I don't think we are but we are not that far. The amigos were great but I think the team is playing better as a team. We seem to be getting tons more of wide open looks than last year. Last year was a ton of one on one play. This team seems better at breaking the zone than last year's team. We are a better three point shooting team this year than last year. Our rebounding and defense was better last year than this year. I really can't wait to see our team when we start getting elite talent
No. If we could get contributions from EWill and if Junior (and Otule for that matter) can come back and give us positive minutes, it would be close.
Good question. Lazar seems to be a better player and JBut is much better. This makes our front court game 10x better than last year. Junior, DJO and Buycks would be a nice backcourt.
I think I will wait until Cracked Sidewalks and Co. crunch the numbers to make a determination on that one. I think this years' team shoots better, but last years' team got a lot of FTs. And keep in mind, we were on fire when DJ got hurt, so that hurt last years' team a lot.
I'll say this much; if last year's team played this year's team it would be a last possession game.
....with MU losing at the buzzer.
Brilliant!
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 17, 2010, 06:33:27 PM
I think I will wait until Cracked Sidewalks and Co. crunch the numbers to make a determination on that one. I think this years' team shoots better, but last years' team got a lot of FTs. And keep in mind, we were on fire when DJ got hurt, so that hurt last years' team a lot.
WITHOUT A DOUBT, player by player, last year's team is better. But this team is playing better team ball. DJ's injury was terrible because we need the amigos to play almost every minute to win. I would like to see those numbers as well.
Better individual talent last year. Better team this year - more scoring options and better chemistry.
Junior's injury hurt this team also. I would take this team over last year sans DJ.
I would say that last year's team was better, but if last year's team would have played with the effort this team gives, they would have been even better.
This year's team is not better. Last year's team would not be 2-3 right now. (Additionally, I don't think this year's team would have started 9-0). They finished 12-6 last year. It will be extremely tough for this year's team to finish 12-6. The only thing that this year's team does better than last year's is outside shooting. Team defense, rebounding, and leadership was better last year. I see no chemistry change either. It should have been better last year seeing as how four guys played with each other for four years.
Hell No Last year>this year
Time will tell
Without looking up, I am guessing this year's team shoots the three waayyyy better than last year. That seems to be the biggest difference and will keep you in most games.
I am sure last years team had a better record at this point in the season but this team has been more exciting and diverse in how we have won or lost. As someone just said, I think it is still to be determined...
Lazar looks like a leader out there! Ala Boozer at Utah. Did we have a leader last year?
Last year in heart beat.
The Big East isn't close to the Big East of last year so comparing results this year to last year's is a fool's errand.
Last year the Big East arguably was the greatest conference in college basketball history and we did quite well. This year, it's not even close.
There's some nice talent on this year's team but I'll take last years.
By the way, which team does Lazar play for? LOL
We were #8 in the country before DJ went down. I don't think this year's team is top 10 material, as much as I admire the work they are doing.
please peiople every time one of these threads come up it gets even dumber. last year we were a hands down top 10 team we were 20-2 and 9-0 in the big east!!!
Maybe an argument can be made of whther we are better this year than were were in MArch of last year. But no one on this year team could hope to guard one of the three amigos ...maybe Buycks but this talk is silly.
Playing with great heart but less talent than last year. Will EWill be back?
Last Year's Team:
- Veteran
- High scorers but had black hole moments (Jerel, DJ)
- Lazar was third, sometimes fourth wheel
- Butler was subdued
- Little bench production
- Focused but stressed
This Year's Team:
- Inexperienced
- Spread the ball around more; all players on the court expected to score
- One black hole (Zar) instead of 2 or 3
- Lazar is the star
- Butler is the man
- Tiny bench production
- Overachieving yet loose; having fun playing basketball as a team
Last year's team (no DJ) would win by 10-14 pts, but it wouldn't be a blow out.
With a three-point chucking and bricking DJ, it'd come down to the final seconds and FTs. LOL
Quote from: ATWizJr on January 17, 2010, 08:45:28 PM
Will EWill be back?
Why are there so many Tim Maymon clone Marquette fans? I can't understand why so many people think EW should be playing more. He's a true freshman, playing behind better players, and he is not playing particularly well when he gets in. He shows flashes of his potential, of course, but he doesn't deserve more minutes.
Yes, E Will will be back, because he's not a crybaby who thinks everybody should get even minutes like some fans. This ain't Little League people.
Quote from: tower912 on January 17, 2010, 08:29:56 PM
We were #8 in the country before DJ went down. I don't think this year's team is top 10 material, as much as I admire the work they are doing.
+1
Lazar was the 4th option last year. Butler was the 6th option.
This year those guys are 1 and 2 (3 at worst if you include DJO). Love the effort on this year's team, but last year's team before DJ got hurt was a legitimate top 10 team in the country.
Agree that last year's team was better...but this year's team is more fun to watch. I also think that (not just today) this is one of the better shooting teams in MU memory.
Marquette always seems to get it share of bricklayers, but there are some smooth strokes with this bunch. I think the career upside for DJO is off the charts.
Quote from: MUrugger on January 17, 2010, 11:25:28 PM
Agree that last year's team was better...but this year's team is more fun to watch. I also think that (not just today) this is one of the better shooting teams in MU memory.
Marquette always seems to get it share of bricklayers, but there are some smooth strokes with this bunch. I think the career upside for DJO is off the charts.
