Hate to say it, but I am a little worried

[ErickJD08]

1.  We have no legit jump shooters.  We are going to get smoked by the zone.
2.  Unless we go really small, we are going to always have one player on the floor that can not contribute on the offensive end.
3.  We are a small team and yet we are not good at 3's or FT's.
4.  The lack of size is an obvious weakness against crappy teams.  I am not sure if we can beat anyone with a solid big man.
5.  We foul alot against bad teams.
6.  The point and the wings seem to make really risky passes in this offense.
7.  Burke did not improve at all since last season.

I have cleared all expectations from this season until we play TN and WI.

[nola03]

I'm not worried about talent. I'm worried about stamina.

[mug644]

Maybe some posters with better memories can share how Villanova made it so far a few years ago with a 4-guard lineup, when the top big man (Curtis something-or-other?) was out for the season. We have 4 guys, any of whom could explode for 25 points or more, who all complement each other, yet none of who hit the 3 with decent consistency. With no post presence, I wonder if we are like Villanova and if we might find a groove where the Big $ take us pretty far.

Did Villanova have much of a bench that year? We obviously don't have much on our bench, but stamina is indeed an issue, if not in each game, certainly over the season.

It feels odd to feel so anxious after such solid (score-wise, at least) wins, with Matthews' emergence, and with James seemingly finding his role, but I don't see us ever really finding a groove, especially as we'll have two guys returning from injury just as the BEast season starts.

[MUCam]

mug644 -

It has been awhile since I visited the Villanova comparison, but I will give you this:

(1) Bigs did really nothing. I think their best big averaged around 5 ppg and 5 rpg. Maybe a little more.
(2) Big East was nowhere as strong
(3) Perhaps the key - the big Villanova three were all better 3 point shooters. I believe in their final season, 2 went over 40 percent from beyond the arc.

There are a lot of similarities between the Nova team and MU. There are also some big differences. But, overall, I'd say the similarities out weigh the differences.

EDIT: I POSTED THIS AWHILE BACK ON "THE OTHER SITE." CONTAINS MORE DETAILED COMPARISONS BETWEEN VILLANOVA 2005-06 AND MARQUETTE 2008-09. DO WITH IT WHAT YOU WILL...

As I posted some time last year or the year before, there are a lot of comparisons and parallels that can be drawn from this team to the 2005-2006 Villanova team that ended up Big East Champions en route to a #1 seed in the NCAA tournament. The team eventually played their way to the Elite 8.

Remember that that Villanova squad's best interior player was a 6'8 Will Sheridan who averaged a paltry 5.5 ppg and 6.3 rpg. Their next best bigs, Dante Cunningham (6'8 - 225 lbs freshman) and Jason Fraser (6'9 - 225 lbs senior), averaged 2.2 ppg / 4 rpg and 3.5 ppg / 3.4 rpg respectively. Shane Clark, playing more of a 3/4 position, at 6'7 was the only other player over 6'5 to average more than 6 minutes per game. His production came out to 2.2 ppg and 2.0 rpg in just over 10 mpg.

That Villanova team was heavily talented in its back court. Using senior leadership and extremely strong play from the backcourt, the team played its way to the Big East Championship, landing ahead of ranked teams like UConn (sporting 6'10 Boone and 6'11 Armstrong), Pittsburgh (Kendall 6'11 and Gray 7'0), and Georgetown (Hibbert 7'2 and Green 6'9 [though admittedly not a true front court player]).

Admittedly, there are a lot of distinctions that can be made from that Villanova team to the Marquette team. While the Big East was strong, landing 5 teams in the AP top 25, it was not nearly as strong as this year's Big East potentially can be. More obviously, Randy Foye, Kyle Lowery and Allan Ray ended up being better guards than what McNeal, James or Matthews are being projected to be. Remember, all three 'Nova guards saw time in the NBA, with Lowery and Foye being drafted in the first round.

Despite the distinctions, there are a lot of parallels that can be made from this year's MU team to the 2005-06 'Nova team. I wouldn't sell this team short just yet. Am I willing to project an Elite Eight with a Big East Championship to boot? No. But I do think it is not outside of the realm of realistic possibility.

