Giving up 8 of the last 9 points, let them take a 3 pointer (twice) to tie. Hayward just fouled out in OT.
Thank you Captain Obvious.
Gamei is not on here. Focus?
We have ha situations where you let it go, but as Doug Gottlieb just said in a whiny voice: "Up three. fooooowwwwwwwwoooolll!"
Well not everyone is able to watch it. Why in the hell do we let teams take 3 pointers to tie at the end of games and not foul them before they get the chance. I just don't get it, never have. I know there are two schools of thought, but I remain on Boeheim's side on this one. Frustrating. I hate Notre Dame. We had this one. >:(
Quote from: chapman on March 06, 2010, 03:08:10 PM
We have ha situations where you let it go, but as Doug Gottlieb just said in a whiny voice: "Up three. fooooowwwwwwwwoooolll!"
Yup. We dodged a couple of bullets in the last 2 weeks letting them take 3's to tie, but it finally bit us today.
Got to foul...I was screaming at the TV for them to foul at the end...
Overall...very flat today minus two or three sparks... definitely did not play with the same edge and urgency as they have over the past few weeks...
If I have to listen to Dickey Simpkins talk about the luck of the Irish or the "epidemic that is Abromaitis" one more time, I am going to hire someone to kick his ass...
Notre Dame did it right. Up 3, they don't even let us take it to tie it. I hate Notre Dame
I guess I don't understand why we didn't foul up 3....
Soft bubble.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 06, 2010, 03:10:05 PM
Yup. We dodged a couple of bullets in the last 2 weeks letting them take 3's to tie, but it finally bit us today.
It's that they missed the shot that bothers me even more. If that thing hits the rim, jump on someone's back, tackle them, anything to get a foul called in lieu of that. Again we give the other team their most open three of the game at the least opportune time. Glad it's over now, what a BORING game. ND is UW after popping a few Zoloft.
Quote from: mwbauer7 on March 06, 2010, 03:23:22 PM
I guess I don't understand why we didn't foul up 3....
Absolutely.
on this day, they were a better coached team. i hope buzz apologizes to lazar.
Sounds like we frigged it up at the end. Tough way to learn ( I hope) the lesson about when to foul and preseve your lead and a tough way for senior day to end.
We were up 7 with one minute left...
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 06, 2010, 03:25:12 PM
on this day, they were a better coached team. i hope buzz apologizes to lazar.
Or Zar could've hit his FT, made the shot on the last posession, got the rebound of the missed 3, not knocked the rebound to Hansbrough, or had a silly foul to take a seat.
As soon as Zar missed the second free throw that would have put them up 7, I said that's a big miss.
And you're right Chicos. Should have fouled before the 3 that tied it.
chalk this up as another epic collapse for MU. We thought the luck was turning after the win streak. But we return true form blowing a 7 pt lead with a minute to go. Lazar misses a FT on senior night and they punish us by hitting a 3 at the buzzer. So very sad. Because Lazar has suffered so many painful, painful losses. This should have been won. Hopefully we got it out of our system, can win a few in the BET, and are ready to go for the NCAAs. ND will now get a higher seed than us. I f$#(# hate losing to ND. Absolutely despise it. Especially a blown game like this one. Just absolutely terrible. On senior night, we can't buy a bucket and give up a ton of offensive rebounds and second chance points.
And what's up with all the threes down the stretch when he haven't been hitting them all day and we don't NEED them at that time?
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 06, 2010, 03:25:12 PM
on this day, they were a better coached team. i hope buzz apologizes to lazar.
Obviously you have an issue with Buzz as virtually everyone of your posts is at best luke warm on Buzz. As has been said, Zar missed the free throw in regulation that would have made this game in regulation an insourmountable margin. crap happens. We've been on the right side of a lot of luck lately, winning the close ones..but..how ironic that we lose a game in this fashion to end the regular season.
Take away the bogus Jim Burr getting in the way of a ball that was 100% being thrown out of bounds by ND, and the ball deflecting off his foot to ND..which turned into a 4 point possession - technical and free throws on that possesion...and we win the game. Period. Bad breaks today.
Cold...cold...cold...
That was MU today.
Nothing was dropping. 4-23 from beyond the friendly confines of the 3.
Mo and David were not in the flow of the game: Combined 3-14 with some CRAZY jacks.
Zar held his own but he was cold from the 3.
Attempted 14 FTs, hit 12. They had 25 attempts.
Outrebounded...but when it counts.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 03:35:36 PM
Obviously you have an issue with Buzz as virtually everyone of your posts is at best luke warm on Buzz. As has been said, Zar missed the free throw in regulation that would have made this game in regulation an insourmountable margin. crap happens. We've been on the right side of a lot of luck lately, winning the close ones..but..how ironic that we lose a game in this fashion to end the regular season.
Take away the bogus Jim Burr getting in the way of a ball that was 100% being thrown out of bounds by ND, and the ball deflecting off his foot to ND..which turned into a 4 point possession - technical and free throws on that possesion...and we win the game. Period. Bad breaks today.
Yeah, Nerd, it was bad breaks...
--the bad break of not fouling ND before letting them get off a couple 3 pt attempts
--the bad break of not having DJO try to miss that second FT'
--the bad break of the brilliantly drawn up half court heave from Cubillan
But it was the dreaded Jim Burr who cost MU the game!
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 03:35:36 PM
Obviously you have an issue with Buzz as virtually everyone of your posts is at best luke warm on Buzz. As has been said, Zar missed the free throw in regulation that would have made this game in regulation an insourmountable margin. crap happens. We've been on the right side of a lot of luck lately, winning the close ones..but..how ironic that we lose a game in this fashion to end the regular season.
Take away the bogus Jim Burr getting in the way of a ball that was 100% being thrown out of bounds by ND, and the ball deflecting off his foot to ND..which turned into a 4 point possession - technical and free throws on that possesion...and we win the game. Period. Bad breaks today.
That was a bad turn of events, but we had a ton of time after that to win the game-- and we put ourselves in the position to win it.
Just poor execution and coaching in the last minutes of the game and throughout OT. They had two guys with 4 fouls who managed to the play the entire OT. We didn't force them to play-- too many poor jumpers.
Let's not lose sight of the accomplishments of the conference season. Had anyone offered 11-7 in October we all would have taken it and laughed at the idea as impossible.
Today's frustrating-- especially since it's ND-- but we move on. This team has shown a pretty good ability to build off mistakes.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on March 06, 2010, 03:38:06 PM
Cold...cold...cold...
That was MU today.
Nothing was dropping. 4-23 from beyond the friendly confines of the 3.
Mo and David were not in the flow of the game: Combined 3-14 with some CRAZY jacks.
Zar held his own but he was cold from the 3.
Attempted 14 FTs, hit 12. They had 25 attempts.
Outrebounded...but when it counts.
Both teams shot really poorly. Ugly, ugly game. MU was under 18% from 3 point land. We actually held ND to under 40% shooting for the game and lost. Had less than 10 turnovers again. A real head scratcher that we lost
Frustrating to say the least. ARGGGGGHHHHH. I hate losing to Notre Dame. With UCONN's loss, I'd say ND has a legit shot to get into the tournament.
Quote from: gumbyandpokey on March 06, 2010, 03:41:29 PM
Yeah, Nerd, it was bad breaks...
--the bad break of not fouling ND before letting them get off a couple 3 pt attempts
--the bad break of not having DJO try to miss that second FT'
--the bad break of the brilliantly drawn up half court heave from Cubillan
But it was the dreaded Jim Burr who cost MU the game!
Notice the focus of your complaint is at the END of the game.
What about the other 44+ minutes?
If you play the whole game to lose in the last seconds, you deserve to lose.
