Sorry, but I just don't see him as the contributor that TV analysts and a lot of people on here seem to think he is.
He just comes off as lazy. Lazy getting up/down the court, extremely lazy on the defensive end (hence all the sloppy fouls under the basket) and nowhere near what you'd call an offensive "spark plug".
I think he looks great when he happens to get the ball down low. Brief flashes of brilliance with his post moves.
All in all, though, I think his offensive production and rebounding is not up to his physical potential, and the points he does score on offense he pretty much gives right back to the opponent on the defensive end via fouls or missed assignments under the hoop.
Anyone else with me here?
DG is effective in smaller, shorter doses, like the left handed reliever who comes in to get one guy out. His effectiveness suffers diminishing returns anytime he is on the floor for more than 3-4 straight minutes or anything beyond 20-22 for the game. This is why we miss Chris so much. And why with JWilson only playing 14 minutes, DG's lack of effectiveness down the stretch was pretty much inevitable. brewcity77 was right.
I don't think he's lazy, he's working hard.....he just doesn't have the quickest feet. I can remember last year his defense was so bad that Buzz couldn't keep him on the floor at all, so he's definitely improved.
When he's fresh he's very effective in the low post. I wish we'd use him more in fact, by getting him the ball down low. He's able to score, draw fouls and he's a good (and un-selfish) passer if the other team collapses on him.
Agree completely that he is best used in 3-minute spurts. I have never seen a college player look so exhausted after a few minutes on the court. Of course, our run-run ststem is partly the reason.
I agree with everything you say, AZ, but the most crucial phrase in your post is "when he's fresh".
Quote from: ecompt on January 05, 2012, 10:57:37 AM
... our run-run ststem is partly the reason.
I don't think that's an excuse anymore. He's had about 18 months on campus, and while he has slimmed up some, his conditioning should not be an issue. Our style hasn't changed since he got here. Either he's not putting in the effort to get in shape (unmotivated, imo), or he's just not the top-shape athlete we expect all our recruits to be.
His conditioning is much improved. He just started from further behind.
Quote from: i_miss_angelos on January 05, 2012, 11:02:07 AM
I don't think that's an excuse anymore. He's had about 18 months on campus, and while he has slimmed up some, his conditioning should not be an issue. Our style hasn't changed since he got here. Either he's not putting in the effort to get in shape (unmotivated, imo), or he's just not the top-shape athlete we expect all our recruits to be.
I can almost guarantee he's in better shape than anyone on this board. However, he's still hauling around nearly 300 pounds. Great shape or not, that takes its toll.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 05, 2012, 11:08:22 AM
I can almost guarantee he's in better shape than anyone on this board. However, he's still hauling around nearly 300 pounds. Great shape or not, that takes its toll.
Of course he's in better shape than us! But we need him to be able to keep up with BEAST speeds, not our stunning 8-minute miles on the treadmills in the Rec.
My point in this, which no one seems to agree with, is that the majority of people are praising him up and down for his contributions, when I think he's average
at best.
Quote from: i_miss_angelos on January 05, 2012, 11:12:34 AM
Of course he's in better shape than us! But we need him to be able to keep up with BEAST speeds, not our stunning 8-minute miles on the treadmills in the Rec.
My point in this, which no one seems to agree with, is that the majority of people are praising him up and down for his contributions, when I think he's average at best.
He was a recruit with low expectations so anything he contributes is praised relentlessly. He's the bizarro Vander Blue.
People like him because he has a great scoring rate. Points make up for a lot if deficiencies. DG is a very valuable player, he just isn't a complete player. Like tower said, he's most effective in small doses. As a 15-20 mpg player, Gardner is NYWarrior's "Force of Nature". But as a 25-30 mpg starter, he runs out of gas.
DG getting so much playing time this year is going to be really good for our team later this season and the next couple of seasons. The guy has talent and drive, and PT will only add more drive to get his conditioning in order.
He has the softest touch around the rim that I've seen from an MU big man in ages. He can also pass brilliantly. He's really putting a nice game together, it'd just be nice if we didn't *have* to use him for 30 min a game :)
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 05, 2012, 11:17:44 AM
People like him because he has a great scoring rate. Points make up for a lot if deficiencies. DG is a very valuable player, he just isn't a complete player. Like tower said, he's most effective in small doses. As a 15-20 mpg player, Gardner is NYWarrior's "Force of Nature". But as a 25-30 mpg starter, he runs out of gas.
