MUScoop

http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9682763/2013-14-college-basketball-preview-marquette-golden-eagles

2013-14 Big East Projected Standings
1. Creighton | 2. Georgetown | 3. Marquette | 4. Villanova | 5. St. John's | 6. Butler | 7. Providence | 8. Xavier | 9. Seton Hall | 10. DePaul
Links to every conference

Marquette Golden Eagles
2012-13: 26-9 (14-4)
In-conference offense: 1.07 points per possession (1st)
In-conference defense: 0.99 points allowed per possession (8th)

Coming off an Elite Eight run and a share of the regular season conference title, there are many who favor the Golden Eagles to claim the crown in the reborn Big East. Those who do must be banking on the acumen of head coach Buzz Williams to extract every ounce of ability from a roster that doesn't feature any obvious NBA-level talent. How else can you explain such optimism around a team that loses Vander Blue, Junior Cadougan and Trent Lockett -- Marquette's top three players in terms of minutes per game last season and team leaders in scoring (Blue, 14.8 points per game), playmaking (Cadougan, 3.8 assists) and rebounding (Lockett, 5.1). The trio also accounted for 47.8 percent of Marquette's points in 2012-13, with Blue contributing over 21 percent on his own.


Projected starting lineup
Pos.   Name   Year
C Chris Otule Sr.
F Jamil Wilson Sr.
F Steve Taylor Jr.
G Todd Mayo Jr.
G Derrick Wilson Jr.

All of that isn't to say the Golden Eagles' departures form some kind of irreplaceable trio, but it's a high bar that Williams' crew will need to clear in order to compete for the conference title.

The expectation is that junior Todd Mayo will slide into the starting lineup to replace Blue, but the 6-foot-3 guard will need to refine his game if he wants to improve his offensive rating of 99.9 and earn more than the 22.9 percent of available minutes he saw in 2012-13. (That's certainly possible; Blue himself jumped from an ORtg of 95.6 in 2011-12 to 104.2 last season.)

Point guard is another concern. Turnovers were a problem last season (20.9 TO percentage, by far Marquette's worst mark under Williams), and there doesn't seem to be an obvious replacement for Cadougan. If you're going to bet on a name, though, bet on the Wilson exacta. Junior Derrick Wilson flaunted an assist rate of 22.3 in relief of Cadougan a season ago (though he muted that mark with a 23.7 TO percentage and shot under 30 percent from inside -- yes, inside -- the arc). That leaves a lot of upward mobility for freshman Duane Wilson, who could grow into the role over time -- especially if he can continue his ludicrous 55 percent clip from beyond the arc (not a typo) posted in his final high school season.

Production lost to college basketball's roster churn is seldom made up for in a one-to-one exchange, though. It's far more likely that the minutes and offensive contributions of the departed trio will be spread around and primarily picked up by an increased role for senior Jamil Wilson (110.4 ORtg in 2012-13; 36.0 3-point percentage) and the free throw manufacturing line that is Davante Gardner. Gardner drew 6.7 fouls per 40 minutes a season ago, and converted 83.5 percent of his 176 foul shots. It's a combination that should make Gardner the nation's most potent foul line force in the season ahead.

But Gardner must push beyond some limitations. First and foremost, Marquette will need its big man to improve his endurance -- and defense -- so he can see more than the 52.9 percent of available minutes he played in 2012-13. Part of that stemmed from the positional split with Chris Otule, who will return for a sixth season of eligibility after being granted a waiver by the NCAA. Otule is the quicker and more formidable defender of the two (6.7 block percentage in 2012-13) and at a minimum will provide effective minutes while Gardner takes a blow. If the two can somehow play in conjunction, however, it would give the Golden Eagles one of the more effective tandems in the conference.

The big men could become even more potent with the ball if they're given some more room to operate. The Golden Eagles are in serious need of a floor spacer. The team collectively shot a dismal 29.6 percent from behind the arc last season (323rd in the nation) and return just one player (Jamil Wilson) who shot over 30 percent from deep. Aforementioned sniper Duane Wilson should help in this regard, however.

Fellow freshman JaJuan Johnson (No. 27, ESPN 100) could also give the Golden Eagles a lift, as he helps headline a recruiting class that ranked No. 11 according to ESPN's RecruitingNation. Meanwhile, 2012 top recruit Steve Taylor could build on a freshman season that saw him brought along slowly.

The cupboard is far from bare in Milwaukee, but it could take master chef Williams a few months to properly mix his ingredients. If this team matures in time for March, though, Marquette figures to once again be an NCAA tournament team no one will want to face.

Projected 2013-14 conference finish: 3rd

I automatically disregard this article for two reasons. One its ESPN and two, they have Steve Taylor listed as a junior. Quality reporting there...

Not sure why the ESPN thing should matter - I thought it was a pretty balanced article that hits on that MU has a lot of talent, but it needs to find a way to mesh together.  We have been saying that for awhile. 

And I bet they screwed up Taylor because he is literally "Steve Taylor, Jr."

