Was just on scout.com and as it looks we are no longer listed as a school that he is considering. The lead story is an update on his recruiting. Having said that, I hope he ends up out of state. Anyone heard anything different?
I heard Obama got re-elected.
Really, because just yesterday we were still listed as a school in the running. It was just updated today and we are no longer listed. Any smart answers on this? I'm sure you have a few
We haven't been in contention for some time. Scout was out of date.
Is Wisconsin still on the updated list?
Quote from: jonny09 on May 30, 2013, 08:32:05 PM
Was just on scout.com and as it looks we are no longer listed as a school that he is considering. The lead story is an update on his recruiting. Having said that, I hope he ends up out of state. Anyone heard anything different?
hehehehe... jon the clown.
Yup, Wisconsin is still on the list
Quote from: jonny09 on May 30, 2013, 08:51:01 PM
Yup, Wisconsin is still on the list
Too bad for Wisconsin, those bridesmaids dresses are
so expensive and you can never really wear them anywhere else.
In guessing Looney will have a similar time like Tokoto and after a grueling decision with his family may choose school X over Wisky--but they were right there until the end.
Quote from: LittleMurs on May 30, 2013, 08:55:58 PM
Too bad for Wisconsin, those bridesmaids dresses are so expensive and you can never really wear them anywhere else.
Aaaannnndddd you just won the internet.
Quote from: LittleMurs on May 30, 2013, 08:55:58 PM
Too bad for Wisconsin, those bridesmaids dresses are so expensive and you can never really wear them anywhere else.
But that look is so cute on them...if only someone told them in advance they were going to be
alongside the altar.
Sorry, cannot agree about Bucky being the bridesmaid--if so, what are we?
I get tired of us losing in state big studs to UNC or Duke or wherever. Of course Kids have the right to go wherever they want. But losing guys like Tokoto or Looney to other programs bugs me. When that happens, it simply shows that MU is still not elite in the minds of many top big recruits in state. What turns some of these kids off to MU? A first class arena, a great tradition, a good school, a great conference(at least the last few years), and a caring good coach. Yes, we did get Blue, but was it more a bunch of Bucky fans turning Blue off to them. If we lose both Looney and Stone, we should be pissed. I am thankful for Burton and Du. Wilson, but some on this board seem to not believe they will impact the team much initially. Some feel Du. Wilson cannot even beat out De. Wilson.
We absolutely need to either get stud bigs in state when they are available, or land some from else where. Otule is not a stud, and Gardner is a good player, but where are the big studs for us? Sure hope that we can land Stone.
As for Looney, Buzz' biggest obstacle was MU is in his hometown. Some kids just want to go away to school. Some like chicken, some like feathers.
4ever
Does Bucky have real chance?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 31, 2013, 06:47:10 AM
As for Looney, Buzz' biggest obstacle was MU is in his hometown. Some kids just want to go away to school. Some like chicken, some like feathers.
Seriously, I never got why it's considered such a tragedy or recruiting failure to lose a home town or home state kid. I know at that age I wanted nothing more than to go somewhere else for college. That brought me several states and a time zone away to MU and I'm glad I did it. For others, staying home is the right thing for them. I'm hoping beyond hope that Stone falls into the latter camp, but it seems like Looney wanted to go away from the get-go. C'est la vie. We're in on a fast rising 2014 wing in Malek Harris, we'll be fine without Looney. We'd obviously be better with him, but that was never really in the cards. Good luck to him at Duke.
I love that people still look at the schools listed on those recruiting sites.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AM
Sorry, cannot agree about Bucky being the bridesmaid--if so, what are we?
I get tired of us losing in state big studs to UNC or Duke or wherever. Of course Kids have the right to go wherever they want. But losing guys like Tokoto or Looney to other programs bugs me. When that happens, it simply shows that MU is still not elite in the minds of many top big recruits in state. What turns some of these kids off to MU? A first class arena, a great tradition, a good school, a great conference(at least the last few years), and a caring good coach. Yes, we did get Blue, but was it more a bunch of Bucky fans turning Blue off to them. If we lose both Looney and Stone, we should be pissed. I am thankful for Burton and Du. Wilson, but some on this board seem to not believe they will impact the team much initially. Some feel Du. Wilson cannot even beat out De. Wilson.
We absolutely need to either get stud bigs in state when they are available, or land some from else where. Otule is not a stud, and Gardner is a good player, but where are the big studs for us? Sure hope that we can land Stone.
Dude, welcome to the world of college basketball. Did it just hit you that MU isn't on the level as the Dukes and Kentuckys of the world (at least not since AL)? It is frustrating to lose in state guys, but it is what it is. I'd be much more frustrated about losing players to Becky or other schools in the Midwest than I am about losing top 20 kids to Duke or UNC.
Bottom line: you keep winning, keep picking your recruiting battles, and sooner or later you start reeling in some of the big fish.
P.S. We just landed our best recruiting class in 30 years, so cheer up.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AM
Sorry, cannot agree about Bucky being the bridesmaid--if so, what are we?
I get tired of us losing in state big studs to UNC or Duke or wherever. Of course Kids have the right to go wherever they want. But losing guys like Tokoto or Looney to other programs bugs me. When that happens, it simply shows that MU is still not elite in the minds of many top big recruits in state. What turns some of these kids off to MU? A first class arena, a great tradition, a good school, a great conference(at least the last few years), and a caring good coach. Yes, we did get Blue, but was it more a bunch of Bucky fans turning Blue off to them. If we lose both Looney and Stone, we should be pissed. I am thankful for Burton and Du. Wilson, but some on this board seem to not believe they will impact the team much initially. Some feel Du. Wilson cannot even beat out De. Wilson.
We absolutely need to either get stud bigs in state when they are available, or land some from else where. Otule is not a stud, and Gardner is a good player, but where are the big studs for us? Sure hope that we can land Stone.
Because top recruits in other states never spurn top programs within that state ::)
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AM
Sorry, cannot agree about Bucky being the bridesmaid--if so, what are we?
I get tired of us losing in state big studs to UNC or Duke or wherever. Of course Kids have the right to go wherever they want. But losing guys like Tokoto or Looney to other programs bugs me. When that happens, it simply shows that MU is still not elite in the minds of many top big recruits in state. What turns some of these kids off to MU? A first class arena, a great tradition, a good school, a great conference(at least the last few years), and a caring good coach. Yes, we did get Blue, but was it more a bunch of Bucky fans turning Blue off to them. If we lose both Looney and Stone, we should be pissed. I am thankful for Burton and Du. Wilson, but some on this board seem to not believe they will impact the team much initially. Some feel Du. Wilson cannot even beat out De. Wilson.
We absolutely need to either get stud bigs in state when they are available, or land some from else where. Otule is not a stud, and Gardner is a good player, but where are the big studs for us? Sure hope that we can land Stone.
We are moving on to recruits that we have a realistic chance to get, rather than wasting precious recruiting time so that we can say; "We were right there until he choose Duke."
The downside to both Looney and Stone is that they will both almost certainly be one and done guys. I'd love to have either one, and I think that Buzz has a shot at Stone, but there is a much bigger bang for one's recruiting buck when you get players who stay 3 or 4 years.
Quote from: AWegrzyn17 on May 31, 2013, 07:42:45 AM
Dude, welcome to the world of college basketball. Did it just hit you that MU isn't on the level as the Dukes and Kentuckys of the world (at least not since AL)? It is frustrating to lose in state guys, but it is what it is. I'd be much more frustrated about losing players to Becky or other schools in the Midwest than I am about losing top 20 kids to Duke or UNC.