Right, DG minutes should be capped at 25. If that means playing Juan a little bit if Wilson is in foul trouble, so be it.
As for the op question, I like Davante because he is efficient. Also, he's MU best offensive rebounder and since only Otule's injury, I feel he has really elevated his game, and more importantly his focus. Other than the Vandy game, DG has been a positive factor in each contest.
I like Gardner because he provides a solid offensive option on a team that desperately needs them. Not a good defender, but who on this team is?
Because he is the only bigman MU has right now.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 05, 2012, 11:31:43 AM
I like Gardner because he provides a solid offensive option on a team that desperately needs them. Not a good defender, but who on this team is?
Blue and Jamil Wilson...but Wilson has been guarding too many bigs.
Gardner worked his ass off last night every time he was in.
Quote from: i_miss_angelos on January 05, 2012, 10:36:14 AM
Anyone else with me here?
NOPE. Just about NO ONE on this board, or anyone with functioning brain capacity, is with you. First, if you can't see he's a really solid contributor on offense, YOU'RE BLIND. The guy scores points in the post, something we deperately need every game.
Second, that "lazy" accusation--equal parts untrue, a figment of your imagination, and a touch RAYCESS. Stunningly, a 6'8", 300 lb guy can't run like a guard. MAYBE BECAUSE HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO. Please cite ONE PLAY from last night where he was beaten to his spot by Sims. You can't. In a related note, you DID see him step into a passing lane 25 feet from the basket to get a steal, right?
Third, The Big OX/SHEESH wasn't highly recruited, and is still, amazingly, a work in progress. He's a sophomore PF playing center in the BE conference, and holding his own both rebounding and scoring. I believe he is EXCEEDING his "physical potential", thanks to good coaching, conditioning by the training staff, and his own work ethic, which would be the exact opposite of "lazy."
In summary, your critiques of DG are "lazy."
Quote from: nyg on January 05, 2012, 11:34:17 AM
Because he is the only bigman MU has right now.
Basically this. He can do things no one else on this team can do. And he has the best touch for a MU post player since RJax.
I like Jeronne !
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 05, 2012, 11:57:50 AM
NOPE. Just about NO ONE on this board, or anyone with functioning brain capacity, is with you. First, if you can't see he's a really solid contributor on offense, YOU'RE BLIND. The guy scores points in the post, something we deperately need every game.
Second, that "lazy" accusation--equal parts untrue, a figment of your imagination, and a touch RAYCESS. Stunningly, a 6'8", 300 lb guy can't run like a guard. MAYBE BECAUSE HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO. Please cite ONE PLAY from last night where he was beaten to his spot by Sims. You can't. In a related note, you DID see him step into a passing lane 25 feet from the basket to get a steal, right?
Third, The Big OX/SHEESH wasn't highly recruited, and is still, amazingly, a work in progress. He's a sophomore PF playing center in the BE conference, and holding his own both rebounding and scoring. I believe he is EXCEEDING his "physical potential", thanks to good coaching, conditioning by the training staff, and his own work ethic, which would be the exact opposite of "lazy."
In summary, your critiques of DG are "lazy."
THIS!!
Davante is quick, not fast, quick. If the ball is around him he gets really quick - primarily on offense, but starting to pick it up on defense last few games.
I think it's a perception thing. He has a natural slumped shoulder demeanor to him that can be interpreted as being slow or even lazy. I'd love to see him make a hoop and carry himself tall, but he doesn't. It's just not the SHEESH way.
He's getting better. He's a sophomore. Conditioning is improving. Defense is improving. Seems to be a good kid.
Why does everyone like Gardner? Well, let's start with the fact that he does not choke. Otherwise, your comments seem to reflect that you have been lazy and not read the proverbial numbers. It is also likely that you are related to Rumplestiltskin.
I like Gardner and I'm glad he's on our team. That being said, I don't have the same kind of crush on him that many seem to have -- a crush that was especially strong earlier this season. Those who actually thought he should start over Otule long ago learned the error of their ways.
I like that he can score from the post, that he draws fouls, that he mostly makes his FTs (which puts him in the minority on this team) and that he occasionally grabs an offensive board.