I think we all have short memories. Last year's team was pretty darn fun to watch when we were beating Wisconsin, beating NC State with a last second shot, starting out 9-0 in the Big East, etc, etc
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 17, 2010, 11:41:30 PM
I think we all have short memories. Last year's team was pretty darn fun to watch when we were beating Wisconsin, beating NC State with a last second shot, starting out 9-0 in the Big East, etc, etc
I agree that some of it may be short memories. THe 9-0 start was fantastic, but in most people's minds tend to remember the post-DJ injury games.
That being said, my enjoyment of watching this team stems partly from the fact that I had fairly low expectations for the team overall. Cheering for the unexpected seems to have a bit more excitement to it in terms of perspective.
Up to this point in the season, last year's team is better, particularly on the defensive end of the floor. Dominic James had a lot to do with it.
I remember at the start of this season being worried that we didn't have any proven outside shooters. I was thinking that Zar and Cubie (if he reverts to his freshman form) could help but didn't have much optimism regarding our perimiter shooting. Well I think it is obvious that this year's team shoots better from outside than last year's team. This allows them to spread the floor more and this helps in so many areas.
The relevant question is, will this team be better at the end of the season than last year's team? I think it could be. Partially because DJ was injured at the end of last season and partially because this team is still maturing and could get even better by the end of conference play. The key will be to get the tourney invite then all bets are off.
Also, the toughest stretch of the season--schedule-wise--were the last few games of the season, so, combining that with the experience of the team last year, it wasn't really that much of a shock to have such a strong first part of the BEast season.
This year, the toughest stretch was at the outset of the conference schedule, and we made it through that fairly well.
I agree with Rugger. We may not be better than last year, but we're a helluva lot more fun to watch. There aren't any players on this team who make me wince when they shoot.
We were better with last year's team, simply because we had three very good seniors. Also the BEast was really loaded last year. It is still very good this year, but not as loaded with great teams as last year.
That being said, the team is playing tough against the stud teams, just not quite good enough to win. The real test will be how we do against the lower echelon BEast teams.
If we get 19 wins and two more quality wins we will make the dance, just not quite as good as last year.
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 17, 2010, 06:33:27 PM
I think I will wait until Cracked Sidewalks and Co. crunch the numbers to make a determination on that one. I think this years' team shoots better, but last years' team got a lot of FTs. And keep in mind, we were on fire when DJ got hurt, so that hurt last years' team a lot.
you rang?
I estimate that last year's team (with DJ) wins about 65% of the time. Most likely view is a four point victory (73-69). However, it's a lot closer than I expected it to be. I really expected it to be a slam dunk.
Basically, last year's team was better at the turnover differential. They protected the ball a little bit better and forced a few more turnovers. They were also better at free throw rate differential, but that really doesn't matter much. This year's team is slightly better at offensive rebounding but that's about it.
The shooting percentages are very, very similar. Offense was 52.7% vs 52.4% and defense was 51.6% vs 51%. The reason the teams are so close is that shooting percentages are a massive chunk of offensive efficiency.
Assumptions
Games against Top 100 (or BE opponents) only
I only included games with DJ in the lineup
Last seasons team started off better but then kinda leveled off due to a tougher schedule near the end and Jame's injury. They also lost to a bad UCF team when everyone was healthy.
I see this years team getting better as the season goes on due to young players getting more experience and an easier end of year schedule. This years team can shoot the 3 better and may be a more balanced team...if McNeil struggled so did Marquette, but if Hayward this year, DJO, Butler can carry the team for a while, plus this team is much more dangerous with the threes. IF this team stays healthy, they may be a better tournament team than last years without James.
McNeal could cover and at least slow down DJO. There is no way DJO could cover McNeal.
D James can cover Acker, Cooby, or Buycks. There is no way any of those guys keep James in front of them.
Wes was unbelviable. Last year's team had a post man who could at least box out.
I love both teams, but last year's team was so much better. Last year's team also played pretty well as a team and blew out good teams like Cincy and WVU. MU also beat Final Four team Villanova to start the Big East season.
In the past two weeks, MU has shot the lights out from three. Hopefully it continues, but MU is going to have an off night and this thread would look a lot different.
Last year's team wins by 10+. Last year's MU team is also better than this year's Nova, WVU, and Wisco team hands down.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 18, 2010, 12:34:42 PM
McNeal could cover and at least slow down DJO. There is no way DJO could cover McNeal.
D James can cover Acker, Cooby, or Buycks. There is no way any of those guys keep James in front of them.
Wes was unbelviable. Last year's team had a post man who could at least box out.
I love both teams, but last year's team was so much better. Last year's team also played pretty well as a team and blew out good teams like Cincy and WVU. MU also beat Final Four team Villanova to start the Big East season.
In the past two weeks, MU has shot the lights out from three. Hopefully it continues, but MU is going to have an off night and this thread would look a lot different.
Last year's team wins by 10+. Last year's MU team is also better than this year's Nova, WVU, and Wisco team hands down.
Calling Wes "unbelievable" is revisionist history. He was a solid, above average college player who's found a great spot in the NBA. He was not an "unbelievable" college player. Also, McNeal was a borderline poor defender at the end of last year. One only need to watch the Big East Tournament loss to Villanova for proof. I'm not saying this year's team is better, but I will say DJO is a better offensive player than any of the three seniors who left and pretty much every player on this year's team is a better shooter than James and/or McNeal. I don't care how many points they both scored, neither one of them were efficient offensive players and McNeal was one of the worst decision makers on the offensive end that Marquette has had in years. Honestly, I can't remember a player in a prominent role being worse in that regard.
More comparing last year's team (with DJ) and this year's team so far. Again, both sets of data are only against Top 100 opponents.
It's a lot closer than I thought it would be. Last year's team is better, but it's not a clear case.