Quote from: esard2011 on October 09, 2013, 01:42:55 PM
I automatically disregard this article for two reasons. One its ESPN and two, they have Steve Taylor listed as a junior. Quality reporting there...

I didn't even notice the Steve Taylor thing, good call.

I'm surprised we are picked below Georgetown, even with Whittington going down. I think an argument can be made for Creighton being the favorite. None of the things the article said were false, but they certainly put a certain tone on things.

Quote from: esard2011 on October 09, 2013, 01:42:55 PM
I automatically disregard this article for two reasons. One its ESPN and two, they have Steve Taylor listed as a junior. Quality reporting there...

Well he is a Jr., just not a Junior.

And they obviously haven't seen our new lean, mean version of Davante, either.

Finally something to get riled up about!!!

Quote from: esard2011 on October 09, 2013, 01:42:55 PM
I automatically disregard this article for two reasons. One its ESPN and two, they have Steve Taylor listed as a junior. Quality reporting there...

Sultan nailed the response to this. Besides, they mention him being a soph later in the piece. Clearly just a misprint.

"a roster that doesn't feature any obvious NBA-level talent"?

Are you kidding me? Jamil & JJJ at least (from raw talent level)... I don't understand how even a non-MU fan wouldn't see them as being NBA-level talent.

Agree that JJJ is unproven (obviously)

Losing Crowder and DJO impacted the team far more than will the loss of Cadougan, Blue and Lockett.  The team had to completely revamp its style and pace of play.

One thing has been proven, Buzz will find a style that maximizes the talents and minimizes the inefficiencies of his team.

MU is going into the season with unknown quantities in the backcourt.    If DeWilson and Mayo have improved quite a bit, MU is solid.    If DuWilson or Dawson is ready to be a D1 starter from day 1, MU is solid.    If neither of these are the case, MU is going to struggle, especially early.    I disagree with ESPN's team preview, but I understand their reasoning.  

Quote from: sixstrings03 on October 09, 2013, 02:20:10 PM
"a roster that doesn't feature any obvious NBA-level talent"?

Are you kidding me? Jamil & JJJ at least (from raw talent level)... I don't understand how even a non-MU fan wouldn't see them as being NBA-level talent.

Agree that JJJ is unproven (obviously)

I don't think Jamil has "obvious" NBA talent.  He has an NBA body, but he doesn't have the foot-speed or outside shot of most small forwards.  

Quote from: Badgerhater on October 09, 2013, 02:31:21 PM
Losing Crowder and DJO impacted the team far more than will the loss of Cadougan, Blue and Lockett.  The team had to completely revamp its style and pace of play.

One thing has been proven, Buzz will find a style that maximizes the talents and minimizes the inefficiencies of his team.

couldn't agree more the loss of the Big 3 and the Dynamic Duo was wayyy tougher than this loss.  I love Lockett but the dude was on the team for a year, not like he was a guy who grew up with the team and year in year out was an impact player. 

Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on October 09, 2013, 01:46:28 PM
Not sure why the ESPN thing should matter - I thought it was a pretty balanced article that hits on that MU has a lot of talent, but it needs to find a way to mesh together.  We have been saying that for awhile.  

This great analysis can apply to nearly every college basketball team. OMG, a college team has new players and lost some players? They're going to have to find a way "to play together" and "as a team".

EDIT: This article at least goes in-depth detail at least about this, but this kind of transition is normal.

Quote from: sixstrings03 on October 09, 2013, 02:20:10 PM
"a roster that doesn't feature any obvious NBA-level talent"?

Are you kidding me? Jamil & JJJ at least (from raw talent level)... I don't understand how even a non-MU fan wouldn't see them as being NBA-level talent.

Agree that JJJ is unproven (obviously)

And don't forget that Otule is the next Roy Hibbert.

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 09, 2013, 02:56:35 PM
couldn't agree more the loss of the Big 3 and the Dynamic Duo was wayyy tougher than this loss.  I love Lockett but the dude was on the team for a year, not like he was a guy who grew up with the team and year in year out was an impact player. 

This. Plus the numbers that Juan and DeWilson put up bear striking resemblance to those of Lockett and Cadougan if you increase minutes and keep their averages/minute. Wilson loses slightly on offense, but much better on D (and Cadougan scored, what, 6 pts a game coming into a last year?). Juan defense is poor inside but on the perimiter I think he can do some damage.

Just annoys me that in reality, we really on lost Blue, but now every other loss is treated as significant. And everyone forgets Lockett was frustrating in the beginning-mid part of the year. Amazing what additional playing time can yield.

They talk about our losses (Blue, Junior and Trent) and then talk about our turnover problems. Not sure of the exact stats, but it seems our biggest turnover transgressors are gone.

Whatever...previews mean nothing. We are going to be good.

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 09, 2013, 02:56:35 PM
couldn't agree more the loss of the Big 3 and the Dynamic Duo was wayyy tougher than this loss.  I love Lockett but the dude was on the team for a year, not like he was a guy who grew up with the team and year in year out was an impact player.  

One-year players? Who needs 'em? I mean, Marquette was able to replace one-year wonder Robert Jackson with Davante Gardner just 8 short years later.