I don't like that he can't play more than a few minutes without getting winded, that his defensive footwork is poor, that he often seems anchored to the floor and that he often fails to get position on the defensive boards. (For example, he had one defensive rebound in 31 minutes last night.) I also don't like that he doesn't have a big wingspan, but that's not his fault!
I don't think he's lazy. Because of his foot speed and body language, though, I can see how somebody might think he's lazy.
He's a valuable backup who has been forced to start. The main hope is he'll help us get through this Big East season without Otule and this entire experience will make him better in the future.
Quote from: MU82 on January 05, 2012, 01:01:47 PM
that he mostly makes his FTs (which puts him in the minority on this team)
That's not the case.
MU is a good FT shooting team. Against GT, MU was 16-20, 80%. For the season, MU is shooting 70% from the line.
We have five guys shooting 70% or better... DJO, Jae, Mayo, J. Wilson & Gardner. Even Blue and Junior are shooting above 65%. These guys represent the overwhelming percentage of minutes played. I wouldn't classify one as a "bad" FT shooter.
For the record, I like Gardner a lot. I will agree with everyone listing every virtue he has He just isn't physically ready to play 30 minutes a game or 10 straight minutes.
He's a mid major recruit who you really can't expect any more of since Buzz' style of play is not he strongest attribute.
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 05, 2012, 11:57:50 AM
NOPE. Just about NO ONE on this board, or anyone with functioning brain capacity, is with you. First, if you can't see he's a really solid contributor on offense, YOU'RE BLIND. The guy scores points in the post, something we deperately need every game.
First, I never said he didn't contribute on offense. In fact, I applauded his post game.
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 05, 2012, 11:57:50 AM
Second, that "lazy" accusation--equal parts untrue, a figment of your imagination, and a touch RAYCESS. Stunningly, a 6'8", 300 lb guy can't run like a guard. MAYBE BECAUSE HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO. Please cite ONE PLAY from last night where he was beaten to his spot by Sims. You can't. In a related note, you DID see him step into a passing lane 25 feet from the basket to get a steal, right?
It's very inappropriate of you to accuse me of racism. There IS such a thing as a lazy ballplayer, and it is completely unrelated to race. Besides, last time I checked, Davante's not the only black player on the team.
And citing a specific play, no, I don't have the film right in front of me. And I am not just referring to last night's game. My point was that he commits sloppy fouls and gives points back to the other team as easily as he can score them for us at some times.
Quote from: lab_warrior on January 05, 2012, 11:57:50 AM
In summary, your critiques of DG are "lazy."
Admittedly, I don't follow the team as closely as most of the posters on here. Forgive me for destroying your perceived intelligence of all the people on the forum with the exception of myself. You're entitled to your own opinion, just as I am. Get off your high horse and let the discussion be opinionated without bashing others for disagreeing with you.
I love Gardner. Brings it every night. Whoever started this thread is a boob.
I think Gardner is doing a great job. Durley, based on looks alone, seems to be the exact same type of player but much taller. Obviously, seeing as how he isn't getting much playing time on his high school team he will most likely have a much steeper learning curve than Davante. It will be nice to have 2 300 pounders on the low blocks but I don't expect that either will be able to keep up with the run of play for an extended period of time or play more than 25 minutes/ game. I'll be interested to see if Buzz is able to bring in an athletic, more mobile center in the next couple of years.
Quote from: RJax55 on January 05, 2012, 01:18:06 PM
We have five guys shooting 70% or better... DJO, Jae, Mayo, J. Wilson & Gardner. Even Blue and Junior are shooting above 65%. These guys represent the overwhelming percentage of minutes played. I wouldn't classify one as a "bad" FT shooter.
70% is marginal and 65% is crap. I'm sure someone will say that both are at or better than the national average. OK, that's fine. Then the national average is crap. Judging one pile of crap based on another pile of crap doesn't make the former a rose.
Quote from: slingkong on January 06, 2012, 09:24:18 AM
70% is marginal and 65% is crap. I'm sure someone will say that both are at or better than the national average. OK, that's fine. Then the national average is crap. Judging one pile of crap based on another pile of crap doesn't make the former a rose.
So, what would you consider to be a "non-crap" rate?