Congrats to the Warriors and Coach Buzz for finally pulling one of these out. It was not pretty in 2nd half, but we won and that is what counts. Now for some thoughts on Players and where we are at:
Crowder: An absolute stud
DJO: An absolute stud, but lose the stupid three point fouls DJO
Butler: An absloute stud
Buycks: Absolutely not a PG. Give it up Buzz
Otule: A total non factor; 1 rebound in 29 minutes and the tallest guy on the floor. Should only play about 8 minutes a game.
Blue: Totally lost out there, and cannot shoot from anywhere. Should only be playing minimal minutes
Fulce: a role player at best, and should not play in the post
Cadougan: Best ball distributor we have and needs to be on floor more. He can dish to anybody. He does not need to score--leave that to the three studs.
Gardner: Needs to develop but IMO adds more than the non factor Otule
Buzz: Can recruit--switchables, needs to land a quality big to prove his worth in recruiting. At this stage, he is an average coach at best, and is overpaid right now.
At least we finally got one.
Take that Bay-whine.
Here's hoping that hanging in and getting the W gives this group some confidence and helps them down the road in tight games.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 29, 2011, 05:06:45 PM
Congrats to the Warriors and Coach Buzz for finally pulling one of these out. It was not pretty in 2nd half, but we won and that is what counts. Now for some thoughts on Players and where we are at:
Crowder: An absolute stud
DJO: An absolute stud, but lose the stupid three point fouls DJO
Butler: An absloute stud
Buycks: Absolutely not a PG. Give it up Buzz
Otule: A total non factor; 1 rebound in 29 minutes and the tallest guy on the floor. Should only play about 8 minutes a game.
Blue: Totally lost out there, and cannot shoot from anywhere. Should only be playing minimal minutes
Fulce: a role player at best, and should not play in the post
Cadougan: Best ball distributor we have and needs to be on floor more. He can dish to anybody. He does not need to score--leave that to the three studs.
Gardner: Needs to develop but IMO adds more than the non factor Otule
Buzz: Can recruit--switchables, needs to land a quality big to prove his worth in recruiting. At this stage, he is an average coach at best, and is overpaid right now.
At least we finally got one.
Take that Bay-whine.
Otule's 29 minutes of playing time won the game.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 29, 2011, 05:06:45 PM
Congrats to the Warriors and Coach Buzz for finally pulling one of these out. It was not pretty in 2nd half, but we won and that is what counts. Now for some thoughts on Players and where we are at:
Crowder: An absolute stud
DJO: An absolute stud, but lose the stupid three point fouls DJO
Butler: An absloute stud
Buycks: Absolutely not a PG. Give it up Buzz
Otule: A total non factor; 1 rebound in 29 minutes and the tallest guy on the floor. Should only play about 8 minutes a game.
Blue: Totally lost out there, and cannot shoot from anywhere. Should only be playing minimal minutes
Fulce: a role player at best, and should not play in the post
Cadougan: Best ball distributor we have and needs to be on floor more. He can dish to anybody. He does not need to score--leave that to the three studs.
Gardner: Needs to develop but IMO adds more than the non factor Otule
Buzz: Can recruit--switchables, needs to land a quality big to prove his worth in recruiting. At this stage, he is an average coach at best, and is overpaid right now.
At least we finally got one.
Take that Bay-whine.
How about his 8 assists?
Quote from: jeffreyweee on January 29, 2011, 05:18:44 PM
How about his 8 assists?
His 5 rebounds were pretty good too. His D wasn't bad either.
Just tell me you're happy. haha, what a great Saturday it is now
willie u just showed us u know nillie about bball
"Otule: A total non factor; 1 rebound in 29 minutes and the tallest guy on the floor."
You forgot that block at the end of the game.
Buzz said he was the player of the game because Crowder is more effective at teh 4 than the 5. Crowder was highly effective today.
willie, Otule had a huge impact on this game. His block at the end was nice, but he played great defense throughout the game and ate up space on offense.
Chris Otule played well. He can do other things than being a stat stuffer.