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee41/roblowe14/10vs09Offense.png)
On the offensive numbers, higher is better except for TO%, where a lower % is better.
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee41/roblowe14/10vs09Defense.png)
Just to clarify on the defensive numbers, lower is better except for TO%, because you are allowing less offensive rebounds/free throws/etc. For TO%, higher is better, because you are forcing more turnovers.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 18, 2010, 12:40:33 PM
Calling Wes "unbelievable" is revisionist history. He was a solid, above average college player who's found a great spot in the NBA. He was not an "unbelievable" college player. Also, McNeal was a borderline poor defender at the end of last year. One only need to watch the Big East Tournament loss to Villanova for proof. I'm not saying this year's team is better, but I will say DJO is a better offensive player than any of the three seniors who left and pretty much every player on this year's team is a better shooter than James and/or McNeal. I don't care how many points they both scored, neither one of them were efficient offensive players and McNeal was one of the worst decision makers on the offensive end that Marquette has had in years. Honestly, I can't remember a player in a prominent role being worse in that regard.
Wes averaged 18 pts/game as a second option and while at times being asked to play the four spot. "Unbelievable" is admittedly an ambiguous word and depends largely on point of view I guess, but he was a great player who was hard to stop. Wes would easily be this year's best player.
I agree with you on McNeal and decision making. However, when DJO has the ball I feel the same sense of unease at times. DJO takes some bad shots, and so does Buycks for that matter. DJO is a great shooter and scorer, but neither he nor Buycks is strong enough to cover McNeal or Matthews. If Wes or Jerel wanted to get to the rim they could both you use their speed and strength to overpower either one.
The only advantage that I would give this year's team is at the head coach position. Buzz is more experienced this year and that has to have an effect on the team. If Buzz was seasoned, maybe the team is better prepared to beat Dayton or Tennesse at the beginning of last year.
In the past few weeks, Coobie and Acker have been on fire from three and Fulce even hit one. I hope MU can keep it up, but saying this team is better than last year is a bit premature. I would love to turn out to be wrong, but I just don't think it is the case. We beat PROVIDENCE.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 17, 2010, 11:41:30 PM
I think we all have short memories. Last year's team was pretty darn fun to watch when we were beating Wisconsin, beating NC State with a last second shot, starting out 9-0 in the Big East, etc, etc
I think we have short memories in many respects. Last year's team had four NBA caliber players which in it of itself makes our team pretty damn good. BUT, it was exciting and tough to watch at times. Last year, our strategy seemed to be to create as many one on one possibilities as possible. Whether it was to pointlessly pass the ball around the perimeter or to have McNeal dribble around and throw up a difficult shot (and make it) or try and make every possession a fast break to not allow a team to play team defense.
Without a doubt, last year's defense was better. James and McNeal manufactured steals.
Quote from: ErickJD08 on January 18, 2010, 01:03:26 PM
Without a doubt, last year's defense was better. James and McNeal manufactured steals.
2009 Steal % - 11.3%
2010 Steal % - 12.8%
Granted, we still need to run through the rest of the BE season, but if it's steals you are looking at...
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 01:13:36 PM
2009 Steal % - 11.3%
2010 Steal % - 12.8%
Granted, we still need to run through the rest of the BE season, but if it's steals you are looking at...
But the problem of comparing stats from one year to the next is the assumption that the competition is the same. Even when this season is over, this year's Big East is not close to last year's Big East. It's a good tool and barometer, but the quality of the teams is much different. We're talking about 8 NCAA teams (7 seeded in the upper half), 2 Final Four teams, a bunch of Elite 8 teams. I don't think this year's Big East is close, and as a result the stats are going to be different because of the quality of competition.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 01:13:36 PM
2009 Steal % - 11.3%
2010 Steal % - 12.8%
Granted, we still need to run through the rest of the BE season, but if it's steals you are looking at...
4 of our 5 BE games - WV, GT, VU, VU - not bad
PRN, saying DJO would be the best offensive player on last years team is recockulous.
Are you people serious? Is this thread about last year after DJ went down?
Let me make this easy for you all. Last year the Big east was better. With DJ we went 12 and 2. Right now we are 2 and 3. How many people today think we will finish with more than 12 conference wins?
No broken foot and we win 2 out of our last 4, finish with 14 wins, win a few games in march and this moronic conversation never happens.
Quote from: RawdogDX on January 18, 2010, 01:40:18 PM
PRN, saying DJO would be the best offensive player on last years team is recockulous.
He has more offensive ability than all three of the last year's seniors. He is a better shooter (by a lot) than all three and is a better ball handler than both McNeal and Matthews and their equal as a passer. And he's only played 5 Big East games. He's only getting better.
It's just my opinion, but our just graduated class, while hard working and upstanding citizens, is the most overrated group we've ever had at MU. Johnson-Odom is more talented than any of them. Again...just my opinion.
Let me put it this way.
Do you think last year's team would be undefeated at this point?
I do.
Conversation over.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on January 18, 2010, 01:45:52 PM
Let me put it this way.
Do you think last year's team would be undefeated at this point?
I do.
Conversation over.
What you're saying is that we'd be the #1 or #2 team in the country. That's just a joke. We were not that good.
I don't even thing this year's team is better. But it's not that far off.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2010, 01:19:58 PM
But the problem of comparing stats from one year to the next is the assumption that the competition is the same. Even when this season is over, this year's Big East is not close to last year's Big East. It's a good tool and barometer, but the quality of the teams is much different. We're talking about 8 NCAA teams (7 seeded in the upper half), 2 Final Four teams, a bunch of Elite 8 teams. I don't think this year's Big East is close, and as a result the stats are going to be different because of the quality of competition.