Meh. I don't see a reason to get up in arms about one of the few previews that DON'T pick MU to win conference. There is plenty of MU kool-aid drinking out there in the media, and I just like reading anybody thats writing about Marquette.

Quote from: sixstrings03 on October 09, 2013, 02:20:10 PM
"a roster that doesn't feature any obvious NBA-level talent"?

Are you kidding me? Jamil & JJJ at least (from raw talent level)... I don't understand how even a non-MU fan wouldn't see them as being NBA-level talent.

Agree that JJJ is unproven (obviously)

Was Vander considered an "obvious" NBA talent at the start of last season?  If not, how is this year any different from the last?

Quote from: Skitch on October 09, 2013, 03:53:14 PM
Was Vander considered an "obvious" NBA talent at the start of last season?  If not, how is this year any different from the last?

No, and it isn't.

We weren't expected to share the BE title and get to the Elite Eight last year...so it's fine by me if ESPN doesn't expect that from us this year either....

How many teams lost their leading rebounder that only averaged 5.1 rebounds? How many teams lost their starting point guard who only average 3.8 assists? Even 14.8 points per game for a leading scorer is not great.
We did lose a lot of experience. Each of these players brought toughness and made important contributions to the team, but how hard can it be to replace 5.1 rebounds, 3.8 assists and 14.8 points. How good this team is in March will depend a lot on how the new players develop and having the luck to stay away from injuries. However, I believe this team at the start of the season is better than last year's team at the start of the season. Remember last year at the start Mayo was suspended, Lockett was learning a new system and Otule basically was dragging his leg up and down the court.

Quote from: Badgerhater on October 09, 2013, 02:31:21 PM
Losing Crowder and DJO impacted the team far more than will the loss of Cadougan, Blue and Lockett.  The team had to completely revamp its style and pace of play.

One thing has been proven, Buzz will find a style that maximizes the talents and minimizes the inefficiencies of his team.

It's a guards game, never underestimate the impact of solid guards.  The current crop is unproven.  Lots of upside, lots of unknowns.  That being said, our guards last year at times were not very consistent for my taste.  Fair article IMO.

I thought Buzz was planning a 3 guard offense? McKay or Anderson would be my guess to start instead of Taylor if they do go the 2 guard route. 

I don't usually read previews like this, but... let's see if I can be as picky as some of you. At first glance it looks like the writer may be a stat-grabber (can pull stats... but does he understand them?).

QuoteThe expectation is that junior Todd Mayo will slide into the starting lineup to replace Blue, but the 6-foot-3 guard will need to refine his game if he wants to improve his offensive rating of 99.9 and earn more than the 22.9 percent of available minutes he saw in 2012-13.

Mayo played around 32% of available minutes when you exclude the 10 games he was suspended for. Relative to his ORtg, consideration of the opponents missed (some real clunkers, but also excellent defenses like uw-madison & Florida) would also be worthwhile. Mayo did very well against weaker teams (below .500 teams = Mayo with a 115 ORtg; same for RPI < 100 teams). Significant upside to Mayo's numbers is achievable.

QuotePoint guard is another concern. Turnovers were a problem last season (20.9 TO percentage, by far Marquette's worst mark under Williams), and there doesn't seem to be an obvious replacement for Cadougan.

Point guard is certainly a concern for this team; however, PG performance relative to team TO% isn't the primary performance indicator I'll be looking at.

Buzz has brought in JUCO's who have valued the ball. Jae Crowder, DJO, Jimmy Butler.. they all played major minutes and had relatively low TO%'s (with Jimmy and Jae being remarkable). Turnovers at PG have been a problem with Cadougan, plain and simple. His best year of his 3 full seasons was last year and it was still brutal (26%).

The uptick in TO% last year was more a function replacing tons of Jae's minutes (10% TO%) with some from Lockett (24-25%).

With Cadougan and Lockett now gone, MU could withstand a "normal" freshman year from a Duane Wilson so long as normal progression (improvement) is seen from others. I'd be more worried about guys like Mayo, Anderson and some of the other wings being strong with the ball than the PG position. There is plenty of room to improve at the point with regard to TO%.

QuoteThe big men could become even more potent with the ball if they're given some more room to operate. The Golden Eagles are in serious need of a floor spacer. The team collectively shot a dismal 29.6 percent from behind the arc last season (323rd in the nation) and return just one player (Jamil Wilson) who shot over 30 percent from deep. Aforementioned sniper Duane Wilson should help in this regard, however.

When projecting 2013-14, I see 3FG shooting as a plus. First, the percentage should improve with the weak comparable. Top 3FGA man a year ago was Van. He made some amazing shots (prayers) at very important times, but was still only 30.3% on the year. Will MU be able to hit an NCAA average ~34% of their 3FGA's? I don't think you can feel comfortable with that type of expectation, but a moderate to significant improvement from a year ago seems likely.

Duane - in EYBL play he wasn't nearly as good as 55%. That number still seems awfully high to me, but perhaps it's accurate. Nonetheless, I think if he's at 34% or better I'm happy.