Otule played hard down in the paint (as usual) and drew attention which freed up Jae and jimmie. His block at the end was HUGE. He is a big contributor in this win. It is good to have gardner to come in and give him a blow.
Yes, Gardner and Otule provided 37 minutes today = HUGE
How does a guy as big as Otule get so few rebounds in so many minutes?
He doesn't time his jumps well. He's never going to be a great offensive player, but he defends well. Don't be so concerned about stats. Just look how much better the team is when he is in the game. Very smart player.
Rick Jackson averages 12 boards a game. Today 4 in 38 minutes of action. This 6'9" 240 player would have dominated Jae and Jimmy today. Boards would have been total different story. Boxing out takes effort and you may not get the rebound stat.
Otule was awesome today. Don't look at his statline, look at the statline of Syracuse's starting frontcourt. Jackson, Joseph, and Melo combined for 7 rebounds. CO may not have come up with the rebounds himself, but he kept them from getting to the ball time after time.
Buycks: 8:4 assists:turnovers
Junior: 2:2 (and zero points)
Junior's a competent backup point. That's it.
Quote from: mviale on January 29, 2011, 05:17:44 PM
Otule's 29 minutes of playing time won the game.
Also his 1 rebound in 29 minutes. By the way, did you notice when the second half started Otule contributed to a 4 point turnaround for Syracuse. he committed an offensive foul and then lost his man on D who scored. game went from 11 up to 7 up in 20 seconds.
Quote from: Boone on January 29, 2011, 07:05:00 PM
Buycks: 8:4 assists:turnovers
Junior: 2:2 (and zero points)
Junior's a competent backup point. That's it.
Overall, Jr. has a much better Assist to TO ratio than Bikes. Look it up--you may be surprised.
Quote from: warriors1965 on January 29, 2011, 06:43:34 PM
How does a guy as big as Otule get so few rebounds in so many minutes?
Watch him. I believe, living with a person who can only see out of one eye and from what Chris himself has said, he has trouble with things close by quickly changing directions. He can catch passes when he is ready for them, but if something comes rapidly at him changing vectors, he struggles. So to compensate, and I saw him do this several times against UConn, he takes his guy and anybody else he can find and locks them up/moves them away, leaving the boards for Jimmy/Jae. Today, 'Cuse's big guys did not dominate the boards. Ergo, Chris must have done his job wrestling with them. I know this will be difficult for the stat heads, Otule non-fans, Gardner fans, and Buzz non-fans, but quit worrying about how many boards Chris gets and instead pay attention to how many the guy he is guarding gets. If his match-up is relatively neutralized with Jae and Jimmy comining for 15 or more boards, Chris is doing his job.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 29, 2011, 07:38:53 PM
Also his 1 rebound in 29 minutes. By the way, did you notice when the second half started Otule contributed to a 4 point turnaround for Syracuse. he committed an offensive foul and then lost his man on D who scored. game went from 11 up to 7 up in 20 seconds.
I believe this is the very definition of grasping at straws.
Otule played 29 minutes and clearly limited the effectiveness of SU's big guys. Without him, we get dominated and lose the game.
Quote from: tower912 on January 29, 2011, 07:42:39 PM
Watch him. I believe, living with a person who can only see out of one eye and from what Chris himself has said, he has trouble with things close by quickly changing directions. He can catch passes when he is ready for them, but if something comes rapidly at him changing vectors, he struggles. So to compensate, and I saw him do this several times against UConn, he takes his guy and anybody else he can find and locks them up/moves them away, leaving the boards for Jimmy/Jae. Today, 'Cuse's big guys did not dominate the boards. Ergo, Chris must have done his job wrestling with them. I know this will be difficult for the stat heads, Otule non-fans, Gardner fans, and Buzz non-fans, but quit worrying about how many boards Chris gets and instead pay attention to how many the guy he is guarding gets. If his match-up is relatively neutralized with Jae and Jimmy comining for 15 or more boards, Chris is doing his job.
For once I went with the short version ;D
But I agree with everything here. Well said, tower.
I did look up their respective assist-to-turnover ratios and JR's ratio is NOT "much better" than Buycks'. Dwight's is 1.8:1 and JR's is 2.0:1.