Just to address the BE for last year vs this year.
So far, the average pomeroy strength of the BE is better this year (0.827) than last year (0.809). The difference is that the playing field is more level. The top teams this year (0.934) are not as strong as last year (0.948), but the bottom teams this year (0.719) are better than last year (0.669).
You have to play every team in the BE. Not just the best teams.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 18, 2010, 01:54:08 PM
What you're saying is that we'd be the #1 or #2 team in the country. That's just a joke. We were not that good.
I don't even thing this year's team is better. But it's not that far off.
Agreed. Don't forget that last year's team got spanked by Dayton and Tennessee, and got the doors blown off at Villanova.
Last year's team was better. But so far, they weren't a slam dunk better team than this year. That should be a good thing, right?
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 01:56:54 PM
That should be a good thing, right?
Thank you! Why are people so defensive about last year? We didn't do much and were not nearly as fun to watch as this year's team. I damn well think it's a good thing!
Quote from: RawdogDX on January 18, 2010, 01:40:18 PM
PRN, saying DJO would be the best offensive player on last years team is recockulous.
Not sure as a freshman DJO would have been the best offensive player on last year's team. As for who DJO is this year, I agree with PRN, that DJO is as good offensively as Matthews or McNeal was last year. DJO in my opinion is/will be the best player at MU since D-Wade. I could see him potentially being a candidate for going to the NBA draft early...after his junior season. Also, DJO right now is absolutely strong enough to have been able to stop McNeal, maybe Matthews from going to the rack.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 18, 2010, 02:01:57 PM
Thank you! Why are people so defensive about last year? We didn't do much and were not nearly as fun to watch as this year's team. I damn well think it's a good thing!
I don't know about that. During the first half of conference play last year MU was a helluva lot of fun to watch. They had an extra gear they'd find and just pull away.
Does anyone here think we will win over 12 games in conference? Anyone? Any takers? ...
No. And why? Because we aren't as good. And that's without one of our key players for the last 4 games. We would have won a bare minimum of 1 of those.
PNR, if you want to say he has more 'ability' that is a completely different argument than 'he is better.' He has put up about 13 a game through 5 conference games, not comparable to our all time points leader.
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 18, 2010, 02:07:34 PM
I don't know about that. During the first half of conference play last year MU was a helluva lot of fun to watch. They had an extra gear they'd find and just pull away.
I remember dozens of "thank god for buzz, this is the most fun MU team to watch in decades." posts last year. Further more there were a ton of who was better, 09 or 03 discussions. I suppose that will be the next thread, is this year as good as 03?
People have no memory what so ever. I feel like I'm talking to a bunch of stoners.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 01:54:32 PM
Just to address the BE for last year vs this year.
So far, the average pomeroy strength of the BE is better this year (0.827) than last year (0.809). The difference is that the playing field is more level. The top teams this year (0.934) are not as strong as last year (0.948), but the bottom teams this year (0.719) are better than last year (0.669).
You have to play every team in the BE. Not just the best teams.
Yes, but the population pool is comparing this year's Big East to this year's Big East. In other words, Pomeroy or any other rating can't compare one year to the next year because they are different. They can claim to, but not in reality. This year's MU UCONN is different than last year's UCONN....different players, etc.
I agree that you have to play each team and that is all rolled up in an evaluation, but there is no way to accurately portray last year vs this year in a true fashion.
On the question where we would be this year....last year's MU team would be 4-1 or 5-0 right now this year and likely 1 overall loss (probably at Wisconsin). IMO
Last year we won 12 games against the greatest Big East ever. This year we might win 9, 10 or 11 in a much different Big East. No way in hell last year's team loses to NC State at home or loses an 18 point lead on a neutral court to Florida State.
DJO is a wonderful talent....really impressed with him. But if put him on last year's team, he doesn't get nearly as many touches and is not the focal point of the offense like he is this year. There's a reason why Hayward was the 4th option last year and Butler the 6th....too many talented guys in front of them. DJO would have the same problem, not enough balls to go around, not enough minutes. As a result, he would not be the most talented offensive player because his role would be limited.
Quote from: Ners on January 18, 2010, 02:02:46 PM
Not sure as a freshman DJO would have been the best offensive player on last year's team. As for who DJO is this year, I agree with PRN, that DJO is as good offensively as Matthews or McNeal was last year. DJO in my opinion is/will be the best player at MU since D-Wade. I could see him potentially being a candidate for going to the NBA draft early...after his junior season. Also, DJO right now is absolutely strong enough to have been able to stop McNeal, maybe Matthews from going to the rack.
DJO has scored points in a few games this year and looks good. Dameon Mason had a string of impressive games as a freshman too where he looked like a pretty good scorer. Let's not put the third leading scorer on a bottom half Big East team ahead of two top ten all time scorers just yet.
DJO has hit some threes and has made some nice moves to the hoop. He is a finesse player and is highly-skilled. McNeal and Matthews also had a lot of skill, but also had pretty big shoulders and could finish inside when they got into the lane. DJO penetrates and kind of floats it up there. DJO skilled shooter and finesse penetrator like McGrady and Matthews and McNeal were skilled-power guards like Jordan. (And yes, McGrady and Jordan are a universe better than these guys, but just trying to comment on style.) Both are obviously very effective, but skilled power guards are tougher to stop in my opinion.
I don't know what your basis is for thinking that DJO has the footspeed defensively to keep players like Matthews and McNeal out of the lane. And then even if he could keep up with them, he does not have the athleticism to jump as high as they could in the lane or the strength to make their shots tougher. Marquette's defense at the guard has not been all that strong this year at all. The three amigos would have had a field day against this year's team.