Bottom line: you keep winning, keep picking your recruiting battles, and sooner or later you start reeling in some of the big fish.
P.S. We just landed our best recruiting class in 30 years, so cheer up.
I don't look at it as we are not on the same level as the Dukes and Kentuckys of the world and neither should Buzz. Every kid is different. Some want to stay home, some want to go out of State. No school gets every single top recruit in their area. I would say MU's track record is pretty good as of late as far as recruiting local kids.
Correct me if I'm wrong (well, don't need to state that here), but wasn't JuJuan J ranked higher than Blue. If he lived in Milwaukee people would say we finally got our top local talent. Buzz is stacking the roster and filling it with guys from every part of the country. We are damn lucky to have a coach who doesn't need to rely only on local talent. We are much more on par with how schools like MSU recruit (geographically speaking) than with how schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin recruit. Duke is pretty good, how many players are from Durham?
Recruiting is a national scene, and we are getting national recruits at the tier 1.5-3 level. I hope Marquette and Buzz get to the point of landing top 10 players, but watching Kentucky and Kansas I'm just not sure that we have the dirty money pockets to compete.
Quote from: macman320 on May 31, 2013, 08:20:42 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong (well, don't need to state that here), but wasn't JuJuan J ranked higher than Blue. If he lived in Milwaukee people would say we finally got our top local talent. Buzz is stacking the roster and filling it with guys from every part of the country. We are damn lucky to have a coach who doesn't need to rely only on local talent. We are much more on par with how schools like MSU recruit (geographically speaking) than with how schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin recruit. Duke is pretty good, how many players are from Durham?
Recruiting is a national scene, and we are getting national recruits at the tier 1.5-3 level. I hope Marquette and Buzz get to the point of landing top 10 players, but watching Kentucky and Kansas I'm just not sure that we have the dirty money pockets to compete.
LOL, and guilty as charged.
One correction, Minnesota seems to have changed its recruiting once Pitino's kid took over for Tubby. They are now after pretty much every kid from the east coast that MU was in on. Pitino will have to recruit nationally to be in line for the Louisville job when his Dad moves on.
Quote from: macman320 on May 31, 2013, 08:20:42 AM
but watching Kentucky and Kansas I'm just not sure that we have the dirty money pockets to compete.
I'm not in any way suggesting that there's $$ involved at either Kansas or Kentucky but I NEVER want to go down that path or even consider it.
Quote from: macman320 on May 31, 2013, 08:20:42 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong (well, don't need to state that here), but wasn't JuJuan J ranked higher than Blue. If he lived in Milwaukee people would say we finally got our top local talent. Buzz is stacking the roster and filling it with guys from every part of the country. We are damn lucky to have a coach who doesn't need to rely only on local talent. We are much more on par with how schools like MSU recruit (geographically speaking) than with how schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin recruit. Duke is pretty good, how many players are from Durham?
Recruiting is a national scene, and we are getting national recruits at the tier 1.5-3 level. I hope Marquette and Buzz get to the point of landing top 10 players, but watching Kentucky and Kansas I'm just not sure that we have the dirty money pockets to compete.
Jajuan: RSCI #30
Blue: RSCI #48
You are correct, sir.
DJames and Robert Jackson are the only other guys we've gotten in the 30s at #36 (2005) and #33 (1998). Diener and Jamil Wilson were both #40 (2001 & 2009). I'd say Jajuan has a shot at being pretty damn good for us when all is said and done.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AMSorry, cannot agree about Bucky being the bridesmaid--if so, what are we?
Here's the thing...Bucky doesn't
realize they are the bridesmaid. They were sent to get a bridesmaid dress and for some reason think that shade of blue is actually white. What we are is smart enough to realize this kid is going out-of-state and not wasting resources trying to get a kid that won't be sticking around.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AMI get tired of us losing in state big studs to UNC or Duke or wherever. Of course Kids have the right to go wherever they want. But losing guys like Tokoto or Looney to other programs bugs me.
It really irks me that people still mention Tokoto constantly as losing a big recruit. Yes, he was highly ranked at one point, but Tokoto finished at #57 in the RSCI rankings, lower than Burton and just 2 spots ahead of Duane Wilson. So when it comes to "in-state big studs" we've landed two that are just as good as Tokoto.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AMWhen that happens, it simply shows that MU is still not elite in the minds of many top big recruits in state. What turns some of these kids off to MU? A first class arena, a great tradition, a good school, a great conference(at least the last few years), and a caring good coach.
The simple truth is that this program is not for everyone. Boot camp turns some guys off. Buzz's unwillingness to promise minutes turns some guys off. And as good as Buzz has been, to say he's on par with title-winners like K, Williams, Self, and Cal simply isn't the case yet. There's no shame in losing out to Duke, UNC, Kansas, or Kentucky. Just about everyone loses out to them.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AMYes, we did get Blue, but was it more a bunch of Bucky fans turning Blue off to them. If we lose both Looney and Stone, we should be pissed. I am thankful for Burton and Du. Wilson, but some on this board seem to not believe they will impact the team much initially. Some feel Du. Wilson cannot even beat out De. Wilson.
I think it was more people within the Wisconsin program that turned Blue off than the fans. If we lose both Looney and Stone, it won't be to Wisconsin, it will be to blue bloods that make a habit out of landing those type of recruits. And who cares if freshmen make an early impact? We have Otule, Gardner, Jamil, Mayo, Taylor, Anderson, and Derrick all coming back. Aside from Taylor, those guys all averaged over 10 mpg and they will likely average more than the 113.2 they accounted for in 2012-13. This is still an excellent roster and will be hard to break into.
And if Duane can't beat out Derrick, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Derrick is an excellent ball handler who doesn't turn it over. Even if he's just a facilitator, he doesn't really need to score with all the options we have returning.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:44:03 AMWe absolutely need to either get stud bigs in state when they are available, or land some from else where. Otule is not a stud, and Gardner is a good player, but where are the big studs for us? Sure hope that we can land Stone.
You realize this broken record has been playing since the mid-90s, right?
Quote from: AWegrzyn17 on May 31, 2013, 07:42:45 AM
Dude, welcome to the world of college basketball. Did it just hit you that MU isn't on the level as the Dukes and Kentuckys of the world (at least not since AL)? It is frustrating to lose in state guys, but it is what it is. I'd be much more frustrated about losing players to Becky or other schools in the Midwest than I am about losing top 20 kids to Duke or UNC.
Bottom line: you keep winning, keep picking your recruiting battles, and sooner or later you start reeling in some of the big fish.
P.S. We just landed our best recruiting class in 30 years, so cheer up.
No, it did not just hit me, but it still is disappointing that we cannot land any of those guys. And maybe it is time we start questioning why, rather than making excuses that it is Duke or Ky. That does not seem acceptable to me. Or saying "well that is the welcome to college basketball" These are shrug off excuses. When was the last time we had a big time big man? Maybe Merrit, who thought he was a perimeter player. McIlvane developed over time when the program was not very good. The last time we had real quality bigs was in the McGuire era. I know, I know, they are few and far between, but we should not accept those type of excuses. Hell, Jabbar has been looking for a coaching job. Have we tried to throw some money at him as an assistant coach to help with recruiting? Just a thought.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 31, 2013, 08:42:11 AM
Here's the thing...Bucky doesn't realize they are the bridesmaid. They were sent to get a bridesmaid dress and for some reason think that shade of blue is actually white. What we are is smart enough to realize this kid is going out-of-state and not wasting resources trying to get a kid that won't be sticking around.