Quite honestly, Willie Warrior is another anti-MU guy. I'm so glad there's an ignore button!
Willie, are you DukieV from the scout board?
willy almost makes me miss the "drama on vacation." almost, but not quite.
Without Otule we lose today. Period. Crowder scored inside so much becuase of Otule. Nad Crowder even said that.
This was a very solid win and the team hung tough and won. Credit the team and coaches on this one. GO MARQUETTE!
willie, to use your words, give it up. Based on your assessment above, Buzz should pretty much be playing a 5, maybe 6 man rotation. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? If all the guys you criticize (Blue, Otoule, Buycks, Gardner, Fulce) were as good as you would like them to be, MU would probably be the number 1 team in the country. It just doesn't work that way. Is that your level of expectation. I'm not suggesting that those guys couldn't stand to improve, but show me a team that doesn't have similar issues and i'll show you a team that will be playing in the Final Four.
Our top 3 were better than their Top 3 today, and we won. Against UConn the opposite was true. Same goes for Pitt, ND2, Duke, etc. When your 4th and 5th guys start making consistent big time contributions, you typically aren't going to lose.
Quite yer bitchin!
i felt like a huge turning point was when DJO went out with his 4th foul. Vander came in his place and turned it over about 3-4 times over the few minutes. Vander's jumper is weak so the zone sagged off, allowing him to drive to the hoop, unfortunately once he got into the trees he just couldnt finish. Once DJO came back around 4:30 left, the zone had to stretch to respect his shot and that opened it up a bit. I think he had a 3, an assist and 2 FT's in the last few min. big swing both when he went out and when he came back in. his athleticism creates a lot of space for other players... anyone see what happened at the end when he pulled up holding his side? lets hope he's ok...
Willie - I love stats too, but you really need to watch what's going on the court.
Otule has had non-facor games, but how you could watch him keep the opposing big boxed out to allow syracuse get 5 offensive rebounds and then save the game with that incredible block and think he was a non-factor is beyond me. Otule blocks and alters shot. Look at how easily uconn went to the hoop every time the court once otul was on the bench.
I thought we'd heard the end of the ridiculous criticism of buycks when the couple of posters with anti-buycks names seemed to go away. Do you watch our guards play defense. I love junior and djo, but they have trouble stopping penetration. Buycks and blue are the only two who can square up and stop guys one-on-one. I'm sorry if you don't like a point guard that hits 45 percent of his 3-pointers and drives to the hoop well enough to be one of the few guards in the country to shoot over 50 percent on all of his shots, but you should also know that 25 percent of mu's baskets come off assists from buycks, virtually the same total as from junior when he is on the floor.
Sometimes I believe a group of our fans are the only ones who believe buzz isn't a good to great coach and that we wouldn't be a tournament team if tomorrow were selection sunday, but at least watch the game if you are going to criticize players.
Buycks could have easily had 12 dimes today if we could make our bunnies.
Last year we watched Lazar and Jimmy try to box out Syracuse big men and grab the rebounds. We were outrebounded 43-21 in the game, dropping to 11-8 despite a great effort.
This year with Otule boxing out their big men to free up Jae and Jimmy to grab the rebounds, we actually outrebounded Syracuse 24-22. Otule was huge.
Our problem right now is that we really only have four very good defensive players: Buycks, Crowder, Otule and Blue, so for defense we really want those four guys and Butler on the floor. We need to keep Buycks and Crowder on the floor as much as we can, but for offense you'd rather have Otule and Blue on the bench and go with Cadougan, Buycks, DJO, Butler and Gardner. With the latter line-up Cadougan can be a great distributor to four guys who all know how to score, but while I believe that's our best offensive line-up, we are going to give up a lot of points without Otule altering shots and Blue getting steals and stops.
Fulce is a good guy off the bench in either line-up.
Quote from: Aughnanure on January 29, 2011, 05:26:28 PM
Just tell me you're happy. haha, what a great Saturday it is now
There is a strange demographic IMO of certain sports fans out there who tend to almost always try to find the negatives for teams they follow, even when they win. Especially so if a fan doesn't like the GM, coach, or manager of the team.