One final note: In their junior years, the 'Nova trio lost a heartbreaking one point game to UNC in the Sweet Sixteen, much like the heartbreaking loss the MU three suffered last year. Was that the catalyst for the successful final hoorah 'Nova experienced? If so, we can only hope the same force will drive MU this season.

[IAmMarquette]

Might I suggest some level-headedness. Yeah, the first half was ugly. No argument there. But this is one game. We can't score 100 every night.

[ErickJD08]

Yeah, but we still struggle against the zone and I see how much size is hurting them against bad teams.  I am not blowing this out of proportion but I am looking at things and I don't see Marquette being favored to win against any ranked BE team, especially on the road.

[mug644]

MUCam, thanks for sharing that again. I do recall reading it as Villanova has come up in the past. I think a key difference is the 3-pt. shooting. If our guards could hit it a bit more consistently, our outlook would be much better.

As for the comment about levelheadedness, I'd say that comparing MU to Villanova 05-06 is actually pretty levelheaded. It is taking a bigger picture and not just freaking out about some weaknesses, but considering how the strengths might actually lead us.

I also wonder about attacking a zone. Our guards are so quick they can get in the seam and get a shot or a pass off. Matthews is getting fouled a ton and hits his shots. Yes, it would be great to have someone to kick it out to for a three, but shouldn't we be able to get inside a zone fairly well. (Then again, that's easy to say until we meet someone like Thabeet.)

[Big Papi]

Yeah, but we still struggle against the zone and I see how much size is hurting them against bad teams.  I am not blowing this out of proportion but I am looking at things and I don't see Marquette being favored to win against any ranked BE team, especially on the road.

We struggled against the zone and yet scored 85 points.  We are not good at free throws yet we shot 75%.  We are not good at 3s yet we shot 43%.  

Yes we do have some major concerns (interior defense and rebounding) mainly due to the fact that we are so small but some of your comments are very puzzling.

[bma725]

Villanova wasn't exactly a deep team that year.  The starters all played at least 28 minutes a game and only three other players averaged over 10 MPG.  They also didn't play at the pace MU is currently playing.  According to KenPom's stats, Villanova was 202nd in pace that year but 13th in offensive efficiency.  MU going into today was 4th in pace, which is going to be a problem in terms of stamina if Fulce and Otule don't come back on schedule.

It's too early to tell with this years stats, but in terms of offensive stats, going into today MU is better in terms of field goal percentage and holds a commanding lead in free throws attempted.  MU is also slightly better at offensive rebounding and turns the ball over less.

Beyond the fact that MU tries to push the pace and Villanova didn't, the main difference comes in perimeter shooting.  Villanova was better at it...and they shot a ton more from beyond the arc than MU does.  Mike Nardi was the one guard you would qualify as a very good shooter, and he shot 40%.  Kyle Lowry shot 44% but he attempted very few from beyond the arc.  Their two main scorers, Randy Foye and Allen Ray shot 35% and 37% respectively.  But they attempted a ton of three pointers.  Ray attempted 288, and Foye attempted 254.  None of MU's guards has come close to shooting that many in a single season, the closest was James two years ago with 184.  Additionally, other than Hayward last year(45%) and Matthews as a freshman with an extremely limited sample size(43%) none of MU's guards has been a good 3 point shooter.  McNeal and James have struggled to be above 31%, Matthews outside of that one year hasn't been above 31%, and Hayward shot 20% from beyond the arc as a freshman.

Defensively, the two teams are nearly the same.  They are within a point of each other in field goal percentage defense, they create nearly the same amount of turnovers, Villanova gave up more offensive rebounds...but MU fouls more.

Villanova's loses that year came against teams with talented big guys, much like MU likely will.  They lost to UConn once and played another close game with them during the regular season.  They lost to West Virginia, Texas, Pitt, and Florida.  The only teams with good big guys that they had no problems with were Georgetown and Louisville.  In general they had no problems with perimeter oriented teams like MU, Syracuse and Notre Dame.