McNeal threw up a lot of crap, but so does DJO. I look forward to seeing him improve, but we cannot crown DJO based on beating Providence at home.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 18, 2010, 02:30:15 PM
I don't know what your basis is for thinking that DJO has the footspeed defensively to keep players like Matthews and McNeal out of the lane. And then even if he could keep up with them, he does not have the athleticism to jump as high as they could in the lane or the strength to make their shots tougher.
Um....I think you must have missed Buzz's quote that DJO is the most athletic player on the team, and the early gym reports about DJO from Rosiak. Remember, DJO was in a boot for the early part of the "practice" year...
QuoteIn the seventh game, DJO knocked down a pair of shots -- a three from the right wing and an alley-oop layin -- and also showed some a mean handle on one play where he got into the lane, spun and fired a pretty no-look pass to Otule, who was caught by surprise but grabbed it and was fouled.
I don't have a real sense on how he is defensively yet, but he's clearly got the athletic ability and quickness to be a pain on that end. He's also a very impressive leaper -- he measured in with a 33-inch vertical, best among the newcomers so far -- and threw down an array of windmills and other power dunks with ease after the games were done.
He's clearly got the skills to play the point, but should be a real handful at the 2 when put in positions to take advantage of his strengths. He'll play major minutes from the outset.
DJO also was the best tester of the newcomers; aside from his vertical he also posted a 3.11 25-yard dash and put up 185 pounds 12 times on the bench press. He also weighed in at 196.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 18, 2010, 02:30:15 PM
DJO has scored points in a few games this year and looks good. Dameon Mason had a string of impressive games as a freshman too where he looked like a pretty good scorer. Let's not put the third leading scorer on a bottom half Big East team ahead of two top ten all time scorers just yet.
DJO has hit some threes and has made some nice moves to the hoop. He is a finesse player and is highly-skilled. McNeal and Matthews also had a lot of skill, but also had pretty big shoulders and could finish inside when they got into the lane. DJO penetrates and kind of floats it up there. DJO skilled shooter and finesse penetrator like McGrady and Matthews and McNeal were skilled-power guards like Jordan. (And yes, McGrady and Jordan are a universe better than these guys, but just trying to comment on style.) Both are obviously very effective, but skilled power guards are tougher to stop in my opinion.
I don't know what your basis is for thinking that DJO has the footspeed defensively to keep players like Matthews and McNeal out of the lane. And then even if he could keep up with them, he does not have the athleticism to jump as high as they could in the lane or the strength to make their shots tougher. Marquette's defense at the guard has not been all that strong this year at all. The three amigos would have had a field day against this year's team.
McNeal threw up a lot of crap, but so does DJO. I look forward to seeing him improve, but we cannot crown DJO based on beating Providence at home.
I agree with most of this until you started saying that DJO couldn't jump. Youtube him and you will see you are wrong there.
And again, I agree with Chicos. Okay, I was going for an extreme viewpoint when I said we'd be undefeated at this point... but really, I don't think that that comment was a stretch. I just think a lot of people see the POTENTIAL of this team rather than the REALITY of this team. It is a lot of fun to watch... especially knowing that we have some of these guys for the next 2-3 years rather than just the one last year with the amigos.
I think that anyone who puts this team up there with last years team is looking at an incomplete picture.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on January 18, 2010, 02:37:25 PM
Um....I think you must have missed Buzz's quote that DJO is the most athletic player on the team, and the early gym reports about DJO from Rosiak. Remember, DJO was in a boot for the early part of the "practice" year...
DJO is good. It is not a matter of him crossing a threshold of being an athlete, being skilled, being a good basketball player, etc. He clearly is. Being the most athletic player on Marquette is really saying something in the last couple years so he is someone to be excited about. The threshold question is whether he is better than Matthews or McNeal, which I don't see how you can say that. Those guys were great athletes too and obviously skilled enough to score a lot of points. They scored on just as good of athletes as DJO.
I also did not say or mean that DJO cannot jump, though I can see how it was inferred. I don't see him covering a Matthews or a McNeal and having the ability to elevate with them and alter their shots. Those guys can jump too.
I don't really see him as a defensive stopper against someone like a McNeal or Matthews though. Who has he really guarded and slowed stopped? Being able to guard McNeal or Matthews is no joke. It does not make you a bad player or defender if you can't. It is just saying a lot in my opinion.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2010, 02:22:13 PM
Yes, but the population pool is comparing this year's Big East to this year's Big East. In other words, Pomeroy or any other rating can't compare one year to the next year because they are different. They can claim to, but not in reality. This year's MU UCONN is different than last year's UCONN....different players, etc.
I agree that you have to play each team and that is all rolled up in an evaluation, but there is no way to accurately portray last year vs this year in a true fashion.
I've provided all manners of comparison between last year's team and this year's team. It can be done. Points per possession and points allowed per possession are objective. Reducing the data pool to Top 100 opponents helps normalize the data. Expanding the data set to include more than just conference opponents provides additional information.
I started with a preconceived notion regarding both the quality of last year's team and the quality of the BE. I thought that hands-down the team last year was better and that the BE was a stronger conference. But then I looked at the data, and it told a different story. And the different story has two parts:
- Last year's team was better, but not significantly better against Top 100 opponents. Not just conference opponents.
- The top teams in the BE were better last year, but the overall strength of the BE is better this year
What you are doing is saying, "the data does not meet my preconceived notion of the truth, so I am attacking the data".