I've seen it with some Packer fans even with all of their success this year. Instead of being mainly just super excited for the five straight important Packer wins, there is a certain percentage of fans who pick apart any of the wins which were close games. As if it's easy to cruise to big margin wins over good teams.
Syracuse is a damn good basketball team and very tough to beat. In 22 games, only 4 were able to beat them. Fans should mainly just enjoy the win vs picking apart the win because some of the players on MU didn't play perfectly or mistake free while facing a very talented top 10 team.
I took the scenic route home so I haven't been to a computer before now, but I wanted to make sure I put in a happy post game post.
GREAT JOB TEAM! We desperately needed a win, and you held off their comeback attempt. I don't understand how every game you can look so good in the first half and then seemingly forget everything at halftime, but a win is a win. I was pretty numb most of the 2nd half, once they cut it to 2 I just kinda sat there stunned until Jimmy's prayers knocked me out of it. But I'm very happy they pulled it out and the optimism is starting to come back. Woo Hoo!
Otule doesn't have to get the board-he finds a body and keeps them off so the quicker guys like Butler and Jae can grab the boards. Otule also helps space the O with the size in the post.
Quote from: bamamarquettefan on January 30, 2011, 12:45:53 AM
Last year we watched Lazar and Jimmy try to box out Syracuse big men and grab the rebounds. We were outrebounded 43-21 in the game, dropping to 11-8 despite a great effort.
This year with Otule boxing out their big men to free up Jae and Jimmy to grab the rebounds, we actually outrebounded Syracuse 24-22. Otule was huge.
Our problem right now is that we really only have four very good defensive players: Buycks, Crowder, Otule and Blue, so for defense we really want those four guys and Butler on the floor. We need to keep Buycks and Crowder on the floor as much as we can, but for offense you'd rather have Otule and Blue on the bench and go with Cadougan, Buycks, DJO, Butler and Gardner. With the latter line-up Cadougan can be a great distributor to four guys who all know how to score, but while I believe that's our best offensive line-up, we are going to give up a lot of points without Otule altering shots and Blue getting steals and stops.
Fulce is a good guy off the bench in either line-up.
Not buying your analysis of our 4 best defensive players. Did you see down the stretch that Otule's block and near block were on Buycks' man who blew right by Buycks? Buycks is average at best. Blue--everybody raves about his defense but he has flaws also. Otule gets schooled planty out there--but he is a very good shot blocker. Crowder is a stud but when he has to play post he gets burned often down low--he does get rebounds when they miss--not his fault, he is not a true post.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 30, 2011, 07:17:32 AM
Not buying your analysis of our 4 best defensive players. Did you see down the stretch that Otule's block and near block were on Buycks' man who blew right by Buycks?
They were overplaying the 3. That's gonna happen.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 30, 2011, 07:19:54 AM
They were overplaying the 3. That's gonna happen.
Willie has demonstrated absolutely nothing when it comes to basketball acumen and general strategy. He's only good at making 100s of Rick Pitino jokes, even though they are all basically the same thing worded a little differently.
I believe Marquette was something like +10 or +11 when O'Tule was in the game. Enough said.
Quote from: Strokin 3s on January 31, 2011, 03:41:46 PM
I believe Marquette was something like +10 or +11 when O'Tule was in the game. Enough said.
+10 in 29 minutes with Otule on the court.
-4 in 11 minutes with Otule on the bench.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on January 31, 2011, 03:19:39 PM
Willie has demonstrated absolutely nothing when it comes to basketball acumen and general strategy. He's only good at making 100s of Rick Pitino jokes, even though they are all basically the same thing worded a little differently.
Acumen, that sounds like semen. Ask for the Fetuccinni Alfredo, at Slick Rick's favorite restaurant at Porcini's.
BWAAAAAAAAAHHHWHAAHAHHHH!
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on January 31, 2011, 03:19:39 PM
Willie has demonstrated absolutely nothing when it comes to basketball acumen and general strategy. He's only good at making 100s of Rick Pitino jokes, even though they are all basically the same thing worded a little differently.