It really irks me that people still mention Tokoto constantly as losing a big recruit. Yes, he was highly ranked at one point, but Tokoto finished at #57 in the RSCI rankings, lower than Burton and just 2 spots ahead of Duane Wilson. So when it comes to "in-state big studs" we've landed two that are just as good as Tokoto.
The simple truth is that this program is not for everyone. Boot camp turns some guys off. Buzz's unwillingness to promise minutes turns some guys off. And as good as Buzz has been, to say he's on par with title-winners like K, Williams, Self, and Cal simply isn't the case yet. There's no shame in losing out to Duke, UNC, Kansas, or Kentucky. Just about everyone loses out to them.
I think it was more people within the Wisconsin program that turned Blue off than the fans. If we lose both Looney and Stone, it won't be to Wisconsin, it will be to blue bloods that make a habit out of landing those type of recruits. And who cares if freshmen make an early impact? We have Otule, Gardner, Jamil, Mayo, Taylor, Anderson, and Derrick all coming back. Aside from Taylor, those guys all averaged over 10 mpg and they will likely average more than the 113.2 they accounted for in 2012-13. This is still an excellent roster and will be hard to break into.
And if Duane can't beat out Derrick, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Derrick is an excellent ball handler who doesn't turn it over. Even if he's just a facilitator, he doesn't really need to score with all the options we have returning.
You realize this broken record has been playing since the mid-90s, right?
Which broken record? We have not had a real stud since Mcguire era. That troubles me. And we should not just shrug it off as we just cannot get there.
willie warrior = negative nancy ;D
Marquette will have the best frontline in both the legacy and new Big East's next year, with an All American, 1st team JUCO joining Big East 6th Man of the Year and preseason AA candidate. And the two most talented players are Jamil and Steve. MU's best frontline in ages.
On Looney, he doesn't want to play PF, he wants to be Magic/Durant. Duke's system lends itself to the forwards dribbling the ball. Bo places his bigs outside the three point line. In Marquette's system, the forwards play different roles, mostly as passers and spot up shooters, who mix it up inside. Is Buzz's system bad and needs to be changed? Well, that position has yielded three straight NBA first round picks, and should have had a fourth as Wes has proven.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 08:44:27 AM
No, it did not just hit me, but it still is disappointing that we cannot land any of those guys. And maybe it is time we start questioning why, rather than making excuses that it is Duke or Ky. That does not seem acceptable to me. Or saying "well that is the welcome to college basketball" These are shrug off excuses. When was the last time we had a big time big man? Maybe Merrit, who thought he was a perimeter player. McIlvane developed over time when the program was not very good. The last time we had real quality bigs was in the McGuire era. I know, I know, they are few and far between, but we should not accept those type of excuses. Hell, Jabbar has been looking for a coaching job. Have we tried to throw some money at him as an assistant coach to help with recruiting? Just a thought.
1.) Looney does not want to stay home. It's not an excuse, it's a fact.
2.) Like others have pointed out, we just got our highest rated recruit in who knows how long but at the very least since '98 (Jajuan). We are creeping closer and closer to the "stud" territory you're looking for. It doesn't happen overnight, it's a process. Buzz is building his brand at MU and we're trending in the right direction. He has spoken about the need to build compound interest on the recruiting trail, meaning prove you can win (sweet 16 and elite 8 breakthroughs) get unheralded guys to the league (Butler, Crowder, DJO), then prove you can get the more heralded guys to the league (Blue early entry fingers crossed) then the bigger fish start to notice. That's starting to pay off. If you can't see that, you're blind or not paying attention very closely.
3.) Gardner and Otule are the best big men we've had since Robert Jackson, and they've been on the roster together for four years. We made a major run at Embiid this past year, but shockingly, he will probably find more immediate playing time at KANSAS than MU. Sometimes things break that way. It's not for lack of trying. We will likely be able to offer Stone and/or Ellenson (your hometown/home state wet dreams) 40 minutes of PT immediately. These are the only local PF/C studs that have come along since Buzz took the helm. Let's see how it plays out.
4.) Regarding your brain-dead Jabbar idea, I'll just leave the quote below. But yeah, let's throw a boatload of cash at the guy! We need an aloof introvert to kick-start our big man recruiting! That's the ticket!
"Many basketball observers, in addition to Abdul-Jabbar, believe that Kareem's reticence, whether through disdain for the press corps or simply because of introversion, contributed to the dearth of coaching opportunities offered to Abdul-Jabbar by the NBA. In his words, he said he had a mindset he could not overcome, and proceeded through his career oblivious to the effect his reticence may have had on his coaching prospects in the future. Abdul-Jabbar said: "I didn't understand that I also had affected people that way and that's what it was all about. I always saw it like they were trying to pry. I was way too suspicious and I paid a price for it."[16] Since he began lobbying for a coaching position in 1995, he has managed to obtain only low-level assistant and scouting jobs in the NBA, and a head coaching position only in a minor professional league."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kareem_Abdul-Jabbar
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 31, 2013, 08:42:11 AM
It really irks me that people still mention Tokoto constantly as losing a big recruit. Yes, he was highly ranked at one point, but Tokoto finished at #57 in the RSCI rankings, lower than Burton and just 2 spots ahead of Duane Wilson. So when it comes to "in-state big studs" we've landed two that are just as good as Tokoto.
Not to mention Jamil Wilson who was RSCI #40.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 08:44:27 AM
No, it did not just hit me, but it still is disappointing that we cannot land any of those guys. And maybe it is time we start questioning why, rather than making excuses that it is Duke or Ky. That does not seem acceptable to me. Or saying "well that is the welcome to college basketball" These are shrug off excuses.
Even if this negativism is all true, what do you want us to do about it?
Quote from: Goose on May 31, 2013, 07:00:49 AM
4ever
Does Bucky have real chance?
This will get many on this board constipated, but the reality is that Bo has endeared himself to the Looney household. Bucky likens his game to Jalen Rose. My own opinion is Kevon's game potentially mimics Durant's game. Georgetown, Tennessee, Michigan, MSU, Florida, Stanford, MU among others were all in on him early. Coach, style of play, teammates, and preparing for the next level were important criteria from the get go.
That said, I stand by my comments of a couple of years ago, though he hasn't taken any visits yet. But, once Duke offered, it was game, set, match.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 31, 2013, 09:17:29 AM
This will get many on this board constipated, but the reality is that Bo has endeared himself to the Looney household.
If Looney ends up in Madison, people are just going to have to deal with it. Stop being obsessed about what is going on over there and just continue to beat them on the court.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on May 31, 2013, 09:17:29 AM
This will get many on this board constipated, but the reality is that Bo has endeared himself to the Looney household. Bucky likens his game to Jalen Rose. My own opinion is Kevon's game potentially mimics Durant's game. Georgetown, Tennessee, Michigan, MSU, Florida, Stanford, MU among others were all in on him early. Coach, style of play, teammates, and preparing for the next level were important criteria from the get go.