Quote from: mwbauer7 on March 06, 2010, 03:23:22 PM
I guess I don't understand why we didn't foul up 3....
You can make a case for fouling sooner..but most coaches will only do that when the game is under 7 or 5 seconds. When ND started that last possesion in regulation, there were 16 seconds left. Given some of our late game Free Throw shooting adventures..not sure the wise thing to do is turn the game into a free throw shooting contest. The difference when ND did it to us was we got the ball inbounded with 6 seconds left in the game.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 06, 2010, 03:42:18 PM
Both teams shot really poorly. Ugly, ugly game. MU was under 18% from 3 point land. We actually held ND to under 40% shooting for the game and lost. Had less than 10 turnovers again. A real head scratcher that we lost
Frustrating to say the least. ARGGGGGHHHHH. I hate losing to Notre Dame. With UCONN's loss, I'd say ND has a legit shot to get into the tournament.
I'd say...we were UNABLE to draw fouls as we did in previous games. Butler had 6 FTAs. The next player? DJO with 4. Zar ONLY had 2 FTAs.
We can't win without drawing fouls: it means we are getting paint touches, getting to the bonus earlier, fouling out their players, getting the opposing team out of their rhythm.
I think Buzz has to put the ball in DJOs hands at the end of the game. I should be Butler, Hayward (if he hasn't fouled out) and DJO. Letting Cubes heave 3s is not necessarily the best thing.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on March 06, 2010, 03:43:30 PM
Notice the focus of your complaint is at the END of the game.
What about the other 44+ minutes?
If you play the whole game to lose in the last seconds, you deserve to lose.
I've said before that Buzz usually comes up with solid gameplans. But he's brutal at the end of close games.
Quote from: gumbyandpokey on March 06, 2010, 03:41:29 PM
Yeah, Nerd, it was bad breaks...
--the bad break of not fouling ND before letting them get off a couple 3 pt attempts
--the bad break of not having DJO try to miss that second FT'
--the bad break of the brilliantly drawn up half court heave from Cubillan
But it was the dreaded Jim Burr who cost MU the game!
Surprise, surprise..look who is all over this LOSS!! You Gumby?? I dont' believe it. See my other post about not fouling a team when ahead by 3 with 16 seconds left. Bottom line is ND had a lot of luck on its side today..for as many balls that bounced our way against Louisville..just as many bounced in ND's favor today. Yes, the "Burr-kick" and subsequent technical were relevant. But so too was Zar missing the free throw down the stretch. He makes it, we win the game...Period..but like all of us..Zar isn't perfect..and you can say Buzz Williams isn't either if you want to...but I'll gladly take the results his coaching have gotten us this season. Lastly, if you have such an issue with Buzz's coaching..why don't you just be a Badger fan where you can watch the infalliable Bo Ryan do his thing? Wait a minute..you already are a Badger fan..have your fun now..cause you can book this: MU will be 7-3 or 8-2 against UW in the next 10 years.
I love your optimism, but no way MU is 7-3 or 8-2 against UW-Madison in the next 10 years.
People are frustrated today because we really coughed this one up, at home, against a bitter rival.
Marquette from the FT line before today's 12-14 performance:
W 18-22 v Louisville
W 19-25 v Seton Hall
W 16-21 v St. John's
W 16-17 v Cincy
L 4-9 v Pitt
W 13-20 v South Florida
W 11-15 v Providence
Other than the asterisks (Cincy and Prov), if we get about 20 FTAs, our chances of winning is heightened.
Think how important it was for us to get those FTAs in order to win the OT games.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 06, 2010, 03:53:14 PM
I love your optimism, but no way MU is 7-3 or 8-2 against UW-Madison in the next 10 years.
People are frustrated today because we really coughed this one up, at home, against a bitter rival.
Thanks..but why do you think we won't be 7-3 or 8-2 against Wisconsin? It absolutely is frustrating that we lost today for sure..but again..there is a ton of knee jerk reaction going on here..it's almost embarrassing in some ways. Tough breaks went against us today. Tough loss. ND was extremely desperate to get this win, extremely..we obviously wanted to get it for Senior Day, and competitive reasons of course..but ND is playing for its NCAA life...and that does count for something - ask Pitt, Georgetown, and UCONN.
We definitely stopped trying to win at the end of regulation and started to just try to hang on. Really disappointing
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 03:51:04 PM
Surprise, surprise..look who is all over this LOSS!! You Gumby?? I dont' believe it. See my other post about not fouling a team when ahead by 3 with 16 seconds left. Bottom line is ND had a lot of luck on its side today..for as many balls that bounced our way against Louisville..just as many bounced in ND's favor today. Yes, the "Burr-kick" and subsequent technical were relevant. But so too was Zar missing the free throw down the stretch. He makes it, we win the game...Period..but like all of us..Zar isn't perfect..and you can say Buzz Williams isn't either if you want to...but I'll gladly take the results his coaching have gotten us this season. Lastly, if you have such an issue with Buzz's coaching..why don't you just be a Badger fan where you can watch the infalliable Bo Ryan do his thing? Wait a minute..you already are a Badger fan..have your fun now..cause you can book this: MU will be 7-3 or 8-2 against UW in the next 10 years.
Why do you make it your personal crusade to defend Buzz in every post?
even though we choke a bunch from the line with as many guards as we have, we are one of the better foul shooting teams in the nation......
YOU FOUL UP THREE PERIOD when theres less than a posession left...... less risk involved there than letting a wide open three drop as three previous overtimes have told us.... luckily we squeaked those out.
Quote from: gumbyandpokey on March 06, 2010, 03:50:33 PM
I've said before that Buzz usually comes up with solid gameplans. But he's brutal at the end of close games.
Didn't we just win 3 straight OT games on the road?
Was MU brutal at the end of those games?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 06, 2010, 04:12:45 PM
Why do you make it your personal crusade to defend Buzz in every post?
Because I'm pretty freakin' pleased with this teams results this season, as well as on the recruiting trail...and when I read some of the knee jerk posts that show up on this board after losses - it is pathetic and makes me embarrased to be an MU alum. Are we really that short-sighted, that we can't see the big picture..and as tough as some of these losses have been...celebrate and enjoy all this "rebuilding" season? Which, by the way, will end in an NCAA tourney bid. Furthermore, second-guessing is really just a big waste of time..would of, could of, should of. There are 100's of factors that go into a game's outcome, and to nitpick the individual game results of a team that's coach helped guide them to an 11-7 Big East record, and 5th place finish, when projected to finish 12th....is pathetic. Buzz may not be 100% perfect..but to expect that of anyone is ignorant, and yet for a bunch of armchair fans..many of whom probably never played basketball at the High School level..to 2nd guess this guy??? Embarrassing.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 04:35:30 PM
Because I'm pretty freakin' pleased with this teams results this season, as well as on the recruiting trail...and when I read some of the knee jerk posts that show up on this board after losses - it is pathetic and makes me embarrased to be an MU alum. Are we really that short-sighted, that we can't see the big picture..and as tough as some of these losses have been...celebrate and enjoy all this "rebuilding" season? Which, by the way, will end in an NCAA tourney bid. Furthermore, second-guessing is really just a big waste of time..would of, could of, should of. There are 100's of factors that go into a game's outcome, and to nitpick the individual game results of a team that's coach helped guide them to an 11-7 Big East record, and 5th place finish, when projected to finish 12th....is pathetic. Buzz may not be 100% perfect..but to expect that of anyone is ignorant, and yet for a bunch of armchair fans..many of whom probably never played basketball at the High School level..to 2nd guess this guy??? Embarrassing.
