I'm sold

[MuggsyB]

This is a serious question:  Since Dec 11th have you watched a single Marquette game where you didn't feel like we were the better team?  Maybe at Xavier or vs UCONN?  Because honestly I haven't.  That's not to say we should be 12-0 or that our opponents didn't deserve to win, but it's pretty remarkable that we haven't had a single game where we were nor right there down the stretch for a month and a half. 

[GoldenEagles03]

This is a serious question:  Since Dec 11th have you watched a single Marquette game where you didn't feel like we were the better team?  Maybe at Xavier or vs UCONN?  Because honestly I haven't.  That's not to say we should be 12-0 or that our opponents didn't deserve to win, but it's pretty remarkable that we haven't had a single game where we were nor right there down the stretch for a month and a half.

At Xavier is a tough Big East opener for a young team and UConn was the better team with Morsell unavailable.  Marquette has a very well constructed roster when healthy.  They have a shot against anyone.

[MuggsyB]

Well, I truly think our best is better than any team in our league.  And I'm not just saying that because I'm biased. 

[CrowdOf5]

Well, I truly think our best is better than any team in our league.  And I'm not just saying that because I'm biased.

Hard not to feel that way right now. I agree.

[1SE]

I really like this team and am amazed how the sum has become more than the parts. Something we haven't seen since buzz.

That said, I think the Achilles heel is a physical big man inside. Our success in the NCAAT will very much depend on match-ups. If we get matchups like Villanova the whole way through, with no dominant and physical big I think  we could win it all. But if we run into someone like Illinois with Cockburn I think we'll struggle unless we a) can get that big into foul trouble or b) just shoot the lights out.

If we lose a game in the NCAAT I think it will be one where we get just absolutely wiped on the glass.

[tower912]

Agree with this.   Shaka has been an alchemist with this team, something Wojo could not do.   And this team could be vulnerable to a physical, wide body big.

[panda]

Agree with this.   Shaka has been an alchemist with this team, something Wojo could not do.   And this team could be vulnerable to a physical, wide body big.

They've actually done a good job of defending posts as the conference season has moved on.

[tower912]

Watson says hi.   

[panda]

Watson says hi.

They really frustrated him and made it challenging for him game 1. Completely changed the dynamic of the game.

The only other game from PC game #2 where a big dominated down low was Osun on the Bonnies.

We do a great job of pressuring the ball and denying post entry with fronts and weak side help. Because of that, we're more likely to see guards/wings have bigger games against us or bigs beating us on second chance points.

[1SE]

They really frustrated him and made it challenging for him game 1. Completely changed the dynamic of the game.

The only other game from PC game #2 where a big dominated down low was Osun on the Bonnies.

We do a great job of pressuring the ball and denying post entry with fronts and weak side help. Because of that, we're more likely to see guards/wings have bigger games against us or bigs beating us on second chance points.

I seem to recall Obiago and Yetna abusing us in game 1 - we won that game because we shot 50% from 3.

Cockburn would have been a major problem for us.

The good thing is that there are only a handful of teams with bigs like that - I just hope we don't run into them or we catch shooting magic in a bottle again if we do.

[panda]

I seem to recall Obiago and Yetna abusing us in game 1 - we won that game because we shot 50% from 3.

Cockburn would have been a major problem for us.

The good thing is that there are only a handful of teams with bigs like that - I just hope we don't run into them or we catch shooting magic in a bottle again if we do.

I don't consider Yetna a "wide bodied" big. He's a stretch 4. I'll leave it to Tower but I interpreted his wide bodied big giving us trouble statement as an offensive threat. Ike did/does nothing offensively so I didn't include him.

Cockburn is a major problem for every team in the country. That's not exactly a a revolutionary take.

[MuggsyB]

I seem to recall Obiago and Yetna abusing us in game 1 - we won that game because we shot 50% from 3.

Cockburn would have been a major problem for us.

The good thing is that there are only a handful of teams with bigs like that - I just hope we don't run into them or we catch shooting magic in a bottle again if we do.

Teams that can pound the paint and rebound obviously could cause us some problems. 

[tower912]

It is also about rebounding.   A wide body post player able to play bully ball and pound the offensive boards have and will cause MU problems.
  I'm not angry, I'm not critical.  Kur and Oso can get muscled.   MU has been able to deal with it for the most part except on the boards.   Watson beat MU up in the second half and won the game at the end.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Agree with this.   Shaka has been an alchemist with this team, something Wojo could not do.   

Not true. Wojo was amazing at turning gold into lead.

[MuggsyB]

It is also about rebounding.   A wide body post player able to play bully ball and pound the offensive boards have and will cause MU problems.
  I'm not angry, I'm not critical.  Kur and Oso can get muscled.   MU has been able to deal with it for the most part except on the boards.   Watson beat MU up in the second half and won the game at the end.

We also beat that same team by 30 on our home floor.  There's no doubt our best beats their best.  Now when it comes to Gonzaga, Zona, Purdue, Illinois (with Cockburn), Kentucky, Baylor, Auburn, and others?  No one is saying that.  However, outside the NCAA top tier I think we can play with anyone even with our rebounding issues.