MU should shoot 3FG's more often than we've seen in the past 3 seasons. That will add volatility to game outcomes (can assist with winning tough games... also can result in losing "easy" games if there's an off night shooting). With some opponents expected to shoot a ton of 3's against MU, fans have to be ready for both some rough nights and some sizable wins... "new day begins at midnight" thinking will be as important as ever.

I like Marquette's chances to improve on their eFG% in 2013-14. Shot selection but the youngsters will be important. Nothing wrong with working to get Davante, Jamil & Chris good opportunities vs. launching difficult FGA's... but it's fun to shoot, especially for young cats.

I need dudes to rebound and play defense like crazy, opponents to not shoot well from 3FG range... and then I think things will come together nicely. Just may take some time to get the minute distribution situated. Lots of guys who have a chance to play - hopefully it remains healthy competition that results in improvement by all.

Haven't seen John Daw play much since the summer of 2012, but at that time he certainly stood out. Curious as to what Buzz and staff are able to do with him. Hopeful that he's a kid who surprises people over the next few years.

QuoteGolden Eagles

??

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 09, 2013, 07:47:41 PM
It's a guards game, never underestimate the impact of solid guards.  The current crop is unproven.  Lots of upside, lots of unknowns.  That being said, our guards last year at times were not very consistent for my taste.  Fair article IMO.

Agreed.

If our shooting guards are productive and, especially, if our PGs can efficiently create for themselves and others, we will have an outstanding season. If not, there will be plenty of frustrations for us.

As for not having NBA-level talent, that's dead on. Jamil is borderline, the freshmen have proven nothing and nobody else is close.

I think people are seriously underestimating the impact Jameel McKay will have on the team. I fully expect him to start, play about 20-25 minutes and be a rebounding machine.

Quote from: JerseyWarrior on October 09, 2013, 10:17:35 PM
I think people are seriously underestimating the impact Jameel McKay will have on the team. I fully expect him to start, play about 20-25 minutes and be a rebounding machine.

Start over who exactly? I mean not over Jamil, not over Otule and if Buzz feels that Gardner's trimmed down enough to play PF I fully expect Gardner to start. 

Quote from: MU82 on October 09, 2013, 10:13:51 PM
Agreed.

If our shooting guards are productive and, especially, if our PGs can efficiently create for themselves and others, we will have an outstanding season. If not, there will be plenty of frustrations for us.

As for not having NBA-level talent, that's dead on. Jamil is borderline, the freshmen have proven nothing and nobody else is close.

First, who knew, I agree with JayBee.  Last time that happened we testified in court about ZFB's animal peccadillos.  Next, Jamil will be a lottery pick.  He has worked all summer on his jumper.  Gone is the moon ball.  He has <highly> impressed the NBA scouts at summer camps with his athleticism. AIA camp surprised a number of them.

Next, Gardner has made every preseason All-American team.  How is he not on the NBA radar?  More so, how is Todd not just on the DNA?  They are tracking both.  And yes, Willie, even Otule.

Love John Daw.  Kid can shoot, but the small town adjustment will take time.  Unlike Jamal but like Davante, the kid gets better with competition. 

Juan, Du and Burton will surprise the out-of-towners commenting here.  Juan is really improved.

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 09, 2013, 10:24:18 PM
Start over who exactly? I mean not over Jamil, not over Otule and if Buzz feels that Gardner's trimmed down enough to play PF I fully expect Gardner to start. 

I doubt Gardner and Otule will both start. I'm not sure who will start at shooting guard, but I think the rest of the starting lineup will look like this:

PG: Derrick Wilson
SG: ?
(S)F: Jamil Wilson
(P)F: Jameel McKay
C: Chris Otule

Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 09, 2013, 10:53:42 PM
First, who knew, I agree with JayBee.  Last time that happened we testified in court about ZFB's animal peccadillos.  Next, Jamil will be a lottery pick.  He has worked all summer on his jumper.  Gone is the moon ball.  He has <highly> impressed the NBA scouts at summer camps with his athleticism. AIA camp surprised a number of them.

Next, Gardner has made every preseason All-American team.  How is he not on the NBA radar?  More so, how is Todd not just on the DNA?  They are tracking both.  And yes, Willie, even Otule.

Love John Daw.  Kid can shoot, but the small town adjustment will take time.  Unlike Jamal but like Davante, the kid gets better with competition. 

Juan, Du and Burton will surprise the out-of-towners commenting here.  Juan is really improved.

All great to hear.....how's the guard play?

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 09, 2013, 11:07:46 PM
All great to hear.....how's the guard play?

Well, it's a big MAN's game, but I am sure Todd is ready. Juan is vastly improved as a 2/3.  DuWilson is key and I don't trust freshman...bit he adds a dimension not seen in a years.  Burton= Stud.  You SoCals will get to see this early season in the DTV\Scoop tent.  How are the Lakefront tapper installs coming on the back patio?

Quote from: JerseyWarrior on October 09, 2013, 11:06:15 PM

PG: Derrick Wilson
SG: ?
(S)F: Jamil Wilson
(P)F: Jameel McKay
C: Chris Otule

That  would be a  pretty tall lineup. I like it.

Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 09, 2013, 11:14:48 PM
Well, it's a big MAN's game, but I am sure Todd is ready. Juan is vastly improved as a 2/3.  DuWilson is key and I don't trust freshman...bit he adds a dimension not seen in a years.  Burton= Stud.  You SoCals will get to see this early season in the DTV\Scoop tent.  How are the Lakefront tapper installs coming on the back patio?

It's a guards game at the college level, so I'm glad to hear they are progressing.  MU will go as far as our guards take us.  Hoping to see a few games, my son was just invited to a select team that will play over Thanksgiving holiday.  I may have an easier time watching them play in Tempe than I do less than 10 miles from mi casa over the holiday.

If it's a gaurds game how is it that we were good in 2009-10 cause Hayward led us... and in 2010-11 cause Butler led us... and in 2011-12 I know we had DJO but we were led by Crowder.  It kinda seems to me like it's a forwards game.  I'll be the first to say typical centers can be overrated in the college game but it seems like Buzz likes to rely on forwards. 

McKay and J.Wilson on the floor at the same time is a nice forward combo if Buzz relies heavily on forwards.

Quote from: JerseyWarrior on October 09, 2013, 10:17:35 PM
I think people are seriously underestimating the impact Jameel McKay will have on the team. I fully expect him to start, play about 20-25 minutes and be a rebounding machine.

+1. I think he will have the most immediate impact of any of our newcomers. I also expect him to be our star his senior year.

As for starting lineups, I think we will have another year where the starters, and the players who get the most minutes are two different groups of people. My projection is:

Starting Lineup
1: De Wilson
2: Anderson
3: J Wilson
4: McKay
5: Otule

(Loving the tall lineup, btw)

Players who get the most minutes at each postion
1: Du Wilson
2: JJJ
3: J Wilson
4: McKay
5: Gardner

I have no trust for Mayo's game whatsoever, I hope that I am proven wrong. And I am very optimistic about Taylor, but I think he will be stuck with backup duty with us being so stacked at forward. Next season will be his time to shine. Also, I love Burton's potential but I am higher on JJJ and I think he gets buried underneath all the taller switchables that we have. We have height this season and Buzz will want to use it.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on October 10, 2013, 12:18:54 AM

I have no trust for Mayo's game whatsoever, I hope that I am proven wrong. And I am very optimistic about Taylor, but I think he will be stuck with backup duty with us being so stacked at forward. Next season will be his time to shine. Also, I love Burton's potential but I am higher on JJJ and I think he gets buried underneath all the taller switchables that we have. We have height this season and Buzz will want to use it.

I think you're right. The only thing I might change is Anderson in the starting lineup -- it's certainly possible that he will, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Jake Thomas out there to spread the floor with such a tall lineup. Anderson and Gardner coming off the bench with one or two of the freshman would also provide experience to that lineup. Honestly though, anything can happen at the two position, whether it's Anderson, JJJ, Thomas, Mayo, or even Burton starting/playing the most minutes.

Quote from: JerseyWarrior on October 10, 2013, 12:56:35 AM
I think you're right. The only thing I might change is Anderson in the starting lineup -- it's certainly possible that he will, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Jake Thomas out there to spread the floor with such a tall lineup. Anderson and Gardner coming off the bench with one or two of the freshman would also provide experience to that lineup. Honestly though, anything can happen at the two position, whether it's Anderson, JJJ, Thomas, Mayo, or even Burton starting/playing the most minutes.

I disagree on all counts....Todd Mayo will blow up this year. Bank on it. He will be the most improved player on this team they won't be able to keep off the floor. And I think you leave Juan Anderson the second guy who can make a big leap in the starting lineup.

Todd will have the extra support of his family like OJ and his mother at games being here with him and will really relax him and his game will blossom big time.

Quote from: raul on October 09, 2013, 11:48:23 PM
McKay and J.Wilson on the floor at the same time is a nice forward combo if Buzz relies heavily on forwards.

You start Todd Mayo...period.

I know they probably won't but I would.

PG Derrick Wilson
SG Todd Mayo
SF  Juan Anderson
PF  Jamil Wilson
C   Devante Gardner

Then you can have a quick hook if things do not work out.
Bring in a few of those diaper dandies...if you want.

Otule {Obvious choice up front to relieve Devante}
JJJ  {Put at SG. Switch Mayo over to PG if he is shooting well.}
Duane Wilson {If Mayo is struggling throw in Duane}
J. McKay {I want McKay and Taylor to be a duo up front...}
S. Taylor {He complements McKay well and they should be a pair}
D. Burton
J. Thomas

None of this matters because Buzz plays everyone and uses mass substitutions and he shuffles guys in and out on each dead ball and possession, but I think some guy play better with others.

I like Mayo and JJJ on the court when we need points...I like McKay and S. Taylor together on the court at the same time as JJJ if they can and Juan and Jamil and Derrick and whoever is hot as the other.

Burton to me is a mystery...on how they will use him. 