But you said it yourself...Buzz isn't 100% perfect. So when people are criticizing strategy (such as not fouling when you are down three), that doesn't mean that want to dump Buzz.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 06, 2010, 04:46:17 PM
But you said it yourself...Buzz isn't 100% perfect. So when people are criticizing strategy (such as not fouling when you are down three), that doesn't mean that want to dump Buzz.
That's a good point. That said, on the balance, I think Buzz deserves the benefit of the doubt. I will agree that the issue of not fouling before the 3 gets taken, is a stategy that needs to get revisited. That said, I believe this topic has been debated before and at best its a 65-35 vote in favor of fouling...
i cant remember all of them.... but would any of these overtime wins we had in the last few weeks even have needed to go into overtime if we had simply fouled, from what i remember we were up in regulation in all of these games , maybe all but one???
correct me if i am wrong. im sorry
but the failure to foul when up three is my biggest peve of the year..... i can take a loss due to missed free throws but it just seems like a failure of logic to not foul.
Quote from: 46-47warriorcaptain on March 06, 2010, 05:01:57 PM
i cant remember all of them.... but would any of these overtime wins we had in the last few weeks even have needed to go into overtime if we had simply fouled, from what i remember we were up in regulation in all of these games , maybe all but one???
correct me if i am wrong. im sorry
but the failure to foul when up three is my biggest peve of the year..... i can take a loss due to missed free throws but it just seems like a failure of logic to not foul.
Definitely wasn't the case in the Cincy game..we were behind and lucky to get it to OT. Also think we had the ball for end of game shots against both St. Johns and Seton Hall...I don't recall either St. Johns or Seton Hall hitting a 3 to tie the game..to ultimately send it into overtime..think they were down 2 points and tied..
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 04:35:30 PM
Because I'm pretty freakin' pleased with this teams results this season, as well as on the recruiting trail...and when I read some of the knee jerk posts that show up on this board after losses - it is pathetic and makes me embarrased to be an MU alum. Are we really that short-sighted, that we can't see the big picture..and as tough as some of these losses have been...celebrate and enjoy all this "rebuilding" season? Which, by the way, will end in an NCAA tourney bid. Furthermore, second-guessing is really just a big waste of time..would of, could of, should of. There are 100's of factors that go into a game's outcome, and to nitpick the individual game results of a team that's coach helped guide them to an 11-7 Big East record, and 5th place finish, when projected to finish 12th....is pathetic. Buzz may not be 100% perfect..but to expect that of anyone is ignorant, and yet for a bunch of armchair fans..many of whom probably never played basketball at the High School level..to 2nd guess this guy??? Embarrassing.
Ners, a coach can be a good, overachieving head coach and still make major mistakes and cost his team games. Buzz is a good recruiter, proved to be a good coach this season, but has some flaws that have cost Marquette games. Bottom line is that MU was up 7 with a minute left, then up 3 with 15 secs and multiple opportunities to foul and not allow an open 3.
Whether some like to admit it or not, Buzz coaches to not lose games that are tight rather than to win them. Also, his second major coaching flaw IMO is that he does not get the most he can out of his lesser quality players in the rotation- we saw it last year with cubillian, acker until DJ ot hurt, fulce, and butler until later in the season. He says he wants a solid 10 man rotation, but I havent seen anything close to that yet, maybe next year...
He is a young coach and is allowed to make mistakes, especially when the team overachieves, but to defend his mistakes at all cost is unnecessary
Quote from: mudimitri on March 06, 2010, 05:36:20 PM
Ners, a coach can be a good, overachieving head coach and still make major mistakes and cost his team games. Buzz is a good recruiter, proved to be a good coach this season, but has some flaws that have cost Marquette games. Bottom line is that MU was up 7 with a minute left, then up 3 with 15 secs and multiple opportunities to foul and not allow an open 3.
Whether some like to admit it or not, Buzz coaches to not lose games that are tight rather than to win them. Also, his second major coaching flaw IMO is that he does not get the most he can out of his lesser quality players in the rotation- we saw it last year with cubillian, acker until DJ ot hurt, fulce, and butler until later in the season. He says he wants a solid 10 man rotation, but I havent seen anything close to that yet, maybe next year...
He is a young coach and is allowed to make mistakes, especially when the team overachieves, but to defend his mistakes at all cost is unnecessary
You know...think of the scenario when we decide to foul a team when ahead by 3...and that teams goes to the line and makes both shots. We lead by 1. We get fouled, go to the line and miss both..other team comes down and hits a 2 and we lose..think a coach would be getting second guessed in that scenario? Think this board would react differently? Lets get real..the fact this team has been in as many close games as it has is a testament to good coaching..given the talent/size eficiency. Let's also realize that we have only given up game tying 3's to West Virginia and now Notre Dame. We got beat by Nova 2x on 2 point shots, Florida State on a 2 point shot, DePaul on a 2 point shot...and you know what..the PLAYERS missed multiple end game free thros in each of these losses. the players execute..and we aren't having this conversation..they were in a position to win ALL of the games I mention..but failed to hit critical free throws. As a player..that's all I can ask..we've been coached well enough to put us in a position to win the game or close it out...
I got to caught up in the game and I can't remember the last ND possession but when were we actually suppossed to foul in that position. Fouling someone intentionally is not the easiest thing to do. Foul too early in the clock and you risk having one of your own players choke away a game at the line and potentially lose in regulation. Foul too late and you risk 3 free throws or worse like the St. John's game, 3 point play plus a free throw. Man I don't know but I would never put a ref in a position to determine a game. The time to foul was probably a half second before that 3 point attempt in the corner. Thing is, DJO did foul on that play and it could have been a 4 point play and a loss. Cooby should have never left his man on the perimeter. Can't blame Buzz for that.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 05:44:28 PM
You know...think of the scenario when we decide to foul a team when ahead by 3...and that teams goes to the line and makes both shots. We lead by 1. We get fouled, go to the line and miss both..other team comes down and hits a 2 and we lose..think a coach would be getting second guessed in that scenario? Think this board would react differently? Lets get real..the fact this team has been in as many close games as it has is a testament to good coaching..given the talent/size eficiency. Let's also realize that we have only given up game tying 3's to West Virginia and now Notre Dame. We got beat by Nova 2x on 2 point shots, Florida State on a 2 point shot, DePaul on a 2 point shot...and you know what..the PLAYERS missed multiple end game free thros in each of these losses. the players execute..and we aren't having this conversation..they were in a position to win ALL of the games I mention..but failed to hit critical free throws. As a player..that's all I can ask..we've been coached well enough to put us in a position to win the game or close it out...
Yes, it is on the players more than anything. However, as dennis green once said, "the players are who we thought they were" Dont forget, they have overachieved more than the coach, so they deserve alot of credit too.
In the end, what matters is that when those players get you up by 7 with a minute left, you have to figure out a way to get them to win the game. It happened last year too, and those guys were all NBA prospects with senior leadership.
Lets be honest: has MU (and Buzz) overachieved beyond anyones expectations? YES... Has Buzz's coaching in the last two minutes of the game been a major contributor in atleast 2 or 3 losses this season? YES. Has Buzz's development of players 7-10 on his roster and the use of those players been less than ideal and perhaps been a factor in some of these late losses? YES
PS: YES #1 definitely outnumbers #2 and 3 by a million. The guy is still a coaching "baby" and will hopefully learn on the job
Quote from: mudimitri on March 06, 2010, 05:59:18 PM
Yes, it is on the players more than anything. However, as dennis green once said, "the players are who we thought they were" Dont forget, they have overachieved more than the coach, so they deserve alot of credit too.
In the end, what matters is that when those players get you up by 7 with a minute left, you have to figure out a way to get them to win the game. It happened last year too, and those guys were all NBA prospects with senior leadership.