That said, I stand by my comments of a couple of years ago, though he hasn't taken any visits yet. But, once Duke offered, it was game, set, match.
the longer Duke does not offer him a scooly, the better chance the other schools have. How long should Looney wait, is he second fiddle. Wisky has a good chance here, hope they
get him over the other schools. Like to see what Bo could do with Koenig, Looney and Decker in the fold.
Quote from: BCHoopster on May 31, 2013, 09:22:52 AM
the longer Duke does not offer him a scooly,
Duke has offered him a scholarship.
http://bluedevilnation.net/2013/01/rebel-with-a-future-a-kevon-looney-interview/
Quote from: Jajuannaman on May 31, 2013, 07:39:37 AM
Seriously, I never got why it's considered such a tragedy or recruiting failure to lose a home town or home state kid. I know at that age I wanted nothing more than to go somewhere else for college. That brought me several states and a time zone away to MU and I'm glad I did it. For others, staying home is the right thing for them. I'm hoping beyond hope that Stone falls into the latter camp, but it seems like Looney wanted to go away from the get-go. C'est la vie. We're in on a fast rising 2014 wing in Malek Harris, we'll be fine without Looney. We'd obviously be better with him, but that was never really in the cards. Good luck to him at Duke.
+1000000000000000000000000
I grew up in Nashville, TN, son of two transplanted cheeseheads. By 1974, I was so tired of the Bubba Belt that Milwaukee looked like Nirvana. Marquette was a grungy "cool" in those days and with Al running around, the world looked to us. It was a great place then as it is now.
About half my high school went to college in Tennessee and relatively few left the south. It's their choice and God love 'em, they're gereat people even if they didn't get the advantage of a Marquette education.
Ultimately, the question is, "where dop you want to live after college," since your selection of a college becomes a key factor in what place you end up living. If these guys want to go out of state, well, they just won't know what they're missing.
Quote from: dgies9156 on May 31, 2013, 09:27:55 AM
+1000000000000000000000000
I grew up in Nashville, TN, son of two transplanted cheeseheads. By 1974, I was so tired of the Bubba Belt that Milwaukee looked like Nirvana. Marquette was a grungy "cool" in those days and with Al running around, the world looked to us. It was a great place then as it is now.
About half my high school went to college in Tennessee and relatively few left the south. It's their choice and God love 'em, they're gereat people even if they didn't get the advantage of a Marquette education.
But you missed out on meeting and marrying one of those high-maintenance, big-haired Southern sorority girls who only go to college to get their MRS degree.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 08:46:59 AM
Which broken record? We have not had a real stud since Mcguire era. That troubles me. And we should not just shrug it off as we just cannot get there.
The marquee big man record. There just aren't that many of them out there. If we get one, great, but I have faith in Buzz. Of course there are idiots who will say Otule isn't that good despite the huge strides in his offensive game, his excellent boxing out and ability to get the team rebounds, and solid defense without fouling. And there are people who will probably complain that Gardner isn't effective enough on the defensive end (despite being much better this past year).
We are better off at the 5 than we have been since MacIlvaine and McCaskill and I have faith Buzz will continue to recruit guys that fit the system and can contribute at this level. If we get Stone or Ellenson, great. If not, something tells me we'll get guys that can do the job, even if they are criticized constantly for what they are not rather than praised for what they are.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 31, 2013, 11:04:42 AM
The marquee big man record. There just aren't that many of them out there. If we get one, great, but I have faith in Buzz. Of course there are idiots who will say Otule isn't that good despite the huge strides in his offensive game, his excellent boxing out and ability to get the team rebounds, and solid defense without fouling. And there are people who will probably complain that Gardner isn't effective enough on the defensive end (despite being much better this past year).
We are better off at the 5 than we have been since MacIlvaine and McCaskill and I have faith Buzz will continue to recruit guys that fit the system and can contribute at this level. If we get Stone or Ellenson, great. If not, something tells me we'll get guys that can do the job, even if they are criticized constantly for what they are not rather than praised for what they are.
OK, I accept your theory that Buzz will get the job done. Nothing wrong with that--as long as that happens. If Buzz can get us to the final 4 without a stud big, then Buzz is the stud. But as of yet, we have not been there, nor have we secured a dominant big. At least get one out of your home state, please! I agree that Gardner has improved defensively, and I agree that Otule has improved offensively. I would hope that Otule would make strides, he has been in the program going on his 6th year.
But what I sense here is that it is all right to constantly miss out on quality bigs, for whatever excuse one wants to offer: They all go to UNC, Duke or Ky.; or we were close on that one; or there just are not that many out there; or the weather is bad in Milwaukee; or that it is a city campus; or that there is not enough poontang at MU; or that we cannot compete with the elites; or that we will be fine with switchables; yadda yadda.
I hope that we can get there with the guys Buzz is bringing in, and the future looks bright, land Stone and we all can be happy.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 11:27:56 AM
OK, I accept your theory that Buzz will get the job done. Nothing wrong with that--as long as that happens. If Buzz can get us to the final 4 without a stud big, then Buzz is the stud. But as of yet, we have not been there, nor have we secured a dominant big. At least get one out of your home state, please! I agree that Gardner has improved defensively, and I agree that Otule has improved offensively. I would hope that Otule would make strides, he has been in the program going on his 6th year.
But what I sense here is that it is all right to constantly miss out on quality bigs, for whatever excuse one wants to offer: They all go to UNC, Duke or Ky.; or we were close on that one; or there just are not that many out there; or the weather is bad in Milwaukee; or that it is a city campus; or that there is not enough poontang at MU; or that we cannot compete with the elites; or that we will be fine with switchables; yadda yadda.
I hope that we can get there with the guys Buzz is bringing in, and the future looks bright, land Stone and we all can be happy.
Everyone wants Stone, and everyone should want Ellenson. Some of us are just trying to be realistic about how MU should spend its recruiting capital and how MU can get to where we all want it to be.
Quote from: warriorchick on May 31, 2013, 11:04:18 AM
But you missed out on meeting and marrying one of those high-maintenance, big-haired Southern sorority girls who only go to college to get their MRS degree.
Yeah. Who wants that when you can have a sloppy, no make-up wearing, bad haircut, big butted midwestern girl.
Quote from: Groin_pull on May 31, 2013, 11:59:39 AM
Yeah. Who wants that when you can have a sloppy, no make-up wearing, bad haircut, big butted midwestern girl.
My wife isn't sloppy, doesn't need make-up, has fine hair (I guess...don't really pay all that much attention), and a real nice ass.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 31, 2013, 12:03:18 PM
My wife isn't sloppy, doesn't need make-up, has fine hair (I guess...don't really pay all that much attention), and a real nice ass.
congratulations
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 11:27:56 AM
OK, I accept your theory that Buzz will get the job done. Nothing wrong with that--as long as that happens. If Buzz can get us to the final 4 without a stud big, then Buzz is the stud. But as of yet, we have not been there, nor have we secured a dominant big. At least get one out of your home state, please! I agree that Gardner has improved defensively, and I agree that Otule has improved offensively. I would hope that Otule would make strides, he has been in the program going on his 6th year.
But what I sense here is that it is all right to constantly miss out on quality bigs, for whatever excuse one wants to offer: They all go to UNC, Duke or Ky.; or we were close on that one; or there just are not that many out there; or the weather is bad in Milwaukee; or that it is a city campus; or that there is not enough poontang at MU; or that we cannot compete with the elites; or that we will be fine with switchables; yadda yadda.