And your name Sir demonstrates that you contribute nothing but a wierd post name. By the way, tell us about your extraordinary acumen, lances other nut. I am sure with that monstrous acumen you can impress one and all.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2011, 03:57:14 PM
And your name Sir demonstrates that you contribute nothing but a wierd post name. By the way, tell us about your extraordinary acumen, lances other nut. I am sure with that monstrous acumen you can impress one and all.
At least the guy doesn't fancy himself the second coming of e.e. cummings.
you guys need to lay off Willie before he comes up with a new nickname for you.
Sincerely,
The Urinator
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2011, 03:57:14 PM
And your name Sir demonstrates that you contribute nothing but a wierd post name. By the way, tell us about your extraordinary acumen, lances other nut. I am sure with that monstrous acumen you can impress one and all.
You mean hard hitting facts and analysis like, Player X is a stud. Player Y is not a stud. He shouldn't be playing, blah blah blah.
Is anyone else having a hard time shaking the feeling that if we didn't go 3-4 from three as the shot clock expired we would have lost this game.
Butler's shot fading right and DJO's (i think) with two guys on him were not things we want to rely on to win games. If we do we'll end up being the unluckiest team in basketball again and again. This seems to be a common problem for the team late in games.
I really hate to be the guy complaining after a loss, but willie bitching about our center (who allowed us to win the rebounding battle against cuse) and our pg (after a 8 dime night) really opened things up for me.
Quote from: RawdogDX on February 01, 2011, 09:28:36 AM
Is anyone else having a hard time shaking the feeling that if we didn't go 3-4 from three as the shot clock expired we would have lost this game.
I agree, but nevertheless it was good to get one our way. All 4 or those shots were better than Knowles 3 just grabbing and turning so it is what it is.
Quote from: RawdogDX on February 01, 2011, 09:28:36 AM
Is anyone else having a hard time shaking the feeling that if we didn't go 3-4 from three as the shot clock expired we would have lost this game.
co-sign
Not to mention that those shot clock threes were in the final five minutes of the game. And during a stretch where our defense turned even more porous than typical.
Quote from: RawdogDX on February 01, 2011, 09:28:36 AM
Is anyone else having a hard time shaking the feeling that if we didn't go 3-4 from three as the shot clock expired we would have lost this game.
Butler's shot fading right and DJO's (i think) with two guys on him were not things we want to rely on to win games. If we do we'll end up being the unluckiest team in basketball again and again. This seems to be a common problem for the team late in games.
I really hate to be the guy complaining after a loss, but willie bitching about our center (who allowed us to win the rebounding battle against cuse) and our pg (after a 8 dime night) really opened things up for me.
You are likely right on that RawDog, but we did finally pull one out, which is the good thing. Remember, if Knowles wouldn't have gone unconscious against us at Louisville, we would have won that also.
Quote from: RawdogDX on February 01, 2011, 09:28:36 AM
Is anyone else having a hard time shaking the feeling that if we didn't go 3-4 from three as the shot clock expired we would have lost this game.
+1. That's what I posted immediately after the game. We have got to stop being so tentative with the lead in the second half. We stopped pushing the ball up the floor and attacking the defense in the second half, but those 3s bailed us out. I do think our D was a little better than it's been down the stretch, whether that was because Syracuse is not a dynamic offensive team or that Otule's presence helped I am not sure. (After the game I chose to credit Otule and I stand by it).
Quote from: RawdogDX on February 01, 2011, 09:28:36 AM
Is anyone else having a hard time shaking the feeling that if we didn't go 3-4 from three as the shot clock expired we would have lost this game.
Butler's shot fading right and DJO's (i think) with two guys on him were not things we want to rely on to win games. If we do we'll end up being the unluckiest team in basketball again and again. This seems to be a common problem for the team late in games.
I really hate to be the guy complaining after a loss, but willie bitching about our center (who allowed us to win the rebounding battle against cuse) and our pg (after a 8 dime night) really opened things up for me.
Fair enough, but you can make that argument the other way.
Does anyone else have a hard time shaking the feeling that if a 39 percent three-point shooter doesn't go four-for-four in a 3:47 stretch, we would have beat Louisville?