Quote from: MUHoopsFan2 on October 10, 2013, 02:09:07 AM

PG Derrick Wilson
SG Todd Mayo
SF  Juan Anderson
PF  Jamil Wilson
C   Devante Gardner

No chance Davante starts. Buzz will have Otule out there to win the tip.

not having NBA talent....get the heck outta here!!!!

This team has more NBA talent then any team they have had here in years if they stay 4 years! Give me a break!

Jamil Wilson has NBA size and skill, so does Mayo with a big year and the others need to develop more and use all of their eligibility.

If Juan's shot starts to fall like it can and his handle is tighten up and on point...then look out! He is coach able, picks up things well and real quick and looks to be a great teammate and glue guy.

Because he can defend, is long, and active and is a player that works hard and loves to compete there is a place for him. He reminds me a lot of Lazar Hayward.

But the no hesitation confidence in his shot and drive to the basket is key. I want to see the dog in him and for him to be assertive more. It's all there.

But he has the hops and great hands and feet and moves well laterally and gets up quick on the rebound and is a legit 6'6 and can guard 2-3 positions. 

Quote from: Aughnanure on October 09, 2013, 02:56:46 PM
This great analysis can apply to nearly every college basketball team. OMG, a college team has new players and lost some players? They're going to have to find a way "to play together" and "as a team".

EDIT: This article at least goes in-depth detail at least about this, but this kind of transition is normal.

Find a way to mesh together???? Ah, helloooooo that is what they have been doing here at Marquette for the last 10 years better in college basketball then any team in the country!

First under Tom Crean and carried over with Buzz...what the heck are they talking about?There is an MU 'Brand' of hoops.

What are they looking at!? They have built a sound and solid reputation here for "meshing their teams together" and of practicing and playing hard and tough.

Who wrote this? Let me leave this place before I pop! LOL.

Quote from: sixstrings03 on October 09, 2013, 02:20:10 PM
"a roster that doesn't feature any obvious NBA-level talent"?

Are you kidding me? Jamil & JJJ at least (from raw talent level)... I don't understand how even a non-MU fan wouldn't see them as being NBA-level talent.

Agree that JJJ is unproven (obviously)

Part of "NBA-level talent" is the ability to turn physical gifts into outstanding performance on the court on a regular basis. Jamil has never done that.

You could make an argument that Gardner's weird ability to get shots to fall regardless of how and where he shoots it is a talent that's more ready for the NBA than anything that Jamil has shown in his two years at MU.

Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 09, 2013, 10:53:42 PM
First, who knew, I agree with JayBee.  Last time that happened we testified in court about ZFB's animal peccadillos.  Next, Jamil will be a lottery pick.  He has worked all summer on his jumper.  Gone is the moon ball.  He has <highly> impressed the NBA scouts at summer camps with his athleticism. AIA camp surprised a number of them.

Since 2007, eight seniors have been drafted in the Lottery. Pretty tall order. Not saying he won't be drafted, perhaps even in the first round, but saying he'll be drafted in the top 14 in what should be the deepest draft since 2003 may be a stretch.

Quote from: strotty on October 10, 2013, 04:14:05 AM
Since 2007, eight seniors have been drafted in the Lottery. Pretty tall order. Not saying he won't be drafted, perhaps even in the first round, but saying he'll be drafted in the top 14 in what should be the deepest draft since 2003 may be a stretch.

Listen, it is a stretch claim, but as I stated this summer, Jamil has the potential to be a "five tool guy".  If, and if it is a big if, he can consistently take over games like we all see in him, the NBA will be intrigued, mainly because it is a league that has gotten smaller in recent years.  Scouts fall in love with potential, tend to go with bigs here, but if he dominates like at the end of the Davidson game, don't discount.  He is starting to turn heads.

Now has he moved past a Rodney Hood or Doug McDermott?  No. He will have to show it on the floor.  The Creighton games, 3-5 potentially, will be well attended.

The hoop is 10 ft. off the ground so its a big man's game. Not hard to comprehend.

Quote from: MUHoopsFan2 on October 10, 2013, 02:26:25 AM
not having NBA talent....get the heck outta here!!!!

This team has more NBA talent then any team they have had here in years if they stay 4 years! Give me a break!

Jamil Wilson has NBA size and skill, so does Mayo with a big year and the others need to develop more and use all of their eligibility.

If Juan's shot starts to fall like it can and his handle is tighten up and on point...then look out! He is coach able, picks up things well and real quick and looks to be a great teammate and glue guy.

Because he can defend, is long, and active and is a player that works hard and loves to compete there is a place for him. He reminds me a lot of Lazar Hayward.

But the no hesitation confidence in his shot and drive to the basket is key. I want to see the dog in him and for him to be assertive more. It's all there.

But he has the hops and great hands and feet and moves well laterally and gets up quick on the rebound and is a legit 6'6 and can guard 2-3 positions. 

OK ... I'm not going to get in to a debate about this. If you want to believe that guys who averaged fewer than 15 mins last season are NBA material, that is your prerogative.