(Maybe at the end of the BE season, the data will be different. They still have to play @Cuse, Pitt, UL, etc. After all, we're only five games in.)
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 18, 2010, 02:30:15 PM
DJO has scored points in a few games this year and looks good. Dameon Mason had a string of impressive games as a freshman too where he looked like a pretty good scorer. Let's not put the third leading scorer on a bottom half Big East team ahead of two top ten all time scorers just yet.
DJO has hit some threes and has made some nice moves to the hoop. He is a finesse player and is highly-skilled. McNeal and Matthews also had a lot of skill, but also had pretty big shoulders and could finish inside when they got into the lane. DJO penetrates and kind of floats it up there. DJO skilled shooter and finesse penetrator like McGrady and Matthews and McNeal were skilled-power guards like Jordan. (And yes, McGrady and Jordan are a universe better than these guys, but just trying to comment on style.) Both are obviously very effective, but skilled power guards are tougher to stop in my opinion.
I don't know what your basis is for thinking that DJO has the footspeed defensively to keep players like Matthews and McNeal out of the lane. And then even if he could keep up with them, he does not have the athleticism to jump as high as they could in the lane or the strength to make their shots tougher. Marquette's defense at the guard has not been all that strong this year at all. The three amigos would have had a field day against this year's team.
I agree with some of your points, but I stand by my statement that DJO is or will be the best player at MU since DWade. In that regard, I guess I am crowning him or putting him ahead of two all-time Top 10 scorers in McNeal/Matthews. If you were to just make an apples to apples comparison and compare where DJO is as a sophomore to where McNeal and Matthews were as sophomores - I think it is quite evident DJO is far more advanced. DJO is a better passer and playmaker already, than were McNeal and Matthews at any point in their MU career. Wes and Rel were good at creating their own, but not very great at creating for others. This is why I see DJO as being the best player at MU since Wade - both have great court awareness/feel/playmaking ability.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 18, 2010, 02:30:15 PM
DJO has scored points in a few games this year and looks good. Dameon Mason had a string of impressive games as a freshman too where he looked like a pretty good scorer. Let's not put the third leading scorer on a bottom half Big East team ahead of two top ten all time scorers just yet.
Anybody could tell Mason was not a big time talent after watching him play a few times. The fact that nobody laments his transfer, as many do Blankson, Mbakwe, Maymon, et. al, speaks volumes. I know you're not comparing the two, but DJO is one of the most talented offensive players Marquette has had in many years. What's even more impressive to me, is that it's clear to me that he's not a "me first" player. He's playing within the system. Look at yesterday. 20 points at half and barely shot the ball in the send half. He's a team player and I believe, were he a more focal point of the offense, he's capable of a string of 20 points games and consistent shooting.
I'm not much for hyperbole, but I agree with whoever said they could see him playing in the NBA. I think he's that good. I never thought that about James or McNeal. If memory serves, I was on record early as thinking Matthews had the most NBA ready physique, but I never imagined he'd have the success he's having.
Quote from: Ners on January 18, 2010, 03:13:23 PM
I agree with some of your points, but I stand by my statement that DJO is or will be the best player at MU since DWade. In that regard, I guess I am crowning him or putting him ahead of two all-time Top 10 scorers in McNeal/Matthews. If you were to just make an apples to apples comparison and compare where DJO is as a sophomore to where McNeal and Matthews were as sophomores - I think it is quite evident DJO is far more advanced. DJO is a better passer and playmaker already, than were McNeal and Matthews at any point in their MU career. Wes and Rel were good at creating their own, but not very great at creating for others. This is why I see DJO as being the best player at MU since Wade - both have great court awareness/feel/playmaking ability.
I hope you are right and it is pretty reasonable that DJO could be the best scoring guard since Wade, which means he is better than Matthews, McNeal, James, Diener, Mason, etc. He does have the tools to make a big impact and hopefully he will.
If he turns out to be just below the amigos in output, I will not be mad at all because that is a very high standard. He has a ton of upside and there is no real skill he is lacking. Could be scary for other teams when he really figures out how good he is and if he can put a little more muscle on his shoulders and chest to finish at the rim and defend scoring guards.
I think DJO's abilities (and to be honest we are not giving Buycks fair credit with his ability to create his own mid-range jump shot with the shotclock winding down. Not everyone can do that either) will help with next year's recruits. Blue looks like he can play and Smith sounds like he was another relatively underrated guard (like DJO and Buycks), so having DJO and Buycks who can play will take a lot of pressure off of the freshman next year. If Blue has a game with 5 turnovers, that may not be the headline because the game will not be all on him if DJO keeps blossoming into this kind of scorer.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 03:05:17 PM
I've provided all manners of comparison between last year's team and this year's team. It can be done. Points per possession and points allowed per possession are objective. Reducing the data pool to Top 100 opponents helps normalize the data. Expanding the data set to include more than just conference opponents provides additional information.
I started with a preconceived notion regarding both the quality of last year's team and the quality of the BE. I thought that hands-down the team last year was better and that the BE was a stronger conference. But then I looked at the data, and it told a different story. And the different story has two parts:
- Last year's team was better, but not significantly better against Top 100 opponents. Not just conference opponents.
- The top teams in the BE were better last year, but the overall strength of the BE is better this year
What you are doing is saying, "the data does not meet my preconceived notion of the truth, so I am attacking the data".
(Maybe at the end of the BE season, the data will be different. They still have to play @Cuse, Pitt, UL, etc. After all, we're only five games in.)