I hope that we can get there with the guys Buzz is bringing in, and the future looks bright, land Stone and we all can be happy.
We got to the Elite 8 and unfortunately played one of our worst games of the season at that point. It wasn't because of bigs that we lost to Syracuse, it was because we were awful in virtually every aspect of the game.
As far as marquee bigs, I'm not sure what qualifies a marquee big. Is it a McDonald's All-American center or power forward? Are we only talking about centers? Does top-50 count? Top-100?
I went through the RSCI for the past 5 years (since Buzz got here) and in that time there have been 183 players in the top-100 at the C and PF positions that went to 76 different schools. Of those, 92 went to 17 schools. Here are the 17 schools with 4+ top-100 RSCI centers and power forwards the past 5 years:
Kentucky: 12
North Carolina: 8
Arizona: 7
Pittsburgh, Baylor: 6
Villanova, Duke, Louisville, NC State, Syracuse: 5
Georgia Tech, UCLA, Michigan State, Texas, Georgetown, Memphis, Indiana: 4
Marquette landed 2 such players, Maymon and Taylor. That's pretty close to blue-bloods like Ohio State, Kansas, Florida, and Connecticut (3 each) and more than Purdue, Missouri, Maryland, and Wisconsin (1 each). Quite simply, we don't have a big man reputation and my guess is until Buzz puts a 3-star big in the league we probably won't start to develop one. But we're keeping up pretty well considering more than half of these guys go to 17 schools.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 31, 2013, 01:00:33 PM
We got to the Elite 8 and unfortunately played one of our worst games of the season at that point. It wasn't because of bigs that we lost to Syracuse, it was because we were awful in virtually every aspect of the game.
As far as marquee bigs, I'm not sure what qualifies a marquee big. Is it a McDonald's All-American center or power forward? Are we only talking about centers? Does top-50 count? Top-100?
I went through the RSCI for the past 5 years (since Buzz got here) and in that time there have been 183 players in the top-100 at the C and PF positions that went to 76 different schools. Of those, 92 went to 17 schools. Here are the 17 schools with 4+ top-100 RSCI centers and power forwards the past 5 years:
Kentucky: 12
North Carolina: 8
Arizona: 7
Pittsburgh, Baylor: 6
Villanova, Duke, Louisville, NC State, Syracuse: 5
Georgia Tech, UCLA, Michigan State, Texas, Georgetown, Memphis, Indiana: 4
Marquette landed 2 such players, Maymon and Taylor. That's pretty close to blue-bloods like Ohio State, Kansas, Florida, and Connecticut (3 each) and more than Purdue, Missouri, Maryland, and Wisconsin (1 each). Quite simply, we don't have a big man reputation and my guess is until Buzz puts a 3-star big in the league we probably won't start to develop one. But we're keeping up pretty well considering more than half of these guys go to 17 schools.
Sorry, willie
(http://abovethelaw.com/uploads/2012/02/You-Got-Served-youve-been-service-of-process.gif)
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 11:27:56 AM
OK, I accept your theory that Buzz will get the job done. Nothing wrong with that--as long as that happens. If Buzz can get us to the final 4 without a stud big, then Buzz is the stud. But as of yet, we have not been there, nor have we secured a dominant big. At least get one out of your home state, please! I agree that Gardner has improved defensively, and I agree that Otule has improved offensively. I would hope that Otule would make strides, he has been in the program going on his 6th year.
But what I sense here is that it is all right to constantly miss out on quality bigs, for whatever excuse one wants to offer: They all go to UNC, Duke or Ky.; or we were close on that one; or there just are not that many out there; or the weather is bad in Milwaukee; or that it is a city campus; or that there is not enough poontang at MU; or that we cannot compete with the elites; or that we will be fine with switchables; yadda yadda.
I hope that we can get there with the guys Buzz is bringing in, and the future looks bright, land Stone and we all can be happy.
Name one that has come out of Wisconsin since Buzz has been at the helm. Hint: there hasn't been one. He's 0 for 0. You're gonna hafta wait til 2015 my man. Then you can complain if Stone or Ellenson go elsewhere. And if they do, we'll have someone else to get the job done. If we (GASP!) have to go the route of a 3-star (Gardner) or 2-star (Otule), I think we'll be okay. Buzz has said he wants two true centers and two true PGs on the roster at all times. I'm guessing that will almost never NOT be the case. Until it is, why are you complaining? And on a thread about Looney, a wiry small forward, of all places?
Quote from: warriorchick on May 31, 2013, 11:04:18 AM
But you missed out on meeting and marrying one of those high-maintenance, big-haired Southern sorority girls who only go to college to get their MRS degree.
My lack of either a trust fund or membership in the Episcopal Church probably excluded me from that crowd anyway.
Instead, I married an absoluetly lovely Midwestern woman who had the good sense to obtain a Marquette education, sit net to me in Spanish class and nurse her beer while all around her consumed mightily. She has a brilliant mind and great common sense, which she is not afraid to use liberally. That definitely sets her apart from any of the southern MRS babes and is a big reason we have been married 33 years!
Quote from: Jajuannaman on May 31, 2013, 01:13:51 PM
Name one that has come out of Wisconsin since Buzz has been at the helm. Hint: there hasn't been one. He's 0 for 0. You're gonna hafta wait til 2015 my man. Then you can complain if Stone or Ellenson go elsewhere. And if they do, we'll have someone else to get the job done. If we (GASP!) have to go the route of a 3-star (Gardner) or 2-star (Otule), I think we'll be okay. Buzz has said he wants two true centers and two true PGs on the roster at all times. I'm guessing that will almost never NOT be the case. Until it is, why are you complaining? And on a thread about Looney, a wiry small forward, of all places?
OK, he is 0 for 0 in Wisconsin. But unless you are confident he will land Looney, he will be 0 for 1 instate when that does not happen, which certainly appears it will not happen. And by the way, he has not landed any stud big from out of state since he has been at the helm. Unless you want to count Otule. My only point is that MU has not landed a quality big for almost decades, and that tradtion continues. And we keep making excuses for it as mentioned above.
By the way, how much of a stud is Ellenson? Is he ranked in the top 50 anywhere? I have not heard that.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 01:28:44 PM
OK, he is 0 for 0 in Wisconsin. But unless you are confident he will land Looney, he will be 0 for 1 instate when that does not happen, which certainly appears it will not happen. And by the way, he has not landed any stud big from out of state since he has been at the helm. Unless you want to count Otule. My only point is that MU has not landed a quality big for almost decades, and that tradtion continues. And we keep making excuses for it as mentioned above.
By the way, how much of a stud is Ellenson? Is he ranked in the top 50 anywhere? I have not heard that.
Looney is a wiry small forward/wing. He is not a big man or post player, despite his height. I would think the comparisons to Jalen Rose and Kevin Durant referenced above should help illustrate that for you.
Gardner is one of the most offensively efficient big men in the country. How does he not count as a "quality big?" We're going to have the best front line in our brand new conference and one of the best in the nation this coming year.
Are these concepts lost on you?
Ellenson is ranked #22 overall by ESPN, #6 at his position. I think that counts.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/143158/henry-ellenson
Isn't Looney more of a Jamil Wilson type then a "stud big"? What is your point?
Jajuannaman beat me to it :P
BeeJay is the self proclaimed authority around here on nice asses.