Lets be honest: has MU (and Buzz) overachieved beyond anyones expectations? YES... Has Buzz's coaching in the last two minutes of the game been a major contributor in atleast 2 or 3 losses this season? YES. Has Buzz's development of players 7-10 on his roster and the use of those players been less than ideal and perhaps been a factor in some of these late losses? YES
PS: YES #1 definitely outnumbers #2 and 3 by a million. The guy is still a coaching "baby" and will hopefully learn on the job
I disagree with the part I put in red..because in this season..who are the 8, 9 and 10 guys? Forzena, an injured Mbao, and Junior and Erik Williams? Williams has Fulce in front of him, and Fulce has shown to be the best alternative to either Lazar or Jimmy. Junior, we all know the story. I also disagree that Buzz didn't utilize his bench well last year..who did he have after James went down? Acker played well last year, just as he has this year. Cooyb? Coming off of 2 shoulder surgeries..and did you really want him out there instead of one of the Big 3? Jimmy Butler developed nicely last year and gave the team a contribution, just as Joe Fulce has done this year. I think we are really nit-picking at this point regardin gBuzz's coaching..and..there is nothing a coach can do when his team is ahead late in games, and can't close it out due to missing free throws. Furthermore, how do you think this board would react if Buzz employed the foul strategy, and got burned on it?
Too many second chance points for ND and us being frigid from the perimeter ultimately cost us the game more than anything Buzz did or didn't do the last 20 seconds of the game.
I think Buzz is in a little bit of a pickle when it comes to end of game situations when we are in the lead. Your opponent was to lengthen the game. We want to shorten the game. The problem with taking the clock down is that it stalls our offense to the point that we force a shot up. Our offense works best when it is attacking the paint and then either finishing or making a kick out that leads to the extra pass and the open shot. Unfortunately today even if we attacked on the offensive end at the end of the game we still were not going to make a shot. Just that kind of a day.
Quote from: gumbyandpokey on March 06, 2010, 03:50:33 PM
I've said before that Buzz usually comes up with solid gameplans. But he's brutal at the end of close games.
Straight up dumb comment.
Look at the end of the game. You say foul, I say no. It was too much time when they got the ball and once Abromitas was in the corner no fouling there. You're an idiot who has no concept of basketball and how it is to be played. Perhaps Buzz isn't perfect but he did not lose the game. You're a fool and needs to complain. Let's get on with the BE Tourney.
Great job this year seniors.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2010, 06:12:03 PM
I disagree with the part I put in red..because in this season..who are the 8, 9 and 10 guys? Forzena, an injured Mbao, and Junior and Erik Williams? Williams has Fulce in front of him, and Fulce has shown to be the best alternative to either Lazar or Jimmy. Junior, we all know the story. I also disagree that Buzz didn't utilize his bench well last year..who did he have after James went down? Acker played well last year, just as he has this year. Cooyb? Coming off of 2 shoulder surgeries..and did you really want him out there instead of one of the Big 3? Jimmy Butler developed nicely last year and gave the team a contribution, just as Joe Fulce has done this year. I think we are really nit-picking at this point regardin gBuzz's coaching..and..there is nothing a coach can do when his team is ahead late in games, and can't close it out due to missing free throws. Furthermore, how do you think this board would react if Buzz employed the foul strategy, and got burned on it?
I think Buzz would have been attacked by some for fouling, but most here seem to agree that this is the correct move so i dont think it would be as bad as not fouling
About the #7-10 guys, we can agree to disagree. I just havent seen Buzz handle these players well up to this point in his tenure. You can look at last year and say that Otule and Fulce were hurt, but they were back and had a good portion of the season. Fulce especially, by this point this season, should be more of a contributor. Butler should have been trusted sooner last year and allowed to play more, same with acker at 16mpg and cubillan at 9mpg. Instead you had 35, 34, 32, and 32 mpg average for the big 3 and lazar, and I believe that cost MU at the end of the season, but thats of personal opinion.
This season, you've got 6 guys averaging above 25mpg, and this includes Cubillian and Buycks, not james, mcneal, matthews, or hayward. You've got Williams, mbao, and fulce basically as non-factors early in the season. Fulce plays a bit now and thats good, I just wonder how good he would be if he played more sooner. You bring back Cadougan for basically no reason. This is not to mention those that say as a head coach you have to find a way to make maymon, and the entourage that you knew about and brought in, happy because you know you need the low post help
I know the maymon thing will get criticism, but all this is encapsulated within managing #7-10 on your team
Quote from: mudimitri on March 06, 2010, 06:58:07 PM
This is not to mention those that say as a head coach you have to find a way to make maymon, and the entourage that you knew about and brought in, happy because you know you need the low post help
I know the maymon thing will get criticism, but all this is encapsulated within managing #7-10 on your team
Those that say that about Maymon are f'n idiots and there's no other way to put it.
Quote from: bma725 on March 06, 2010, 07:05:36 PM
Those that say that about Maymon are f'n idiots and there's no other way to put it.
Sorry BMA, but some would say that those that bring him in are f'n idiots to begin with, and theres no other way to put it
I dont think either are idiots. I think if you make the mistake to bring him in, you have to make the extra effort to make him work, atleast through an entire season. At that point, you realize and admit you made a mistake and let him go
Quote from: bma725 on March 06, 2010, 07:05:36 PM
Those that say that about Maymon are f'n idiots and there's no other way to put it.
Also, you being the recruit guru, should be the first to admit that a coach made a mistake on a talent with "issues"
That said, whether or not you make a mistake, you have to be man enough to do your best to try and make it work
Good call.
On another note, I saw the replay on tv of the game and when Abromitous (spell?) Took his 3 to cut it to three he was set in front of the 3 pt line, picked up his dribble, and hopped on back behind the line. Oh did I mention the reff was right behind him.
I know we all want to forget this game and focus on the BET but it just gets me mad how that call could have changed the game and momentum moving forward.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 06, 2010, 03:22:44 PM
Notre Dame did it right. Up 3, they don't even let us take it to tie it. I hate Notre Dame
+1. Especially the last 4 words.
Quote from: mudimitri on March 06, 2010, 07:09:32 PM
Sorry BMA, but some would say that those that bring him in are f'n idiots to begin with, and theres no other way to put it
I dont think either are idiots. I think if you make the mistake to bring him in, you have to make the extra effort to make him work, atleast through an entire season. At that point, you realize and admit you made a mistake and let him go
No, anyone who says that you have to make it work with JMay is an idiot, sorry there's no two ways about it. The only thing that would have made him stay was to make him a perimeter player at all times both on offense and defense, and run the offense through him to the detriment of everyone else on the team. It would have completely blown up the chemistry of the team and been one of the worst moves in the history of coaching. There's no other way to put it. Anyone who thinks it was a fixable situation doesn't know what was going on.
Quote from: mudimitri on March 06, 2010, 07:12:13 PM
Also, you being the recruit guru, should be the first to admit that a coach made a mistake on a talent with "issues"
That said, whether or not you make a mistake, you have to be man enough to do your best to try and make it work
I don't deny it was a mistake, but when you make a mistake, the most important thing to do is recognize it and fix it, not compound it. Doing your best to make it work with J May compounds the mistake and essentially kills the season. The coach has to think about the best interests of the team as a whole. Sometimes that means that you have to part ways with a talented kid.
You don't placate malcontents, under any circumstances, if you want to be a head coach for very long.