I just don't seem how they can be compared when the teams are different. It would be like saying the Vikings last year are the Vikings this year. They aren't, teams change, players leave, etc. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love your data but I don't think anyone can account for one year to the next to compare teams when the personnel changes so much. The data doesn't factor that in.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2010, 02:22:13 PM
Yes, but the population pool is comparing this year's Big East to this year's Big East. In other words, Pomeroy or any other rating can't compare one year to the next year because they are different. They can claim to, but not in reality. This year's MU UCONN is different than last year's UCONN....different players, etc.
I agree that you have to play each team and that is all rolled up in an evaluation, but there is no way to accurately portray last year vs this year in a true fashion.
On the question where we would be this year....last year's MU team would be 4-1 or 5-0 right now this year and likely 1 overall loss (probably at Wisconsin). IMO
Last year we won 12 games against the greatest Big East ever. This year we might win 9, 10 or 11 in a much different Big East. No way in hell last year's team loses to NC State at home or loses an 18 point lead on a neutral court to Florida State.
DJO is a wonderful talent....really impressed with him. But if put him on last year's team, he doesn't get nearly as many touches and is not the focal point of the offense like he is this year. There's a reason why Hayward was the 4th option last year and Butler the 6th....too many talented guys in front of them. DJO would have the same problem, not enough balls to go around, not enough minutes. As a result, he would not be the most talented offensive player because his role would be limited.
I agree that last years team was better. Also agree with Rocky that 4 or 5 points on a neutral court sound about right. Question: Do you think Hayward or James was really our 3rd offensive option last year and if Butler was #6 who was #5?
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 18, 2010, 02:52:39 PM
I don't really see him as a defensive stopper against someone like a McNeal or Matthews though.
I'm not really disagreeing with your assessment that at this point, DJO is not playing good enough defense. However, I do disagree that he's not athletic enough to match up with those guys. I think the athleticism is on par (if not better) than those guys, but he would get burnt by them because he doesn't play fundamentally good defense....yet.
Of course, you could also argue that both of those guys might get burnt by DJO when he's on the offensive end. Good offensive players are hard to stop...period.
These are all really good points. At the end of the day, the team shows Buzz's coaching abilities. The two teams are play completely different styles. Buzz was given players last year that can pretty much win every one on one match up so he executed a scheme to help that team succeed. Now, he has a team that with players like DJO, Acker, and Buycks and he has set something up to allow those players to flourish in less than a year. That gives me more confidence in Buzz and this program. I agree with (what seems to be) the consensus. We were better last year but we are not that much worse and that's pretty damn amazing considering we lost three of MU's top ten all-time players in one season.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 18, 2010, 04:02:46 PM
I agree that last years team was better. Also agree with Rocky that 4 or 5 points on a neutral court sound about right. Question: Do you think Hayward or James was really our 3rd offensive option last year and if Butler was #6 who was #5?
Yes, I really do think Hayward was behind James last year. When the game was on the line, we weren't going to Hayward to make something happen, we were going to one of the big 3 every time.
Butler....yeah, move him up to 5th if you wish...let's just say at that point we aren't drawing up any plays. Our 5th player between Acker, Butler, Burke, Cube, et al were significantly down the list in minutes played, points, etc.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2010, 04:13:54 PM
Yes, I really do think Hayward was behind James last year. When the game was on the line, we weren't going to Hayward to make something happen, we were going to one of the big 3 every time.
Butler....yeah, move him up to 5th if you wish...let's just say at that point we aren't drawing up any plays. Our 5th player between Acker, Butler, Burke, Cube, et al were significantly down the list in minutes played, points, etc.
We'll "agree to disagree" on James vs Hayward. But no way Acker, Burke or Cooby was anywhere close to Butler as an option last year.
I'll take this Sophomore season from DJO over the 2nd years of any of the three Amigos. McNeal was a bricklayer who forced shots, DJ was a me-first point guard who also couldn't shoot and Wes was injured and trying to find his place.
I think the "more fun to watch" comment I will stick to is based on a couple of things. (And I'll cop to saying the same thing last year.) The team shows more of their coach's coaching and philosophy. You can almost see plays being run and executed according to plan. I think that Buzz' coaching imprint is obvious and that he has the team buying in more so than The Three Amigos who were far more schooled in TC's multiple sets. Often though, as the shot clock was winding down the Amigos reverted to their own talents and abilities to make a play, which forced a lot more shots than I see from this team. That's why our shooting % is higher. Obviously, RJax or somebody like him in the middle would have helped both teams.
Another reason behind my own viewing enjoyment is that I just like Buzz' Xs & Os better than the other guy. The promise of better times ahead for this team, that I am not afraid to say has exceeded my own expectations, makes them that much more fun to watch for me.
Quote from: RawdogDX on January 18, 2010, 02:16:56 PM
I remember dozens of "thank god for buzz, this is the most fun MU team to watch in decades." posts last year. Further more there were a ton of who was better, 09 or 03 discussions. I suppose that will be the next thread, is this year as good as 03?
People have no memory what so ever. I feel like I'm talking to a bunch of stoners.
I was among those who thought last year's team was the most fun MU team to watch in decades. Still do. Love watching this year's warriors but they've got a ways to go to reach last year's group.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 18, 2010, 03:44:40 PM
I just don't seem how they can be compared when the teams are different. It would be like saying the Vikings last year are the Vikings this year. They aren't, teams change, players leave, etc. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love your data but I don't think anyone can account for one year to the next to compare teams when the personnel changes so much. The data doesn't factor that in.
Does this mean you're unwilling to state that this year's Vikings are better than last year's Vikings?