[IAmMarquette]

Yeah, but we still struggle against the zone and I see how much size is hurting them against bad teams.  I am not blowing this out of proportion but I am looking at things and I don't see Marquette being favored to win against any ranked BE team, especially on the road.

Fair enough. Hopefully Otule will be able to provide more than 5 fouls per game, which I think he will. And as much as I loved Ousmane, I don't think losing him will have the effect on our record that many predict. I've been disappointed with Dwight's performance thus far (remember his game against UW? and that putback against Georgetown last year?), but it's early. I understand your concern, but I'm not ready to concede all of our conference road games just yet.

[augoman]

I realize it's early, and I know we out rebounded TexSo, but, having watched unranked Syracuse vs #22? Kansas (with the talented Tyshawn Taylor), I wonder as to the validity of our current # 15 ranking.  I, too, am worried.

[ErickJD08]

We struggled against the zone and yet scored 85 points.  We are not good at free throws yet we shot 75%.  We are not good at 3s yet we shot 43%.  

Yes we do have some major concerns (interior defense and rebounding) mainly due to the fact that we are so small but some of your comments are very puzzling.

I am sorry for puzzling you with my comments but let me break it down for you.  For the season, we are shooting 33% from 3's.  That is not that good.  Especially since we are a guard heavy team.  As for the free throws, Marquette is shooting 73% from FT.  Matthews is shooting great from the line so far and he is also shooting about 30% of the teams FT's.  Take Matthews out of the equation and MU is shooting 67% from the line.  That is REALLY terrible since we are guard heavy.  Hopefully these stats helped clear things up and my concerns about the FT and 3 point shooting.

[NCMUFan]

It is a good topic.  No problem with being a bit worried or concerned.  Against better opponents the odds of blowing them out certainly decreases and we will need to excel at other aspects of the game to make up for areas we are weaker at.

[Big Papi]

I am sorry for puzzling you with my comments but let me break it down for you.  For the season, we are shooting 33% from 3's.  That is not that good.  Especially since we are a guard heavy team.  As for the free throws, Marquette is shooting 73% from FT.  Matthews is shooting great from the line so far and he is also shooting about 30% of the teams FT's.  Take Matthews out of the equation and MU is shooting 67% from the line.  That is REALLY terrible since we are guard heavy.  Hopefully these stats helped clear things up and my concerns about the FT and 3 point shooting.

Yes puzzling.  What sense does it make taking Matthews out of the free throw equation?  Oh yea lets take out MU's best free throw shooter and the one who gets to the line more than anyone else.  While we are at it, lets take Hayward out of the equation as well.  If we take everyone out of the equation except for DJ than yea we suck at free throws.  You do realize that this team which is largely intact from last year, finished fifth in the Big East in free throw shooting and 7th in 3 point shooting.  That is a sample size of greater than 4 games.  You make it sound like they are horrible and that is far from the fact.  Our free throw shooting is good and while our 3 point shooting is not great, lets reserve judgement on their 3 point shooting until we see what they do in a few more games.  They had 2 good games shooting over 40% and 2 bad games with our best 3 point shooter struggling at 23%.  Again the sample size is way too small but I would take a 3 point percentage that is in the top half of the best conference in basketball and say that we are going to win more games than lose this year and I'll say it before and after playing both Tennessee and Wisconsin as those two games do not define this season.

[ErickJD08]

Just to reiterate... 33% from 3 and 73% from FT is not good either.  Taking Matthews out was just to point out that our team as a whole is not that great because we only have one really good FT shooter on the team.  The other thing to take into consideration is that we are playing bad teams.

At the end of the day, we will have to wait and see what happens but I think outside WV and GTown, most of the top BE teams have gotten better while we are the same, or arguably worse than last season. 

[TVDirector]

Buzz has to find a way to parlay the strengths and talent of his guard group into a workable offense, no doubt.
zones against MU, like last year, ought to be in the opponents playbook for sure.
any good coach is going to realize that they will have a much better chance of winning by limiting our slashing and exposing our inconsistent 3 point shooting by using a zone as opposed to running with us man to man all game.