I certainly hope you are right about Mayo and Juan, because that will mean we're Final Four-bound. I seriously doubt you're right -- I mean, Vander, DJO, Lazar, McNeal, James, Robert Jackson, etc., aren't/weren't NBA material -- but I hope you are.

Quote from: Brewtown Andy on October 10, 2013, 02:42:30 AM
Part of "NBA-level talent" is the ability to turn physical gifts into outstanding performance on the court on a regular basis. Jamil has never done that.

You could make an argument that Gardner's weird ability to get shots to fall regardless of how and where he shoots it is a talent that's more ready for the NBA than anything that Jamil has shown in his two years at MU.

Disagreed. From February 6 through the end of the year last year, Jamil averaged 11.9 ppg and was in double-digits scoring in 13 out of 15 games. He also averaged 5.3 rpg (13/15 were 4+ rebounds) and shot well from beyond the arc, 36.8% while making at least 1 three in 13/15 games. If anything, Jamil was our most consistent performer from the beginning of February through the end of the season.

As far as Mayo...I don't see any way he's not a starter. People are still predicting too much for JJJ and Duane Wilson. Maybe they will come in and have great success, but it's an uphill climb for freshmen that just finished their first boot camp. Todd has been here and played significant minutes since he arrived. The only knock on him is that he's older than the average junior, which could be interpreted as "if he was going to make the jump he'd have made it already" but he was behind DJO as a freshman and Blue as a sophomore, two guys that are currently have NBA contracts (how solid, yet to be determined). I fully expect him to get every chance to start. Here's my starting five:

PG De. Wilson (25 mpg)
SG Mayo (25 mpg)
SF J. Wilson (32 mpg)
PF McKay (22 mpg)
C Otule (15 mpg)

And my guess at primary guys off the bench:

Gardner (20 mpg)
Anderson (18 mpg)
Taylor (15 mpg)
Du. Wilson (10 mpg)
Thomas (8 mpg)
Burton (5 mpg)
Johnson (4 mpg)
Dawson (1 mpg)

I think DuWil will play some by necessity, maybe he'll tick that up a couple minutes, but I doubt much. And maybe as the year goes on Burton starts to take more of Thomas' minutes, because physically he's the most ready of the freshmen. But for Johnson, I just don't think his time is now seeing as he's behind Mayo, Jamil, and Anderson, all of whom will likely log heavy minutes. And because we have four solid bigs (Otule, Gardner, McKay, Taylor) it's less likely Buzz will have to push Jamil or Juan to the 4 as often as he did in the past, which won't open up minutes that may have been there for a flex freshman 2/3 in the past.

The only freshman I could see really making a huge uptick from those minutes is DuWil, and then only if Derrick falls on his face. But Buzz will give Derrick every chance to succeed, maybe even to the point where it's a detriment to the team at times. Because at the end of the day, it's less about the seed than it is just getting in, and this team will get in.

Gardner will play more than 20 minutes per game.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 10, 2013, 07:49:46 AM
Gardner will play more than 20 minutes per game.

I think a lot of it will be need. If we don't need Gardner for 20 minutes, will he still play it? In tight games, yes. But in blowouts, I think some of the starters will get short minutes to rest them. The only guy on the team I see playing truly heavy minutes is Jamil. Though if he plays 26 mpg, that will probably be enough to lead the team.

Quote from: MUHoopsFan2 on October 10, 2013, 02:26:25 AM
not having NBA talent....get the heck outta here!!!!

This team has more NBA talent then any team they have had here in years if they stay 4 years! Give me a break!

Jamil Wilson has NBA size and skill, so does Mayo with a big year and the others need to develop more and use all of their eligibility.

The question was whether they have "obvious" NBA talent, and I don't think either of the players you mention do.  Jamil may have a great year, but while he has NBA size, I don't think he has NBA skill.  Not enough foot-speed and too inconsistent a shot. 

And Todd Mayo?  There isn't much room in the NBA for a 6'3" guard who can't play PG and shoots 33% from the college three.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 07:07:37 AM
Here's my starting five:

PG De. Wilson (25 mpg)
SG Mayo (25 mpg)
SF J. Wilson (32 mpg)
PF McKay (22 mpg)
C Otule (15 mpg)

And my guess at primary guys off the bench:

Gardner (20 mpg)
Anderson (18 mpg)
Taylor (15 mpg)
Du. Wilson (10 mpg)
Thomas (8 mpg)
Burton (5 mpg)
Johnson (4 mpg)
Dawson (1 mpg)

You really think the highest rated recruit we have gotten since Doc Rivers (JJJ) will only get 4 minutes off the bench? People are sleeping on him way too much. He's been on everyone's preseason Big East Freshman of the Year short list. Vander Blue, whose rating was close to JJJ's but lower got 19 minutes a game his freshmen year despite struggling. Granted, this team is better than that one, but there is no way that JJJ does not get at least 15 minutes a game. I honestly think he will get the lion's share of the minutes at shooting guard. Maybe Mayo will prove me wrong but I have seen nothing from his game to give me a great amount of confidence.