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 03:05:17 PM
I've provided all manners of comparison between last year's team and this year's team. It can be done. Points per possession and points allowed per possession are objective. Reducing the data pool to Top 100 opponents helps normalize the data. Expanding the data set to include more than just conference opponents provides additional information.
I started with a preconceived notion regarding both the quality of last year's team and the quality of the BE. I thought that hands-down the team last year was better and that the BE was a stronger conference. But then I looked at the data, and it told a different story. And the different story has two parts:
- Last year's team was better, but not significantly better against Top 100 opponents. Not just conference opponents.
- The top teams in the BE were better last year, but the overall strength of the BE is better this year
What you are doing is saying, "the data does not meet my preconceived notion of the truth, so I am attacking the data".
(Maybe at the end of the BE season, the data will be different. They still have to play @Cuse, Pitt, UL, etc. After all, we're only five games in.)
Sugar, are these numbers for last year in it's entirity? Were we significantly better pre 2/25?
Quote from: RawdogDX on January 18, 2010, 10:26:00 PM
Sugar, are these numbers for last year in it's entirity? Were we significantly better pre 2/25?
Not Sugar, but from his earlier post...
Quote from: Henry Sugar on January 18, 2010, 12:49:56 PM
More comparing last year's team (with DJ) and this year's team so far. Again, both sets of data are only against Top 100 opponents.
What rocky said
The comparison gets even tighter if you toss in those final eight games where there was no James, mostly on the defensive end. Remember that I started out trying to prove that the team with DJ was a lot better.
Honestly, I expect this year's team to have the numbers adjust once we add more top 100 opponents. But still... the comparison right now is a lot closer than I originally thought it would be.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 18, 2010, 04:29:19 PM
We'll "agree to disagree" on James vs Hayward. But no way Acker, Burke or Cooby was anywhere close to Butler as an option last year.
My point being that neither was Butler....it's all a wash. You're not going to go to your 5th option when you have 3 Seniors and a Junior ahead of them. It's a moot point.
Quote from: IAmMarquette on January 18, 2010, 05:51:11 PM
Does this mean you're unwilling to state that this year's Vikings are better than last year's Vikings?
I'm more than willing to say this year's Vikings team is better than last year's Vikings team. A few key personnel changes at key positions, more wins against playoff teams, etc.
My biggest gripe is that last year's Big East was not your normal Big East and comparing any Big East team (us, Syracuse, etc) to what any Big East team had to go through last year, is going to be very difficult to do. The conference is that different from last year to this year. In most years, I'd be wiling to say the conference is in the ballpark of being relatively equal, but last year was a very special year for the conference.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 19, 2010, 11:34:18 AM
My biggest gripe is that last year's Big East was not your normal Big East and comparing any Big East team (us, Syracuse, etc) to what any Big East team had to go through last year, is going to be very difficult to do. The conference is that different from last year to this year. In most years, I'd be wiling to say the conference is in the ballpark of being relatively equal, but last year was a very special year for the conference.
Last year's Big East was pretty insane. There was no Carmelo Anthony in it, but there were still reasons to objectively say it was pretty good.
First of all, lottery picks like Thabeet and Flynn were difference makers.
The number one recruit in the country in Greg Monroe.
There were some quality players who could score inside on almost anyone in Harangody and Blair.
Then, what made it even crazier were the amount of upper classmen who have pro talent and had been starting for multiple years- Matthews, McNeal, James, Hayward, Terrence Williams, Earl Clark, Jeff Adrian, Dajuan Summers, Scottie Reynolds, Lavance Fields, Dante Cunningham, Sam Young, etc., etc., etc.
Good experienced college basketball players all at once, all in the same conference. It is not the same as last year by any means.
We are not better than last year, but the "drop" that everyone anticipated after the amigos left has not been nearly as bad as expected. We are right in every game and most certainly competing on a high level.
Can't wait for Vander to join this squad next year!!! I'm also really interested in getting Cadougan back and seeing how he fits in as well.
We're also forgetting that last year's squad and this year's engage in somewhat different styles of play too.
Last year's team played at a somewhat faster pace, gambled on defense more, relied heavily on dribble penetration to get to the free throw line, and was streaky from the perimeter.
This year's team tends to grind it out more, plays back more defensively, relies on dead-eye perimeter shooting, but shies away from dribble penetration.
What has driven last year's team and this year's team moreso than anything were tremendous offensive efficiency, limiting turnovers, and solid offensive rebounding. Exceuting those three characteristics well will make any team wtih solid talent a good team. Fortunately, we've had tremendous improvement from Jimmy and Mo, a healthy Cooby, and a strong first-year campaigns from DJO and Buycks so far, which has helped limit the drop off from last year.
I still give last year's team a definite edge, especially with a healthy Dominic James. However, all and all, considering the injury issues we've battled all year, and with the lack of a post presence once again, I'm extremely surprised by this team so far, and I think we'll definitely be fighting for an NCAA bid come February/March.
I think that how well we are performing this year after the amigos have left can also be attributed to Buzz's willingness to bring JUCO transfers who have experience playing at the college level. Granted not at the BEAST level of play, but simply playing in college helps gain you experience that can be really valuable... DJO, Buycks, Butler...
Quote from: GoldenWarrior on January 19, 2010, 02:15:50 PM
I think that how well we are performing this year after the amigos have left can also be attributed to Buzz's willingness to bring JUCO transfers who have experience playing at the college level. Granted not at the BEAST level of play, but simply playing in college helps gain you experience that can be really valuable... DJO, Buycks, Butler...
[/quote
competition is better but don't forget about another year of hitting the weights, putting on manscle and adjusting to a college schedule and travel.