a way to cobble together a 60th percentile high-major D (so 75ish kenpom?) we'd probably be hoping for the S16 rather than just squeaking into the tourney.

This. All of this.

[GGGG]

The big difference of course is that the midgets team was significantly better defensively - and it didn't even have an option to play a big.  In my view Buzz simply did a better job coaching that team up defensively, than is Wojo doing with our team this year.

I agree.  Buzz is a better coach than Wojo is right now.  But I also wouldn't minimize the role that two future NBA first round draft picks played defensively. 

[Nukem2]

I digress here.  The real reason for the better defense is that that team had far quicker/experienced personnel along with guys that have sniffed the NBA ....  Butler, Hayward, DJO, Buycks, Cooby , Acker and the healthiest Joe Fulce we were able to see. 

[Floorslapper]

I digress here.  The real reason for the better defense is that that team had far quicker/experienced personnel along with guys that have sniffed the NBA ....  Butler, Hayward, DJO, Buycks, Cooby , Acker and the healthiest Joe Fulce we were able to see.

Solid point.  However, I think we will see all of Rowsey, Howard and Hauser sniff the NBA.  Not to mention Sacar is a very good athlete, who essentially is a Junior, Rowsey a 5th year Senior.  Wojo also has at his disposal all of Heldt, Theo, and Froling.  That midgets team was 7 guys total.  None over 6'6".

[brewcity77]

Another big difference in terms of the defense between the midgets and this team was the pace of play. The midgets played at the slowest pace any Marquette team has played in ages. I believe that helped keep them fresh. They played slow and virtually never turned the ball over, which limited transition baskets and allowed them to be rested come the end stages of games. Our tempo on offense allows more transition.

Yes, there was definitely a difference on the interior as Hayward and Butler were better defenders than anyone we have on this team currently, but I think guys had more energy to expend on the defensive wide as well in 2010.

[Nukem2]

Solid point.  However, I think we will see all of Rowsey, Howard and Hauser sniff the NBA.  Not to mention Sacar is a very good athlete, who essentially is a Junior, Rowsey a 5th year Senior.  Wojo also has at his disposal all of Heldt, Theo, and Froling.  That midgets team was 7 guys total.  None over 6'6".

But, those guys will not sniff the NBA for their quickness or defense (which is the topic here).

[Dr. Blackheart]

No one has used New Age Defense except for you - it's actually a scheme very similar to what Buzz used.

Buzz's defense is not at that similar...maybe with the high hedging but he would always keep the paint covered when he did it (you know, to limit the paint touches). 
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2011/01/defense-issue-guest-column.html

I have been told on here the New Age Defense of building a defense from the outside-in is the new norm so I should adjust my thinking, like the GS Warriors.  Yet, none of the top defenses in Pomeroy actually play it.  <shoulder shrug>

Giving up 60 PIP to Bulter plus 12 made free throws, is insanity.  Especially after the Seton Hall game where we limited the paint and held them to their worst offensive game in conference by protecting the paint. Bad scheme.

[tower912]

Different offense, home team versus team on their second  road game in a row.  There are clearly defensive issues.   But there are many factors to consider.

[Nukem2]

Different offense, home team versus team on their second  road game in a row.  There are clearly defensive issues.   But there are many factors to consider.

Big difference is that SHU, like Bucky, has an offense more focused on a center (DelGado and Happ for Bucky).  Easier for MU to defend?

[tower912]

SH ran more post up, less pick and roll.   

[Nukem2]

SH ran more post up, less pick and roll.   

My point.

[tower912]

we agree

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The difference between the midget team and this year's team was not just coaching. The difference was the 09-10 midgets, Acker and Cubillian, were elite on ball defenders considering their size. The 17-18 midgets are terrible on ball defenders for any size.

[Nukem2]

The difference between the midget team and this year's team was not just coaching. The difference was the 09-10 midgets, Acker and Cubillian, were elite on ball defenders considering their size. The 17-18 midgets are terrible on ball defenders for any size.

They were also quicker.

[panda]

The 09/10 team was also very poor defending inside. They made their money forcing turnovers and scoring in transition.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Lil Bit was also listed at 5'8" and Cubes at 6'0"...lol....bong height?

Maybe the best coaching job in MU's history. 

[Herman Cain]

The 09-10 team was a lot of fun to watch.  Hopefully Lazar can make it back to the NBA.

[Nukem2]

Lil Bit was also listed at 5'8" and Cubes at 6'0"...lol....bong height?

Maybe the best coaching job in MU's history.

Once agai, there was a ton of talent on that team.  No different than the Mizzou team the year before that MU lost to.

[Lennys Tap]

The difference between the midget team and this year's team was not just coaching. The difference was the 09-10 midgets, Acker and Cubillian, were elite on ball defenders considering their size. The 17-18 midgets are terrible on ball defenders for any size.

Mo Acker was an elite on ball defender? Not "for his size" or any other size. He was a cape short of being a matador. Cubi got after it pretty good, though.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Once agai, there was a ton of talent on that team.  No different than the Mizzou team the year before that MU lost to.

This team has a ton of talent too, if not more...in fact, they may be the best MU offensive team in 101 years.  Will be interesting to see where they land.

[Nukem2]

This team has a ton of talent too, if not more...in fact, they may be the best MU offensive team in 101 years.  Will be interesting to see where they land.

Also once again, that team was very quick and had multiple future pro guys.  Can?t say that about this year?s team at this point.  Apples and oranges here.

[Stretchdeltsig]

The hedge on the high pick and roll is a staple of man defense at all levels.  Two 5'10 guards out front hurts the 2-3 zone as much as it does man to man.   Switching on to Martin is a choice.  Give Scar more minutes and watch him hurt the offense?   Bring in the other skinny freshman, Cain? (My choice).  Don't switch?  Also a viable option.

The way Sam was yelling, I have the impression a lot of guys weren't playing to the scouting report, weren't switching or rotating according to plan.

Come on... our guards are 5'11".

[Lennys Tap]

The 09/10 team was also very poor defending inside. They made their money forcing turnovers and scoring in transition.

I don't remember them scoring a lot in transition. They were a "slowdown" team. Moved the ball well, few turnovers, good shooting usually late in the shot clock. Had to play that way because of their lack of size, strength and depth.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Also once again, that team was very quick and had multiple future pro guys.  Can?t say that about this year?s team at this point.  Apples and oranges here.

Ok. Fair enough.  I think we have better talent this season than obviously you do.  Elite offense, best in 101 years.  Taller guards and much taller at 3, 4 and 5 than Midgets.

Play stay at home defense a bit more and this team can be special. Pomeroy has MU going 9-9, and potentially  going up to 12-6. All incumbent on our defense, frankly.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Mo Acker was an elite on ball defender? Not "for his size" or any other size. He was a cape short of being a matador. Cubi got after it pretty good, though.

Actually no, he wasn't. In 226 defensive possessions in 09-10, Acker allowed 163 points for a points per possession allowed of .721. That number put him in the 77th percentile of all Division 1 players. Considering he had to overcome being 5"8 that puts his on ball defense in the elite category IMHO. If you want to argue over the adjective that's fine but a matador he was not. He was better than his running mate, Cubillan who was in the 69th percentile.