[panda]

It is also about rebounding.   A wide body post player able to play bully ball and pound the offensive boards have and will cause MU problems.
  I'm not angry, I'm not critical.  Kur and Oso can get muscled.   MU has been able to deal with it for the most part except on the boards.   Watson beat MU up in the second half and won the game at the end.

Fair enough - I wrongly interpreted your initial statement. I agree here.

[MuggsyB]

Not true. Wojo was amazing at turning gold into lead.

The truth is even if H and H came back with Howard and the rest of that team it had significant flaws on the defensive end. I don't have any confidence they would have done anything in the tournament. 

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I'm really concerned about teams with size knocking us out of the tournament, and several of this year's top teams have size.

Let's look at the teams as they are seeded on Bracket Matrix.

Auburn has Kessler, Gonzaga has Timme and Holmgren, Purdue has Edey and Williams.  Baylor might be the one seed that is Marquette's best matchup.

Looking at 2 seeds, Arizona has two bigs, and Kentucky has one dominant rebounder.  Those are bad matchups.  Kansas and UCLA would be better matchups.

Duke has pro size and talent. They are the 3 seed I least want to draw.  I'd much rather draw Houston.  If Wisconsin is placed in Milwaukee, we can't play them.  The other 3 seed is Villanova, which the committee will have to avoid if MU plays them in the BET.

I like the matchups against the 4 and 5 seeds a lot more.  Texas Tech, Michigan State, LSU, Tennessee, Alabama, Ohio State would all be ok with me.  Illinois would be a nightmare with Cockburn.  Providence is an unlikely draw.

If Marquette ends up a 6 seed, I want a draw of Houston and either Kansas or UCLA .

If Marquette ends up a 4 or 5, I'd love Michigan State for the Joey factor.  But there are several options where I think MU matches up well.

[PGsHeroes32]

I'm really concerned about teams with size knocking us out of the tournament, and several of this year's top teams have size.

Let's look at the teams as they are seeded on Bracket Matrix.

Auburn has Kessler, Gonzaga has Timme and Holmgren, Purdue has Edey and Williams.  Baylor might be the one seed that is Marquette's best matchup.

Looking at 2 seeds, Arizona has two bigs, and Kentucky has one dominant rebounder.  Those are bad matchups.  Kansas and UCLA would be better matchups.

Duke has pro size and talent. They are the 3 seed I least want to draw.  I'd much rather draw Houston.  If Wisconsin is placed in Milwaukee, we can't play them.  The other 3 seed is Villanova, which the committee will have to avoid if MU plays them in the BET.

I like the matchups against the 4 and 5 seeds a lot more.  Texas Tech, Michigan State, LSU, Tennessee, Alabama, Ohio State would all be ok with me.  Illinois would be a nightmare with Cockburn.  Providence is an unlikely draw.

If Marquette ends up a 6 seed, I want a draw of Houston and either Kansas or UCLA .

If Marquette ends up a 4 or 5, I'd love Michigan State for the Joey factor.  But there are several options where I think MU matches up well.

Lunardis current brack of Ohio state as the 5 and Baylor as the 1 is one of the more ideal possible paths for us

[CTWarrior]

This is a serious question:  Since Dec 11th have you watched a single Marquette game where you didn't feel like we were the better team?  Maybe at Xavier or vs UCONN?  Because honestly I haven't.  That's not to say we should be 12-0 or that our opponents didn't deserve to win, but it's pretty remarkable that we haven't had a single game where we were nor right there down the stretch for a month and a half.

UConn is the one team that I thought looked better than us the first time around in BE play.  They're the one team I give us a less than 50/50 chance to win the rest of the way in BE play.  I'm sure we'll probably drop one or two outside of them, but I think they are the toughest game we have left.

[GoldenEagles03]

Watson says hi.

Nate Watson was smothered by Marquette for about 75 of the 80 minutes.  Kuath and Oso do a pretty good job. What the give up in strength they make up for with athleticism in blocking shots.  Preventing bigs from scoring hasn't been the issue. Preventing teams from grabbing their own misses has been the issue.

[muwarrior69]

Topper

Not only did we sweep them, we had the lead in well over 70 minutes of the 80 minutes played and beat them in low scoring game and a higher scoring affair. IMO, we were the best team on the floor for both games and Jay Wright knows that MU basketball is on their way back. Prior to tipoff to the conclusion of the game last night did I have any doubt MU would win the game. It is a nice feeling not having to "steal" a game.

I wonder how we'll do in the BET this year. Ever since we have been in the BE our track record for the tournament has been abysmal.

[VanderBlueFanClub]

We can win the BET. For sure.

+1

[willie warrior]

I wonder how we'll do in the BET this year. Ever since we have been in the BE our track record for the tournament has been abysmal.

Talk to Wojo-Dukiet. He can explain.

[Herman Cain]

This is a serious question:  Since Dec 11th have you watched a single Marquette game where you didn't feel like we were the better team?  Maybe at Xavier or vs UCONN?  Because honestly I haven't.  That's not to say we should be 12-0 or that our opponents didn't deserve to win, but it's pretty remarkable that we haven't had a single game where we were nor right there down the stretch for a month and a half.

I agree with this analysis