If I were Looney I would be offended Bo compared him to Jalen Rose. I think he is much more Kevin Durant than Jalen Rose. Wherever he ends up next year IMO he will be immediate impact kid. Have to be honest, going to UW would hurt. Hope 4ever is right and he ends up at Duke.
Quote from: Goose on May 31, 2013, 02:42:24 PM
If I were Looney I would be offended Bo compared him to Jalen Rose. I think he is much more Kevin Durant than Jalen Rose. Wherever he ends up next year IMO he will be immediate impact kid. Have to be honest, going to UW would hurt. Hope 4ever is right and he ends up at Duke.
Yeah, as much as I hate Duke I really want him to go there over UW.
Quote from: Goose on May 31, 2013, 02:42:24 PM
If I were Looney I would be offended Bo compared him to Jalen Rose. I think he is much more Kevin Durant than Jalen Rose.
Why would you be "offended?" Jalen Rose was a hell of a college basketball player. He didn't average a double-double in one year of college, but here is what Scout says about Looney:
"When watching Looney it's his skill and ability to rebound that standout. At 6-foot-8, he's a versatile forward that handles the ball well, has great touch and can score in a variety of ways. He can hit mid-range range shots and even threes, although his shot could be more consistent, but he's also capable of scoring at the rim. He's a relentless rebounder that plays the game with energy and toughness."
Here is what they said about Durant:
"Will graduate high school as a 17-year old senior, making him one of the youngest players in his class. Superior 3-point shooter with a soft touch. Shoots off dribble. Tries to play inside but strength is not there. Good athlete and a true small forward. Elite level prospect, has star power."
I'll be honest, I think the Rose comparison is better than the Durant one. Looney sounds like much more of a driver, mid-range scorer than an outside bomber. That is more like Rose than it is Durant.
Quote from: Terror Skink on May 31, 2013, 02:58:09 PM
Why would you be "offended?" Jalen Rose was a hell of a college basketball player. He didn't average a double-double in one year of college, but here is what Scout says about Looney:
"When watching Looney it's his skill and ability to rebound that standout. At 6-foot-8, he's a versatile forward that handles the ball well, has great touch and can score in a variety of ways. He can hit mid-range range shots and even threes, although his shot could be more consistent, but he's also capable of scoring at the rim. He's a relentless rebounder that plays the game with energy and toughness."
Here is what they said about Durant:
"Will graduate high school as a 17-year old senior, making him one of the youngest players in his class. Superior 3-point shooter with a soft touch. Shoots off dribble. Tries to play inside but strength is not there. Good athlete and a true small forward. Elite level prospect, has star power."
I'll be honest, I think the Rose comparison is better than the Durant one. Looney sounds like much more of a driver, mid-range scorer than an outside bomber. That is more like Rose than it is Durant.
I agree. Rose was the 13th selection in draft, spent 14 years in the NBA, made a boatload of money and now has an excellent media gig.
God help us if we've reached a point where recruits are offended at being compared to a player who's college career averaged 34 minutes and 17.5 points/game, helped their team reach the national championship game, and then went on to a 13 year NBA career.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 31, 2013, 01:00:33 PM
We got to the Elite 8 and unfortunately played one of our worst games of the season at that point. It wasn't because of bigs that we lost to Syracuse, it was because we were awful in virtually every aspect of the game.
As far as marquee bigs, I'm not sure what qualifies a marquee big. Is it a McDonald's All-American center or power forward? Are we only talking about centers? Does top-50 count? Top-100?
I went through the RSCI for the past 5 years (since Buzz got here) and in that time there have been 183 players in the top-100 at the C and PF positions that went to 76 different schools. Of those, 92 went to 17 schools. Here are the 17 schools with 4+ top-100 RSCI centers and power forwards the past 5 years:
Kentucky: 12
North Carolina: 8
Arizona: 7
Pittsburgh, Baylor: 6
Villanova, Duke, Louisville, NC State, Syracuse: 5
Georgia Tech, UCLA, Michigan State, Texas, Georgetown, Memphis, Indiana: 4
Marquette landed 2 such players, Maymon and Taylor. That's pretty close to blue-bloods like Ohio State, Kansas, Florida, and Connecticut (3 each) and more than Purdue, Missouri, Maryland, and Wisconsin (1 each). Quite simply, we don't have a big man reputation and my guess is until Buzz puts a 3-star big in the league we probably won't start to develop one. But we're keeping up pretty well considering more than half of these guys go to 17 schools.
Of course, until he got physically separated from his dad, Maymon resented being characterized as a PF. Other schools get big men outside the top 100 and develop them. I wouldn't be surprised if Buzz, after trying that route with Mbao and McMorrow, decided he rather get a usable player with his scholarship, rather than take a flyer that a tall kid could develop.
Quote from: Jajuannaman on May 31, 2013, 01:38:56 PM
Looney is a wiry small forward/wing. He is not a big man or post player, despite his height. I would think the comparisons to Jalen Rose and Kevin Durant referenced above should help illustrate that for you.
Gardner is one of the most offensively efficient big men in the country. How does he not count as a "quality big?" We're going to have the best front line in our brand new conference and one of the best in the nation this coming year.
Are these concepts lost on you?
Ellenson is ranked #22 overall by ESPN, #6 at his position. I think that counts.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/143158/henry-ellenson
Sorry, I love Gardner but how many people consider him a quality big. I don't know, but I do know that Buzz does not consider him as a big time player or he would be playing 30 plus minutes a game. And please don't start telling me it is conditioning or that Otule deserves those minutes. If that is so then he is not a quality big. Is that concept lost on you?
Quote from: Jajuannaman on May 31, 2013, 01:38:56 PM
Looney is a wiry small forward/wing. He is not a big man or post player, despite his height. I would think the comparisons to Jalen Rose and Kevin Durant referenced above should help illustrate that for you.
Gardner is one of the most offensively efficient big men in the country. How does he not count as a "quality big?" We're going to have the best front line in our brand new conference and one of the best in the nation this coming year.
Are these concepts lost on you?
Ellenson is ranked #22 overall by ESPN, #6 at his position. I think that counts.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/143158/henry-ellenson
I was not aware that Ellenson was ranked that high, but he is two years out and Buzz has not landed him. I hope he does, but until he does, it doesn't count for anything either. Would not be surprised that Bucky Bo hooked him.
There's a simple solution...willie warrior will stop posting his entirely ignorant, stupid, uninformed, clueless opinions when people start to ignore him. And there's a simple way to do that...the "Ignore" button.
When you learn a single thing about college basketball have someone notify me and I'll take you off pal.
Only those that know anything about basketball.....everybody else thinks he stinks.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:19:54 PM
Sorry, I love Gardner but how many people consider him a quality big. I don't know, but I do know that Buzz does not consider him as a big time player or he would be playing 30 plus minutes a game. And please don't start telling me it is conditioning or that Otule deserves those minutes. If that is so then he is not a quality big. Is that concept lost on you?
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:19:54 PM
Sorry, I love Gardner but how many people consider him a quality big. I don't know, but I do know that Buzz does not consider him as a big time player or he would be playing 30 plus minutes a game. And please don't start telling me it is conditioning or that Otule deserves those minutes. If that is so then he is not a quality big. Is that concept lost on you?
See Big East 6th man of year.
See: http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/84865/marquette-key-returnee-davante-gardner
Quote from: WarriorInDC on May 31, 2013, 08:34:39 PM
See Big East 6th man of year.