Quote from: mudimitri on March 06, 2010, 06:58:07 PM
I think Buzz would have been attacked by some for fouling, but most here seem to agree that this is the correct move so i dont think it would be as bad as not fouling
About the #7-10 guys, we can agree to disagree. I just havent seen Buzz handle these players well up to this point in his tenure. You can look at last year and say that Otule and Fulce were hurt, but they were back and had a good portion of the season. Fulce especially, by this point this season, should be more of a contributor. Butler should have been trusted sooner last year and allowed to play more, same with acker at 16mpg and cubillan at 9mpg. Instead you had 35, 34, 32, and 32 mpg average for the big 3 and lazar, and I believe that cost MU at the end of the season, but thats of personal opinion.
This season, you've got 6 guys averaging above 25mpg, and this includes Cubillian and Buycks, not james, mcneal, matthews, or hayward. You've got Williams, mbao, and fulce basically as non-factors early in the season. Fulce plays a bit now and thats good, I just wonder how good he would be if he played more sooner. You bring back Cadougan for basically no reason. This is not to mention those that say as a head coach you have to find a way to make maymon, and the entourage that you knew about and brought in, happy because you know you need the low post help
I know the maymon thing will get criticism, but all this is encapsulated within managing #7-10 on your team
I'll agree to disagree on the above analysis..and leave it at that.
Quote from: bma725 on March 06, 2010, 07:31:54 PM
No, anyone who says that you have to make it work with JMay is an idiot, sorry there's no two ways about it. The only thing that would have made him stay was to make him a perimeter player at all times both on offense and defense, and run the offense through him to the detriment of everyone else on the team. It would have completely blown up the chemistry of the team and been one of the worst moves in the history of coaching. There's no other way to put it. Anyone who thinks it was a fixable situation doesn't know what was going on.
I don't deny it was a mistake, but when you make a mistake, the most important thing to do is recognize it and fix it, not compound it. Doing your best to make it work with J May compounds the mistake and essentially kills the season. The coach has to think about the best interests of the team as a whole. Sometimes that means that you have to part ways with a talented kid.
You don't placate malcontents, under any circumstances, if you want to be a head coach for very long.
Since you know what is going on, shouldnt Buzz also have known? I mean in the end something so dramatic in a player and fathers thought process, compared to the head coach's should be known, so as to not waste a scholarship. Also, when there are differences in opinion sometimes it needs to be worked out, or attempted to be worked out. The kid didnt do drugs, cheat, or break the law, he had a different idea of his role.
In the end Im happy Buzz told him he was the coach and he makes the decisions, but it is still a strike on the coach's recruiting resume and theres no way around it.
Also, this doesnt change my original argument that Buzz hasnt done well with players #7-10 on his roster to this point
So you think Buzz should have been able to predict the future then. Because there is no way that he would have known that it would get to the level it did back when he was recruiting JMay without having some sort of crystal ball. Yes his dad had acted like a fool on the sidelines, but there were no indications that it would get as bad as it did until it actually happened. Lots of recruits have overbearing people around them and never have situations like that arise in college.
QuoteAlso, when there are differences in opinion sometimes it needs to be worked out, or attempted to be worked out.
The only time you try to work things out are when there are workable options for that player and the rest of your team. This was not one of those times. You don't try to work out a situation to the detriment of the rest of your team and your program.
QuoteIn the end Im happy Buzz told him he was the coach and he makes the decisions, but it is still a strike on the coach's recruiting resume and theres no way around it.
Didn't say it wasn't. But doing as you suggest and trying to work it out would have been an even bigger strike on the resume, and one that could possibly have turned into a career killer.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 06, 2010, 03:22:44 PM
Notre Dame did it right. Up 3, they don't even let us take it to tie it. I hate Notre Dame
The voices in the Bars of the 3rd Ward agree. This one was on Buzz. Great, great season with a couple of tourney runs to come, and our coach will continue to learn from all these incredibly close games. He gives his team energy and emotion--and absolutely the alums are lovin' him. His assistants need to step in and remind him of the situationals, though. Definitely a missed opportunity in a bed of thorns.
"with our current team...with as many grind-it-out games as we've been a part of, I'm not going to bet on the come bet. I'll just play on the pass line and put odds on the back."
Part of Buzz's explanation on not fouling from the Rosiak blog. He's thought about it. I don't mind that explanation. I thought we would win in OT. I'm not a craps player, though. Maybe the come bet is the superior bet.
Maybe, the bigger point is that when you let games get close in the final minute, its craps, and that longview:
"I just told them I think it was God's way of showing us one more time before we left the Bradley Center that if we're not going to be exactly who we have to be on both ends of the floor, then we get beat. It doesn't matter who we play, where we play, what time we play -- if we're not us, we will lose. And if we are us, then I like our chances."
It's tourney time. Don't care what seed MU is, we're in. For Zar I hope they go to Buffalo.
From Rosiak:
You've never shown the inclination to foul in those situations. Mike Brey did. Where do you stand on that: "Anytime if we're up by three with less than nine seconds to go in the game, and we're in the bonus, not the double bonus, philosophically I would foul. But not when whoever it is that we would foul, when we go to the free-throw line..if I can't see the top of our guys' heads, I'm not going to foul. But I think if they're in the 1 and 1 there's a little bit of added pressure because now you have to make the first one, miss the second one, get an offensive rebound and a putback. But it's going to be with less than nine seconds left. But with our current team...with as many grind-it-out games as we've been a part of, I'm not going to bet on the come bet. I'll just play on the pass line and put odds on the back.
Anyone care to interpret that?
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 07, 2010, 08:48:20 AM
From Rosiak:
You've never shown the inclination to foul in those situations. Mike Brey did. Where do you stand on that: "Anytime if we're up by three with less than nine seconds to go in the game, and we're in the bonus, not the double bonus, philosophically I would foul. But not when whoever it is that we would foul, when we go to the free-throw line..if I can't see the top of our guys' heads, I'm not going to foul. But I think if they're in the 1 and 1 there's a little bit of added pressure because now you have to make the first one, miss the second one, get an offensive rebound and a putback. But it's going to be with less than nine seconds left. But with our current team...with as many grind-it-out games as we've been a part of, I'm not going to bet on the come bet. I'll just play on the pass line and put odds on the back.
Anyone care to interpret that?
Well, now I understand why MU looks so confused at the end of games....
He's learning. He already has the dancing part diown
nm
Quote from: ecompt on March 07, 2010, 09:04:07 AM
He's learning. He already has the dancing part diown
He is learning but his logic behind fouling or not fouling is not what he needs to learn. Its worked before and it will work again much like it go bad again. Thats basketball. What Buzz needs to learn is (1) tone down his antics on the sideline. That technical was huge and this coming from a man who believes and stresses that every possession is so important for this team. (2) we need better shots at end of game possessions. The Lazar fadeway from 3 was a very bad shot. Need to start working the play before there is only 8 seconds on the shot clock with this team.
We lost for a whole lot of reasons(besides the two above, we couldn't hit our perimeter shots and too many second chances off of misses from ND). Why everyone gravitates to the foul/don't foul call especially when there is no legit consensus from most Division 1 coaches is beyond me. Frankly I am surprised someone hasn't brought up free throw shooting again seeing that Lazar's second free throw attempt was almost an airball.
As far as the last play goes, Abromitis took just an awful shot. A shot that I would give every time. Off balance, body twisting sideways fall away shot. The ball just bounced the right way for ND and Cooby went on instinct towards the ball and there you go. Bad outcome. It happens.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on March 07, 2010, 08:48:20 AM
From Rosiak:
You've never shown the inclination to foul in those situations. Mike Brey did. Where do you stand on that: "Anytime if we're up by three with less than nine seconds to go in the game, and we're in the bonus, not the double bonus, philosophically I would foul. But not when whoever it is that we would foul, when we go to the free-throw line..if I can't see the top of our guys' heads, I'm not going to foul. But I think if they're in the 1 and 1 there's a little bit of added pressure because now you have to make the first one, miss the second one, get an offensive rebound and a putback. But it's going to be with less than nine seconds left. But with our current team...with as many grind-it-out games as we've been a part of, I'm not going to bet on the come bet. I'll just play on the pass line and put odds on the back.