TS was a surprisingly decent team... their guys looked and played solidly, and had athleticism throughout.  They rebounded in their zone scheme pretty well and forced us into plenty of turnovers.
Was the closeness of the first 18:00 all contributed to them playing really well or being a decent team?  No.  All us playing below our abilities?  No.
I think it was a feeling out period in the season- learn something about yourselves... like every cupcake game really should be.  That's their value.

But as Buzz said on radio afterward, it was a good experience for the guys so they know what they have to work on--- now go back to my first sentence.
This is where the senior leadership and Buzz's coaching staff will show their colors, hopefully.

Not every night is Wes going to have a bit of the flu.
Nor DJ hits a 40 footer at a buzzer.
Nor Fulce and OTule sit the bench indefinitely due to injuries.
Nor Burke is going to be completely invisible (while that's true lately, he's shown ability previously)
Nor is Coach going to call Hazel a Spaz on radio (didya hear that!!!?!???!!!)

I wouldn't call this game a clunker- rather a learning experience for a group with talent and skill, some good experience, but depth, size and shooting challenges that can be overcome by this team.

[avid1010]

1.  We have no legit jump shooters.  We are going to get smoked by the zone.
2.  Unless we go really small, we are going to always have one player on the floor that can not contribute on the offensive end.
3.  We are a small team and yet we are not good at 3's or FT's.
4.  The lack of size is an obvious weakness against crappy teams.  I am not sure if we can beat anyone with a solid big man.
5.  We foul alot against bad teams.
6.  The point and the wings seem to make really risky passes in this offense.
7.  Burke did not improve at all since last season.

I have cleared all expectations from this season until we play TN and WI.

1.  We shot 43.5% AGAINST THE ZONE.  Don't bring in the 33.3% and then say we're going to get smoked by a zone.  33% from the 3 point line would equate to 50% from anything inside it.

2.  We are not going to match up well down low.  No doubt about it, but I've seen more points come from the post this year that I did under anything since Robert Jackson

3.  Seems like you just combined concerns 1 and 2??

4.  Now I'm confused, is that concern 2 or concerns 1 and 3???

5.  Then we probably won't foul so much against good teams

6.  Yes, I'm really worried about turnovers in an offense that has no big men.  Turnovers have been a major problem for these guys, especially from what we've seen under Buzz

7.  So is this the same as concern 1, 3, 4 and 5??

They're not strong inside (I believe that's been stated on here) and they've never been a great 3 point shooting team.  That being said, I like what I've seen to compensate for that this year.  We're getting easy buckets in transition and in the paint and we just shot 43% from behind the arc against a zone!  If you can't give them credit for winning big against these teams I'm not sure you can draw concerns either?

[Henry Sugar]

bma is my favorite poster on the messageboards. 

Great breakdown.

One thing about pace, which I found interesting from the announcers, was that Buzz said the team averaged about 3.5 possessions per minute.  However, Buzz expected the team to only have about 2.5 possessions per minute in BE play.

At least, I think that's what I heard Kaplan say.  When I do the math, that works out to 140 possessions per game vs 100 possessions per game.  Even split in half, those numbers don't jive.

[Marquette84]

First, if our biggest problem is that we only score 85 points playing against the zone, it will be a very good year offensively.

Second, to provide some perspective, the difference between a 33% and 39% team 3 point shooting percentage for a team taking 20 attempts per game is just one made field goal.   That's it.   When you're scoring 96 points, there's a fair argument to be made that we'll have plenty of other opportunity to make up for that missed field goal. 

Third, BTW, 39% is not average or typical--it would have put us #2 in the Big East, and top 25 nationally.  39% is unusually good for team shooting.  35% would have put us middle of the pack in the Big East--and then the scoring difference between 33% and 35% is just over one point per game.

Fourth, despite the below average team 3 point percentage, it's not going to stop teams from coming out on and defending our outside shooters.  While none of them are Novak-like in terms of consistency,  they all are capable of individual games where they shoot 40%+--and the other teams aren't going to know ahead of time when that will happen! .