See: http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/84865/marquette-key-returnee-davante-gardner
I think coaches are going to dig out the game tapes of our first Syracuse game (where Gardner had a season high 26 points and attempted 13 FTs) to the second in the NCAA (where he only tallied 3 FTA) to compare effective vs. ineffective defenses. If opposing coaches figure out how to bend on Gardner and give him his easy field goals, but not break by giving up 10, 13 or 15 FTA, it could be a long season for us.
One of the tactics I think opposing coaches will use more in the coming season is to argue more vehemently that their player has defensive position on Gardner, and either Garder is initiating the contact, or the contact is incidental and should be a no-call. I can't remember which game, but one of the late season games the anoucers were pointing this out.
Quote from: The Equalizer on May 31, 2013, 09:50:24 PM
I think coaches are going to dig out the game tapes of our first Syracuse game (where Gardner had a season high 26 points and attempted 13 FTs) to the second in the NCAA (where he only tallied 3 FTA) to compare effective vs. ineffective defenses. If opposing coaches figure out how to bend on Gardner and give him his easy field goals, but not break by giving up 10, 13 or 15 FTA, it could be a long season for us.
One of the tactics I think opposing coaches will use more in the coming season is to argue more vehemently that their player has defensive position on Gardner, and either Garder is initiating the contact, or the contact is incidental and should be a no-call. I can't remember which game, but one of the late season games the anoucers were pointing this out.
Soooooo, you're saying that opposing coaches are going to game plan for Davante Gardner by arguing more with the refs? Man, I hope that is what they come up with in their defensive game plans.
Quote from: The Equalizer on May 31, 2013, 09:50:24 PM
I think coaches are going to dig out the game tapes of our first Syracuse game (where Gardner had a season high 26 points and attempted 13 FTs) to the second in the NCAA (where he only tallied 3 FTA) to compare effective vs. ineffective defenses. If opposing coaches figure out how to bend on Gardner and give him his easy field goals, but not break by giving up 10, 13 or 15 FTA, it could be a long season for us.
One of the tactics I think opposing coaches will use more in the coming season is to argue more vehemently that their player has defensive position on Gardner, and either Garder is initiating the contact, or the contact is incidental and should be a no-call. I can't remember which game, but one of the late season games the anoucers were pointing this out.
Certainly you must have some empiricism on this.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:19:54 PM
Sorry, I love Gardner but how many people consider him a quality big. I don't know, but I do know that Buzz does not consider him as a big time player or he would be playing 30 plus minutes a game. And please don't start telling me it is conditioning or that Otule deserves those minutes. If that is so then he is not a quality big. Is that concept lost on you?
You are a jackass. And the most ignorant poster in the history of Scoop ignorant posters.
Sounds like Looney could be a Bo Ellis type. He could help elevate MU to the final four! Too bad he doesn't want to stay in Milwaukee, as other posters wrote, he could be "big" in Milwaukee and after his playing days are done. Playing in a far away city may not allow him to stand out much.
Quote from: willie warrior on May 31, 2013, 06:19:54 PM
Sorry, I love Gardner but how many people consider him a quality big. I don't know, but I do know that Buzz does not consider him as a big time player or he would be playing 30 plus minutes a game. And please don't start telling me it is conditioning or that Otule deserves those minutes. If that is so then he is not a quality big. Is that concept lost on you?
This has to be one of the dumbest posts in the history of MUScoop. Congratulations, sir, that is truly an impressive feat.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m58bo50oqL1ry10fwo1_500.gif)
Quote from: brewcity77 on June 01, 2013, 09:01:28 AM
This has to be one of the dumbest posts in the history of MUScoop. Congratulations, sir, that is truly an impressive feat.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m58bo50oqL1ry10fwo1_500.gif)
Sorry Brew that I am not an expert on all things which you always profess to be. Your opinion always ranks well above everybody else--in your own mind. Isn't America great where we can all anonymously slam others on the internet?
Quote from: oneposteagle on June 01, 2013, 12:03:08 AM
You are a jackass. And the most ignorant poster in the history of Scoop ignorant posters.
here we go with the name calling!!
Quote from: keefe on May 31, 2013, 11:03:11 PM
Certainly you must have some empiricism on this.
Well, there was a downward trend in both FGA and FTA over the course conference play, which extended through the BET and NCAA.
--First five conference games, he averaged 9 FTA/game. Over the last five conference games, he averaged 4.5 FTA/game, and in the BET/NCAA it was only slightly better at 5.0 FTA/game.
--His FGA was 6.4 over the first five Big East regular season games, 3.6 in the last five BE regular season games, and 3.2 in the BET & NCAA tournaments.
Combine this with the broadcast commentary toward the end of last season, and it seems like a plausible explanation.
Quote from: The Equalizer on June 01, 2013, 12:34:19 PM
Well, there was a downward trend in both FGA and FTA over the course conference play, which extended through the BET and NCAA.
--First five conference games, he averaged 9 FTA/game. Over the last five conference games, he averaged 4.5 FTA/game, and in the BET/NCAA it was only slightly better at 5.0 FTA/game.
--His FGA was 6.4 over the first five Big East regular season games, 3.6 in the last five BE regular season games, and 3.2 in the BET & NCAA tournaments.
Combine this with the broadcast commentary toward the end of last season, and it seems like a plausible explanation.
I'm really confused about what you're trying to prove here. So you're saying that by coaches arguing with refs that Davante is the one creating contact rather than the defensive player, Davante is thus attempting less field goals? And as a result he is attempting less free throws?
How about this one...coaches picked up on flaws in his game and came up with a defensive game plan to exploit those? To me, it was pretty obvious. Double Davante hard on the catch and he struggles to make a quick move/decision with the ball, and thus is far less effective. If I, as a casual fan, can pick up on this, I'm fairly certain guys like Jim Boeheim, Rick Pittino, JT3, etc. would be capable on picking up on this. This would also explain the reduction in field goal attempts per game.
It's pretty obvious these coaches weren't taking shots away from Davante by arguing with the refs about who is initiating contact and who has position.
Quote from: wadesworld on June 01, 2013, 12:52:48 PM
I'm really confused about what you're trying to prove here. So you're saying that by coaches arguing with refs that Davante is the one creating contact rather than the defensive player, Davante is thus attempting less field goals? And as a result he is attempting less free throws?
Yes.
I don't want to get into a debate about effectiveness of coaches arguing with the refs--
All I can do is observe that many coaches over the years have lobbied with the refs to get more calls to go their way, annoucers I've heard over the years have generally reported that such protests have some effect, and this season at least one of those annoucers specifically made a comment about opposing coaching protests about Gardner and it having some impact.
Again, I can't remember which game or who said it. But it seems to a) make sense and b) is supported by the facts.
Quote from: wadesworld on June 01, 2013, 12:52:48 PM
How about this one...coaches picked up on flaws in his game and came up with a defensive game plan to exploit those? To me, it was pretty obvious. Double Davante hard on the catch and he struggles to make a quick move/decision with the ball, and thus is far less effective. If I, as a casual fan, can pick up on this, I'm fairly certain guys like Jim Boeheim, Rick Pittino, JT3, etc. would be capable on picking up on this. This would also explain the reduction in field goal attempts per game.
Except that guys like Boehim, Pitino & JT3 (and really any coach) would have done this already as part of their normal game prep, don't you think? Its not like these guys don't watch tape. If you, as a casual fan, can pick it up, so can they, and they would have from the first game of the season.