Anyone care to interpret that?
Top of guys heads?
He seems to have answered the question with two conflicting answers
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 07, 2010, 11:29:20 AM
Top of guys heads?
He seems to have answered the question with two conflicting answers
How so?
I took it to mean that with future teams he is not opposed to fouling in the last 9 seconds up 3. There are two reasons he has not fouled in that situation this year. One, MU is small. If you look at the rebounders lined up at the free throw line from the opposite coaches' box you cannot see our guys heads because they are that much shorter than the other team. If they were equal height or taller you could see the top of their heads. He believes giving up the rebound is a risk with this team.
Two, Buzz has confidence in his team that they will continue to play solid defense on the final possession and won't give up a good three. And if the game is tied with a three, he has confidence that his team will do a better job of grinding in overtime and win the game.
That's how I read it. He believes the foul is a gamble and he doesn't want to lose on a coaches' decision, and he'd rather play straight-up because he has confidence in his team to play it straight up.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on March 07, 2010, 11:36:15 AM
How so?
Read what he said.
Anytime we're up by 3 with less than 9 seconds and in the bonus...he would foul.....but then he back tracks about some comment about seeing the top of guys heads and says he wouldn't foul.
Then reverses himself again and says if it's a 1 and 1, he would foul due to the added pressure of making the first shot of the free throw, missing the second, getting the rebound and making the putback.....but then he reverses himself again and says "but with our current team" he'd just bet on playing the odds (makes a Craps reference).
He went back and forth, basically, four times in that sentence. At least the way I read it. Perhaps others read it different. Based on the fact the previous games we also didn't foul, well I have to believe he just doesn't believe in fouling in that situation and wants to play the odds, so I'm not sure why he said everything else.
I don't agree with the strategy but coaches have differing viewpoints on it. I'd foul when the clock gets down around 4 or 5 seconds.
I don't mean to dig up old news, so if this is talked about elsewhere, just let me know and my bad. But, I am curious as to whether or not Buzz has put a lot of work into this part of his strategy. We all know what a huge numbers guy Buzz is, and he seems to reference concrete surrounding circumstances (1-1 vs double bonus; 9 seconds or less vs. 10 seconds +) I wonder if there is some reason for his delineating those circumstances?
Earlier in this thread I mentioned that we were outfoxed yesterday, and i still think thats true. Certainly doesnt mean I would rather have Brey or any other blah blah blah. But after a year full of of heartstoppers, I'm curious how much of Buzz's clear preference not to foul is based on our lack of height and how much of it is something that will continue.
The main reason I am pro-foul is because you can play great defense and still allow a guy to get an okay look at a 3 to tie. He might be a couple steps off the line or drifting to one side, etc, but you cant both assure a nonfoul play and play completely lock down on the perimeter. At least if you foul you put the game back into your own hands - you need to get a rebound, you need to inbound and make a FT, etc.
Quote from: karavotsos on March 07, 2010, 11:46:30 AM
I took it to mean that with future teams he is not opposed to fouling in the last 9 seconds up 3. There are two reasons he has not fouled in that situation this year. One, MU is small. If you look at the rebounders lined up at the free throw line from the opposite coaches' box you cannot see our guys heads because they are that much shorter than the other team. If they were equal height or taller you could see the top of their heads. He believes giving up the rebound is a risk with this team.
Two, Buzz has confidence in his team that they will continue to play solid defense on the final possession and won't give up a good three. And if the game is tied with a three, he has confidence that his team will do a better job of grinding in overtime and win the game.
That's how I read it. He believes the foul is a gamble and he doesn't want to lose on a coaches' decision, and he'd rather play straight-up because he has confidence in his team to play it straight up.
This is also how I read it. Pretty simple and straightforward, but I guess not to everyone.
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 07, 2010, 03:41:50 PM
The main reason I am pro-foul is because you can play great defense and still allow a guy to get an okay look at a 3 to tie. He might be a couple steps off the line or drifting to one side, etc, but you cant both assure a nonfoul play and play completely lock down on the perimeter. At least if you foul you put the game back into your own hands - you need to get a rebound, you need to inbound and make a FT, etc.
You do put it back in your hands but the only time we could foul and be under 10 seconds was when Abromitis had the ball in the corner. He is a 89% FT shooter and a good 3 point shooter who was struggling. Now he was doing some dipsy doing there in the corner and we have 3 problems here. The first is you don't want to foul him on a shot where he is in a difficult situation to get off a good shot. Two, you don't want to foul him taking a 3. At that point in time, you are putting the game in your hands but the ref. What if the foul is just a 1/2 second late and ref calls a shooting foul. What if he crazily hits it and its a 3 and one. Third, Hayward almost airballed his last free attempt. How comfortable do you feel us hitting the front end of the 1 and 1? I think there is a better chance we miss the front end and ND has the ball down 1 with 6 seconds left and brings those painful WV memories back. Also a foul by DJO would have given him 4 fouls in the game. Hayward had 4 and Butler might have had 4. So our 3 best players could all have had 4 fouls going into OT. I don't know but I don't think it is as clear cut as everyone makes it seem around here.
Quote from: mufanatic on March 07, 2010, 04:19:42 PM
You do put it back in your hands but the only time we could foul and be under 10 seconds was when Abromitis had the ball in the corner. He is a 89% FT shooter and a good 3 point shooter who was struggling. Now he was doing some dipsy doing there in the corner and we have 3 problems here. The first is you don't want to foul him on a shot where he is in a difficult situation to get off a good shot. Two, you don't want to foul him taking a 3. At that point in time, you are putting the game in your hands but the ref. What if the foul is just a 1/2 second late and ref calls a shooting foul. What if he crazily hits it and its a 3 and one. Third, Hayward almost airballed his last free attempt. How comfortable do you feel us hitting the front end of the 1 and 1? I think there is a better chance we miss the front end and ND has the ball down 1 with 6 seconds left and brings those painful WV memories back. Also a foul by DJO would have given him 4 fouls in the game. Hayward had 4 and Butler might have had 4. So our 3 best players could all have had 4 fouls going into OT. I don't know but I don't think it is as clear cut as everyone makes it seem around here.
+ 1, good analysis..I've reversed course on the idea of fouling vs. not fouling..and probably would side on the side of fouling...however, it also is a lot more difficult to execute when ND inbounds the ball with 16 seconds and pushes the ball upcourt...as opposed to when MU fouled DJO when they were up 3 in overtime. We inbounded the ball with basically 7 seconds left in the game..DJO gets fouled as he gets to halfcourt with 5 seconds left...much easier scenario to pull off..than what we faced when Abromistis launched with 6 seconds left..meaning the smart time to foul was essentially the time when Abormitis was shooting the ball..which of course we wouldn't want to foul him in the act of shooting the 3.
After reading this post written by a bunch of people who probably never played basketball let alone coached it, I have one question; do you really think that coaching has hurt this team this year? Do you think Coach K would have reeled off 28 wins with this team? Maybe Rick Pitino would have had us undefeated and ranked first in the nation. I bet you after Jim Boehiem saw our roster, he wanted to leave Syracuse for the MU job.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and it's what makes boards like these entertaining, but whether we win or lose, some on this board consistently show they have no idea what they are talking about.