Does anyone else have a hard time shaking the feeling that if Notre Dame wasn't awarded 22 second-half free throws - they average 25 per game - at South Bend, we would have won that game.
Does anyone else have a hard time shaking the feeling that if a foul were called on a very close trip/slip at the end of the Vandy game, MU would have beaten a ranked opponent on the road?
Fact is, Knowles did hit those shots, Notre Dame did get those free throws, Vandy wasn't called for a foul and Butler and DJO did knock down huge threes. Do we want to rely on that? No, not any more than Pitino is relying on 12 points from Preston Knowles in less than four minutes play, or Mike Brey is counting on getting to the line 22 times every half.
But, for me at least, I try not to look at our guys hitting big shots in big situations as something we should be griping about. Isn't that exactly what we've been calling for all year? Isn't that how good teams win tough games against good opponents?
Quote from: Pakuni on February 01, 2011, 01:08:28 PM
Fair enough, but you can make that argument the other way.
Does anyone else have a hard time shaking the feeling that if a 39 percent three-point shooter doesn't go four-for-four in a 3:47 stretch, we would have beat Louisville?
Does anyone else have a hard time shaking the feeling that if Notre Dame wasn't awarded 22 second-half free throws - they average 25 per game - at South Bend, we would have won that game.
Does anyone else have a hard time shaking the feeling that if a foul were called on a very close trip/slip at the end of the Vandy game, MU would have beaten a ranked opponent on the road?
Marquette lost those games because they are poor defensively and cannot make stops when it counts. UL converted on, what, 11 of 12 possessions down the stretch? ND shot an eFG% of 60.5% against us and didn't turn the ball over at all. Vandy scored 1.12 ppp and yet again MU couldn't make the stop at the end.
The feeling I can't shake is that MU does not make stops when it matters. The pattern was repeating itself against Syracuse. Marquette just outgunned them with three shot-clock beating three pointers.
I'm not griping about the win. But I am taking a step back and saying, "Maybe we still have the same fundamental problem and just got a little lucky". Nothing wrong with being lucky every now and then.
In the final five minutes of the game, Syracuse went 6-8 and also went to the line once. One of those missed shots was with 0:16 left and MU up by six. The other was Otule's block. 'Cuse also had one turnover.
Pakuni,
I understand what you are saying but it seemed like those threes by louisville were shot in rhythm and open. The point of running an offense should be to get high percentage shots. We take a lot of high % shots till the last 6 minutes. Then we start taking low % shots and give up our lead. This game we hit the low percentage shots.
I'm not smart enough to know if the above is factual or perceived. And I'm not even close to figuring out why it happens. I've met too people who think they are more likely to hit a set with 3's than 9's to think humans are good at recognizing patterns by watching events, so I could be completely wrong. I think Buzz changes something on offence late and the D (as sugar mentioned) isn't great all game long and that doesn't change in crunch time.
It seemed to me that we had trouble getting good shots against Syracuse for pretty much the entire second half. They doubled the ball on the perimeter a lot in the first half and the result was easy opportunities for us. In the second half they packed it in some and played their zone straight up, making the seams harder to find and exploit.
On the other side of the ball,I don't know why our below average defense slips to being almost statistically non existant down the stretch in some games. Are we more fatigued because we try to play like our hair's on fire for the entire game? Do bigger and more athletic teams simply wear us down? Does the emphasis on not fouling backfire down the stretch when officials tend to allow/reward more contact and physical play? Do other teams just have players (Knowles, Hansbrough, Joseph, etc.) capable (mentally and physically) of chucking the game plan and simply taking over at crunch time? Certainly there's been an element of bad luck involved (especially vs Louisville), but it's more than that. Thoughts?
Good point on the fatigue. Hadn't thought about that.
Unrelated trivia that I can't help to think about whenever fatigue is mentioned in sports.
(Not Verbatim)
Question asked by Reporter: What factor did fatigue play in the game?
Player's Response: Who? What number was Fatigue?
Name that player.
Edit: answer Neil Smith DE (Nebraska, Chiefs, Broncos, Chargers)