Quote from: wadesworld on June 01, 2013, 12:52:48 PM
It's pretty obvious these coaches weren't taking shots away from Davante by arguing with the refs about who is initiating contact and who has position.
Of course they were having an effect. Thats why they debate and yell at refs. Thats why the annoucers mention it when they see the effects its having. And those annoucers are right there at courtside--they hear what coaches say, they see how refs react.
If anything, its obvous they are having some impact with their protests.
Quote from: willie warrior on June 01, 2013, 09:16:57 AM
Sorry Brew that I am not an expert on all things which you always profess to be. Your opinion always ranks well above everybody else--in your own mind. Isn't America great where we can all anonymously slam others on the internet?
Expert on all things? Hardly. But not foolish enough to say Gardner isn't a quality big. He was the fifth most efficient player in the country offensively for his usage rate. He's top-100 in the country in offensive rebounding percentage. I'd also argue he's the best player in the country at drawing fouls and converting at the line (only Ella Ellis, a forward for Army, had a higher fouls drawn/40 stat with a higher FT%, but come on...he plays for Army).
I don't know what your definition of a quality big is, but he is arguably the best returning offensive big man in the country. If that's not quality, I guess no one outside of Wilt Chamberlain will meet your lofty expectations.
Quote from: willie warrior on June 01, 2013, 09:18:41 AM
here we go with the name calling!!
Sticks and stones may break your bones, but names can never hurt you!
Quote from: The Equalizer on May 31, 2013, 09:50:24 PM
I think coaches are going to dig out the game tapes of our first Syracuse game (where Gardner had a season high 26 points and attempted 13 FTs) to the second in the NCAA (where he only tallied 3 FTA) to compare effective vs. ineffective defenses. If opposing coaches figure out how to bend on Gardner and give him his easy field goals, but not break by giving up 10, 13 or 15 FTA, it could be a long season for us.
One of the tactics I think opposing coaches will use more in the coming season is to argue more vehemently that their player has defensive position on Gardner, and either Garder is initiating the contact, or the contact is incidental and should be a no-call. I can't remember which game, but one of the late season games the anoucers were pointing this out.
I think Davante is working on his 8-10 foot jumper. Success there will open up the area around the basket.
Quote from: leever on June 03, 2013, 09:13:08 AM
Sticks and stones may break your bones, but names can never hurt you!
Thats right! If you cannot make your point with facts, then pound the table with hollering and fiction, and if you cannot make your point with hollering and fiction, when all else fails, demonize the other person and call names. The old tried and true technique: " idiot, jackass, dumbass, $@##$, etc., etc.
Quote from: willie warrior on June 03, 2013, 12:23:30 PM
Thats right! If you cannot make your point with facts, then pound the table with hollering and fiction, and if you cannot make your point with hollering and fiction, when all else fails, demonize the other person and call names. The old tried and true technique: " idiot, jackass, dumbass, $@##$, etc., etc.
There's no reason for me to make my point with facts as you have proven to be too ignorant to take them for what they are.....FACTS. So the only thing that seems to resonate with you is "demonization," which in this case is completely warranted. Davante Gardner, who just got invited to try out with the National team, is not a quality big????
Gardner is a nice player, but not close to being a great player IMO. Those who love him think his value is much higher than those who do not love him. I think he wanted to get into great shape he could move much past being a nice player. Would love to see him get in shape and see what he can do if lighter.
Agree 100% with Goose. Gardner is a very good player now, but, could become great if he were in better shape. Wonder what he would play like at 250 lbs.?
Quote from: mu-rara on June 03, 2013, 11:01:56 AM
I think Davante is working on his 8-10 foot jumper. Success there will open up the area around the basket.
Gardner doesn't have much of a jump shot. It is more of a retro set shot.
(http://www.haveastandard.com/images/ccheck/3_6_big.jpg)
Quote from: keefe on June 03, 2013, 01:43:22 PM
Gardner doesn't have much of a jump shot. It is more of a retro set shot.
(http://www.haveastandard.com/images/ccheck/3_6_big.jpg)
You are probably correct. I am convinced it will be an effective weapon.
Quote from: keefe on June 03, 2013, 01:43:22 PM
Gardner doesn't have much of a jump shot. It is more of a retro set shot.
(http://www.haveastandard.com/images/ccheck/3_6_big.jpg)
Hahahahaha, that was awesome, but so true. Love Devante's mid range game.
Although Looney to Duke is a good bet (Michigan seems to be making a strong push), I wouldn't mind seeing him end up at Georgetown. It would be a huge signing for the conference and he'd get to play in Milwaukee on an annual basis. I'm sure Otto Porter, Jr's success isn't lost on him either.
Quote from: Heavy Gear on June 04, 2013, 08:50:22 AM
Although Looney to Duke is a good bet (Michigan seems to be making a strong push), I wouldn't mind seeing him end up at Georgetown. It would be a huge signing for the conference and he'd get to play in Milwaukee on an annual basis. I'm sure Otto Porter, Jr's success isn't lost on him either.
Well, if you can call one game before he moves onto the NBA, annual.
Here's a Looney question for those of you who are familiar with Duke. If Jabari Parker doesn't go pro after his first year, what does coach K do with the two of them? Does one play power forward or does one play 2G?
Quote from: LittleMurs on June 04, 2013, 11:08:07 AM
Here's a Looney question for those of you who are familiar with Duke. If Jabari Parker doesn't go pro after his first year, what does coach K do with the two of them? Does one play power forward or does one play 2G?
They both hold onto the ball at the same time so as to not outshine the other.
Quote from: dgies9156 on May 31, 2013, 01:17:34 PM
My lack of either a trust fund or membership in the Episcopal Church probably excluded me from that crowd anyway.
Instead, I married an absoluetly lovely Midwestern woman who had the good sense to obtain a Marquette education, sit net to me in Spanish class and nurse her beer while all around her consumed mightily. She has a brilliant mind and great common sense, which she is not afraid to use liberally. That definitely sets her apart from any of the southern MRS babes and is a big reason we have been married 33 years!
Escaping all that was a big reason warriorchick left the home of hideous orange uniforms...... and maybe part of her reason for ultimately settling in the north and marrying a Marquette man. (But we did meet in a bar, not Spanish class.)
Quote from: mu-rara on June 03, 2013, 11:01:56 AM
I think Davante is working on his 8-10 foot jumper. Success there will open up the area around the basket.
To quote jsglow, "Davante doesn't have a jumper; it's more of a 'rocker'".
Quote from: jsglow on June 07, 2013, 11:49:53 AM
Escaping all that was a big reason warriorchick left the home of hideous orange uniforms...... and maybe part of her reason for ultimately settling in the north and marrying a Marquette man. (But we did meet in a bar, not Spanish class.)
Ms. Dgies and I certainly did our fair share of bar time while at Marquette. I even tried to go back to Big Orange Country in the early 1980s with Ms. Dgies. Knew we were lost in Tennessee when Ms. Dgies was working at a place where she answered the phone for someone who said "Roll Tide." She, unfamiliar with southern rituals, said "what... and how do you spell that!"
When she came home that night and I asked, "is that caller from Alabama," she frustratingly asked, "why does everyone keep asking that?" We high-tailed it back to Chicago and the Midwest, where we belong!
As we used to say, "No fruit sucks like a Big Orange!"