Quote from: MU83 on March 07, 2010, 05:08:06 PM
After reading this post written by a bunch of people who probably never played basketball let alone coached it, I have one question; do you really think that coaching has hurt this team this year? Do you think Coach K would have reeled off 28 wins with this team? Maybe Rick Pitino would have had us undefeated and ranked first in the nation. I bet you after Jim Boehiem saw our roster, he wanted to leave Syracuse for the MU job.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and it's what makes boards like these entertaining, but whether we win or lose, some on this board consistently show they have no idea what they are talking about.
Incredible strawman
again, where does this "OH YEAH!?! I BET YOU NEVER EVEN PLAYED BIG EAST BASKETBALL!!!" mentality come in, and what does it have to do with anything?
some of the greatest analysts around right now never played or coached the game at a high level, and that goes across sports. heck, some of the best coaches never played and some of the best gms never did either.
Quote from: Ners on March 07, 2010, 04:55:49 PM
+ 1, good analysis..I've reversed course on the idea of fouling vs. not fouling..and probably would side on the side of fouling...however, it also is a lot more difficult to execute when ND inbounds the ball with 16 seconds and pushes the ball upcourt...as opposed to when MU fouled DJO when they were up 3 in overtime. We inbounded the ball with basically 7 seconds left in the game..DJO gets fouled as he gets to halfcourt with 5 seconds left...much easier scenario to pull off..than what we faced when Abromistis launched with 6 seconds left..meaning the smart time to foul was essentially the time when Abormitis was shooting the ball..which of course we wouldn't want to foul him in the act of shooting the 3.
Whether or not you chose to foul is a matter of opinion. However, even though I think its a mistake to not foul prior to a 3 point attempt, its definitely a mistake to not foul immediately if your team doesnt get the rebound
Its seems fairly easy, actually. You tell your team to defend and not foul, but if the shot is missed and you cannot gather the rebound you foul immediately, just making sure you foul in a way that doesnt allow an and 1 situation. This eliminates the possibility for a kick out and another 3 pt attempt
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 07, 2010, 05:23:21 PM
again, where does this "OH YEAH!?! I BET YOU NEVER EVEN PLAYED BIG EAST BASKETBALL!!!" mentality come in, and what does it have to do with anything?
some of the greatest analysts around right now never played or coached the game at a high level, and that goes across sports. heck, some of the best coaches never played and some of the best gms never did either.
My point was that whether we win or lose, there are people on here that pick the team or coaching staff apart. Why didn't we do this in that situation, or why did this player miss that shot? I realize this board is for anyone to post whatever they want to say (within reason), but it gets old listening to people criticize this team. By all accounts (and I'm sure any of the experts you cite would agree) this team and coaching staff has far exceeded expectations. By indicating otherwise indicates a lack of knowledge of the game.
if all we care about is exceeding expectations or the overall body of work, why even watch the games? your previous 20 wins dont get you a pass for your next game. if MU goes undefeated and then loses the ND game in this way, that doesnt make the criticism any more or less valid.
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 07, 2010, 05:23:21 PM
again, where does this "OH YEAH!?! I BET YOU NEVER EVEN PLAYED BIG EAST BASKETBALL!!!" mentality come in, and what does it have to do with anything?
some of the greatest analysts around right now never played or coached the game at a high level, and that goes across sports. heck, some of the best coaches never played and some of the best gms never did either.
Based on your above comment, and the one below, my assumption is that you did not play the game at even the High School level? Clearly, you do not seem to grasp that most teams don't go undefeated in men's college basketball - or any sport for that matter - and defeats aren't always the result of poor coaching, or even poor play by the players. Some days you get outplayed, some days that ball bounces the other way, some days you face better talent. The fact this team is 1 of 5 teams in high-major NCAA Division 1 (Kansas, Kentucky, Purdue, Baylor) basketball who have not lost a game by double digits speaks volumes to how well prepared, coached, etc, this team has been - as there are nights where things just don't go your way, you play a more talented opponent, etc. The fact that you feel it is acceptable to be critical of a team even if they were to go 29 -1 (lose their last game to ND) is really short-sighted, and shows a lack of perspective.
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 08, 2010, 09:13:46 AM
if all we care about is exceeding expectations or the overall body of work, why even watch the games? your previous 20 wins dont get you a pass for your next game. if MU goes undefeated and then loses the ND game in this way, that doesnt make the criticism any more or less valid.
again, ad hominem and straw man.
But the rarity of undefeated teams doesn't mean that losses cant be examined and criticized. I actually think this knee-jerk defense of the team at all times is remarkably defeatist and ironically pessimistic. If we want to agree that this team CAN beat any team on any given night, why would we not discuss why they didn't on nights when they lose?
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 08, 2010, 10:41:49 AM
again, ad hominem and straw man.
But the rarity of undefeated teams doesn't mean that losses cant be examined and criticized. I actually think this knee-jerk defense of the team at all times is remarkably defeatist and ironically pessimistic. If we want to agree that this team CAN beat any team on any given night, why would we not discuss why they didn't on nights when they lose?
My argument may be ad hominem, but that does not make it necessarily false. You have not denied that you were not a high-school, varsity-level, basektball player. I'm not being elitist or anything, just because I played varsity high school ball...as many people have, however, there is a reason most basketball coaches and color commentators are former players - either on the professional or collegiate level - and in few cases at very least the High School level. There may be the occasional exception to this, but it skews in large favor to the former player - with regard to expertise regarding the respective sport they played or coach. Also, could you explain what is "ironically pessimistic," about supporting a team even in defeat? There is a difference between being a pessimist and realist for sure - and being a realist, one realizes it is ridiculous to expect a team such as this year's MU team to go undefeated...therefore it seems unnecessary to criticize and dissect the losses.
Quote from: Ners on March 08, 2010, 01:25:04 PM
My argument may be ad hominem, but that does not make it necessarily false. You have not denied that you were not a high-school, varsity-level, basektball player. I'm not being elitist or anything, just because I played varsity high school ball...as many people have, however, there is a reason most basketball coaches and color commentators are former players - either on the professional or collegiate level - and in few cases at very least the High School level. There may be the occasional exception to this, but it skews in large favor to the former player - with regard to expertise regarding the respective sport they played or coach. Also, could you explain what is "ironically pessimistic," about supporting a team even in defeat? There is a difference between being a pessimist and realist for sure - and being a realist, one realizes it is ridiculous to expect a team such as this year's MU team to go undefeated...therefore it seems unnecessary to criticize and dissect the losses.
I know you said "most" and I'm not trying to stir things up, but isn't Buzz one of those that never played the game? Just wondering. Also, I believe this 'lack' of experience of his was a huge reason many people nearly crap a brick during his signing
Am I allowed to say that? ?-(
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 08, 2010, 10:41:49 AM
again, ad hominem and straw man.
I like how you use the logical fallacies in an argument. I will use one as well, non-sequitur. I will get back to this point later.
The "knee jerk" you reference stems from the argument which originally implied Buzz being a bad coach for not fouling at the end and Brey being a good coach for fouling at the end. The "foul at end" for people came out in droves and argued the two circumstances. "One fouled, one didn't-look at the outcome and judge for yourself. Thus because of this, Buzz is an awful in-game coach."
Who is committing the fallacy?
You are taking a microcosm of the game and using it to express the whole. You cannot deny the fallacy there.
Perhaps I am misinterpreting or not understanding what was being said earlier.
Perhaps you are only referencing ONLY the end of the game where Buzz may "suffer" in his in game coaching.