Fifth, part of the low outside shooting percentage is that the other teams ARE coming out on our perimiter players, which is improving the ability to get the ball in  the paint.  Our We're getting back far more than 3 points

Finally, for the fool who is complaining that our FT% is lousy, check out the BE stats from last season--our current 73.4% would have put us at #2 in the Big East last season (.4% behind 73.8% Notre Dame) , and inside the top 50 in all NCAA.   
 

[NotAnAlum]

You can argue all day about if MU’s guards as a group are adequate shooters to support us being a top tier contender.  My problem with them is from a shooting standpoint they are all the same.  They are all streaky shoot off the dribble type guys.  We do not have a pure spot up shooter on this team.  Since in a zone the defense is giving up responsibility to cover a particular guy (unless it’s a gimmick defense like a box and 1) the classic way to attack the zone is to collapse it by attacking an area and positioning your pure shooter to get a wide open 3 look by virtue of the collapse.  This shooter needs to be able to consistently hit this wide open shot (better than 50%).  Since the defense can’t keep giving up 3 points more than 50% of the possessions they have to come out of the zone.  Now it’s great if one of your starters is this guy.  The example of Nardi from Nova’s team discussed earlier.  (Yes he shot around 40% overall but on stand still uncontested shoots he was deadly)  Or you can sub in a “zone breaker”.   But somehow the guy has to be on the roster somewhere.  MU does not have that nor does it appear they are bringing it in with the next recruiting class.  To get to that high level a basketball team needs to have an array of weapons.  But the way our team is built we have only one type (granted very good at what they do but all in the same mold).  So the challenge for Buzz is either to turn one of these guys into a great spot up shooter (not likely) or design a completely different way of attacking a zone.       

[StillWarriors]

All the comments about the offense are legit, but seems to me the defense is the real cause for concern. Giving up 48% for the game and 64% in the second half against Texas Southern??? Yikes. That won't cut it.

[rocky_warrior]

MU does not have that nor does it appear they are bringing it in with the next recruiting class. 

Not entirely, Cubillan can (and dare I say, will) be a zone buster.  He'll be around the next year too.  You have to remember he missed a LOT of shooting practice due to his shoulder surgeries - and is just now getting some of his form back.  Still, he's shooting 33% behind the arc so far.

Also, Acker's shooting coming along nicely.  He's 40% so far this season, and I don't see any reason for that declining. 

The only problem with these two, is that they're fairly short and have problems creating their own space on the perimeter.  That's not a huge problem however, because the rest of the team (sans the 5 spot) can draw defenders and create space for them beyond the arc.  Doesn't look like that will change next season either.

My biggest beef, is that the team all says Lazar is the best shooter on the team (they mentioned that on the broadcast last night), but we can't find time for him behind the arc since we're so weak in the post positions.  I'm hoping next year, and perhaps this year once Fulce is able to play, Lazar will get more time in at the 3 spot.

Honestly, our shooting "woes" are overblown.  The biggest problem last night was we came out shooting cold, and didn't adjust to the zone fast enough.    Those two problem were resolved by the end of the game.

[jaybilaswho?]

Yeah, but we still struggle against the zone and I see how much size is hurting them against bad teams. 

We have struggled against the zone for years, but we have managed to do alright.

[DoubleMU0609]

The only problem with these two, is that they're fairly short and have problems creating their own space on the perimeter. 

I think that Cub and Acker will have an easier time getting open on the perimeter against a zone this year.  Kaplan kept talking last night about how the extra distance on the 3-pt line probably won't decrease shooting percentage for decent shooters.  Because the line is farther out, the collapsed defense has farther to recover, giving our (more vertically challenged) shooters a larger window through which to shoot. 

I think both of these guys have the ability to become solid zone busters for us.

[jaybilaswho?]

What I am more worried about is that we seem to fall back on the three too much this year so far. We have always been a team that lived or died by the three ball, but maybe I was just hoping that Buzz would have changed it up.