If that is what you mean and you use the argument that what Brey and ND did at the end of the game on your arguments behalf to criticize the end of game coaching of Buzz you are wrong, for this is where the non-sequitur occurs. Hell, the conclusion that Buzz should have fouled may be a correct one, but your premise that Brey and ND did it when it came to their decision and then realizing the outcome (an ND win) is wrong. They were two completely different circumstances! One got the ball with 16 seconds, the other 6. One had the ball at halfcourt with under five seconds, the ball was in the air and then tapped out with under five seconds. One could have easily shot the ball if a foul was coming, one was dribbling full speed at half court. Completely Different circumstances. How do you not see that? Did you not watch the game?
Again, this "knee jerk" stems from this unqualified argument that Brey and ND did it properly while Buzz and MU didn't. There is no evidence to prove either way and the evidence cited is just fallacious.
I am not a proponent for the foul at the end of a game as I am not a proponent for the do not foul, I have not done enough research. I am just stating the facts. If you cannot see that, then your vision is skewed by your beliefs.
i don't understand why a particular criticism has to be expanded beyond the circumstances. the non-sequitur in your argument is that I "implied Buzz being a bad coach for not fouling at the end"
When I mentioned that we were outcoached, it doesn't come from just the fouling argument. Of course, thats a big one. But also, why did we put the best free throw shooter in the conference on the line three times in a row? I also disagreed with Buzz's timeout usage down the stretch in overtime. These are things that just need to be better.
Why, because I disagree with the end of game management, am I "taking a microcosm of the game and using it to express the whole" ?
I really enjoy breaking down particular points of basketball games and getting into what could have been done differently and how that might have effected the outcome. Its like Bobby Knight has said, his favorite part of coaching is taking all of these different kids and essentially playing chess against the other coach. To me, one of the most enjoyable parts about sports is doing that from my couch. Then, i get to see responses to that here. I'm not searching to go on a crusade against Buzz. I love Buzz. I love his dances and his techs and his honesty and his recruiting and some of his decisions. The decisions are the least personal of all these. Hell, I thought the Saints decisions in the Super Bowl were terrible, but look where that got them. Still fun to discuss and criticize over nachos and beer though.
the same way that Ners cited all of those factors as to why you sometimes just lose, why can't you just sometimes get outcoached?
Quote from: MUBurrow on March 08, 2010, 02:07:09 PM
the same way that Ners cited all of those factors as to why you sometimes just lose, why can't you just sometimes get outcoached?
Exactly and vice versa.
I said you can't take a look at the final minute to say Buzz is bad in-game coach because you forget about the previous 39. And you may be correct in saying that Buzz isn't the best ingame coach but you can't do that by looking solely at the final minute.
I love analyzing that is why I brought up the points I did. People can see the same thing and come up with two completely differing answers. And then we bang our heads against walls to try and convince the others.
I love it.
mudimitri could not be more dead on about that, the kick out was the most brutal part of all of that!\
who cares what level basketball you played,,,, some of the guys on here that feel like they have increased credibility b/c they played "VARSITY" level basketball im sure would not have played for some of the local area mps teams back in their day either. I'll give you the argument about playing high level sports in general , but just because it was basketball and not soccer or football or anything else means nothing when you are talking about the breakdown of game strategy.
Quote from: mudimitri on March 08, 2010, 01:51:26 PM
I know you said "most" and I'm not trying to stir things up, but isn't Buzz one of those that never played the game? Just wondering. Also, I believe this 'lack' of experience of his was a huge reason many people nearly crap a brick during his signing
Am I allowed to say that? ?-(
I believe Buzz played in High School..which is certainly less than most D-1 coaches, whom have played at least college ball. The fact there was the outcry against Buzz considering his lack of playing experience, speaks to the belief (whether right or wrong) that the more basketball a coach has played, the more he is qualified to know about the game. I guess my defense in this is that we have armchair fans who dissect the games in hindsight, and say we should have done this/that/etc..Hindsight is always 100%. I just feel that if Buzz did employ the foul strategy and it backfired..meaning team makes first, misses 2nd and grabs rebound and scores to tie the game...there would be outcry against that too. To me, big-picture wise in athletics..somedays you win, some days you lose..but considering this team has yet to lose a game by double digits speaks volumes to the quality of coaching..therefore, I'm not going to dissect or be critical of the coaching..particularily not in hindsight.
Quote from: Ners on March 08, 2010, 04:46:19 PM
I just feel that if Buzz did employ the foul strategy and it backfired..meaning team makes first, misses 2nd and grabs rebound and scores to tie the game...there would be outcry against that too.
Not likely. Here's why:
Think of all the times you've seen the foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence.
Now think of all the times you've seen a game-winning or game-tying shot from 3 point land.
I think most fans would correctly conclude that if Buzz had called for the foul in that situation, and ND successfully executed the foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence, they would chalk it up to ND being INCREDIBLY lucky--not the wrong coaching move.
The reason why people are critical of the decision is that it didn't play into the odds. We've see MU lose several games
this year already on last second shots. I can't remember the last time we were on
either end of a successful foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence.
Can you?
Quote from: Marquette84 on March 08, 2010, 06:45:03 PM
Not likely. Here's why:
Think of all the times you've seen the foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence.
Now think of all the times you've seen a game-winning or game-tying shot from 3 point land.
I think most fans would correctly conclude that if Buzz had called for the foul in that situation, and ND successfully executed the foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence, they would chalk it up to ND being INCREDIBLY lucky--not the wrong coaching move.
The reason why people are critical of the decision is that it didn't play into the odds. We've see MU lose several games this year already on last second shots. I can't remember the last time we were on either end of a successful foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence.
Can you?
This situation is completely different than the usual...should you foul with less than 10 second or whatever variable number it is, circumstance.
Why can't people see that?
When were you looking for the foul? When they were driving down with more than 10 seconds? After it was in the corner and Abro trapped?
WHen?
Tip back? Who would have fouled there?
Quote from: Marquette84 on March 08, 2010, 06:45:03 PM
Not likely. Here's why:
Think of all the times you've seen the foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence.
Now think of all the times you've seen a game-winning or game-tying shot from 3 point land.
I think most fans would correctly conclude that if Buzz had called for the foul in that situation, and ND successfully executed the foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence, they would chalk it up to ND being INCREDIBLY lucky--not the wrong coaching move.
The reason why people are critical of the decision is that it didn't play into the odds. We've see MU lose several games this year already on last second shots. I can't remember the last time we were on either end of a successful foul/made FT/intentional miss/rebound/putback sequence.
Can you?
We have lost 3 games this year on last second shots - FSU, WVU and DePaul. All were TWO point shots so the foul/play defense discussion is irrelevant in each case. Assuming a team has big inside players (we don't) I'd say always foul under 5 seconds.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on March 08, 2010, 08:13:06 PM
We have lost 3 games this year on last second shots - FSU, WVU and DePaul. All were TWO point shots so the foul/play defense discussion is irrelevant in each case. Assuming a team has big inside players (we don't) I'd say always foul under 5 seconds.
Thanks for pointing that out..I did in a previous thread..everyone has gotten worked up about this foul/no foul thing...and it only applies to WVU and now ND to an extent. I don't disagree with 84 that more things do need to happen for a team to tie on the foul/intentional miss/get rebound/make 2 point shot to tie..can't argue that point..and can't really argue that we didn't foul initially against ND..you can make a case for once the shot was missed..to foul anybody..immediately..hack the rebounder...BUT...you never know when a crazy referee such as Burr decides the foul is "intentional" and awards 2 shots and the ball..most likely wouldn't happen..but..it could. Some have criticized Cooby for leaving the 3 point shooter...to be critical of that is ridiculous after a shot has been attempted. There is almost NEVER a situation where you don't instinctually pursue a loose ball in a rebounding situation...and even more so at the end of regulation in a game like that...instincts are instincts..and Cooby actually got back to shooter and got a decent hand in his face.