I respect your opinion. You are right that Buzz definitely rewards seniority and that freshmen tend to struggle. But we have never had freshmen like these. They will be competing for starter's minutes from day one. Honestly, I love that we have this problem. We are so deep that we have no idea how everyone who deserves minutes will get them.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on October 10, 2013, 09:08:50 AM
You really think the highest rated recruit we have gotten since Doc Rivers (JJJ) will only get 4 minutes off the bench? People are sleeping on him way too much. He's been on everyone's preseason Big East Freshman of the Year short list. Vander Blue, whose rating was close to JJJ's but lower got 19 minutes a game his freshmen year despite struggling. Granted, this team is better than that one, but there is no way that JJJ does not get at least 15 minutes a game. I honestly think he will get the lion's share of the minutes at shooting guard. Maybe Mayo will prove me wrong but I have seen nothing from his game to give me a great amount of confidence.

I respect your opinion. You are right that Buzz definitely rewards seniority and that freshmen tend to struggle. But we have never had freshmen like these. They will be competing for starter's minutes from day one. Honestly, I love that we have this problem. We are so deep that we have no idea how everyone who deserves minutes will get them.

Vander was also a fantastic defender and rebounder for his position.

That being said, it really is going to depend on how well he shoots versus how well Mayo shoots.  I tend to think that 25 for Mayo is probably right, but I think JJJ will get more like 8 or 10.  I don't see any reason why Thomas would get that much.  He had one basket during the BE season last year.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 07:07:37 AM
Disagreed. From February 6 through the end of the year last year, Jamil averaged 11.9 ppg and was in double-digits scoring in 13 out of 15 games. He also averaged 5.3 rpg (13/15 were 4+ rebounds) and shot well from beyond the arc, 36.8% while making at least 1 three in 13/15 games. If anything, Jamil was our most consistent performer from the beginning of February through the end of the season.

That was kind of my point.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on October 10, 2013, 09:08:50 AM
I respect your opinion. You are right that Buzz definitely rewards seniority and that freshmen tend to struggle. But we have never had freshmen like these. They will be competing for starter's minutes from day one. Honestly, I love that we have this problem. We are so deep that we have no idea how everyone who deserves minutes will get them.

Where this gets interesting is that Marquette's glaring weaknesses are exactly where the freshmen fit in.

Quote from: Brewtown Andy on October 10, 2013, 09:22:29 AM
Where this gets interesting is that Marquette's glaring weaknesses are exactly where the freshmen fit in.

Pay the man

Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on October 10, 2013, 09:17:27 AM
I don't see any reason why Thomas would get that much.  He had one basket during the BE season last year.

To Thomas' credit, it was a pretty epic basket

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 07:07:37 AM
Here's my starting five:

PG De. Wilson (25 mpg)
SG Mayo (25 mpg)
SF J. Wilson (32 mpg)
PF McKay (22 mpg)
C Otule (15 mpg)

And my guess at primary guys off the bench:

Gardner (20 mpg)
Anderson (18 mpg)
Taylor (15 mpg)
Du. Wilson (10 mpg)
Thomas (8 mpg)
Burton (5 mpg)
Johnson (4 mpg)
Dawson (1 mpg)

I will be very surprised if Thomas logs more MPG than JJJ, or even Burton. Thomas was significant in our regular season victory over Syracuse, and helped spread the floor throughout the year (most notably on the last possession v. Davidson). Having said that, he has failed in the role he was brought here to fill. He shot an uninspired .278 3P% last year, behind Jamil (.360), Lockett (.333), Blue, who was constantly ripped on this board for his inability to shoot from the perimeter (.303), Juanito (.286), and Mayo (.279). Why McKillop chose to face-guard an unproven perimeter shooter and not double team Blue on that last possession is beyond me, but thank God for it.

I understand that JJJ and Burton are 'raw' and 'unproven'. I also understand that if they can't play Big East caliber defense, they won't see many minutes, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet they are better defenders than Thomas out of the gate.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on October 10, 2013, 09:08:50 AM
But we have never had freshmen like these. They will be competing for starter's minutes from day one.

Oh I don't know.  Seems to me in 2005-06, we had some "decent" freshmen who competed for starter's minutes from day one.  

Just sayin'

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on October 10, 2013, 09:08:50 AM


I respect your opinion. You are right that Buzz definitely rewards seniority and that freshmen tend to struggle. But we have never had freshmen like these. They will be competing for starter's minutes from day one. Honestly, I love that we have this problem. We are so deep that we have no idea how everyone who deserves minutes will get them.

Wes Matthews, Dominic James, Jerel McNeal

Damon Key, Jim McIlvaine, Logterman

Hopefully these freshmen coming in are as good as advertised.  It can be a tough transition.  For every example like the two classes above, there are examples where it took quite a few years to get rolling...some guy named Vander Blue comes to mind and he was rated higher than most of the guys above. 

This may be a cop out answer but I really think we can't predict the line up minutes.  This is the first team I think Buzz truly has all the pieces he needs to play his system.  With what Buzz has he can literally play every style of basketball so each line-up and the players that get the most minutes will change with every game. 

If he needs to go big, he can easily do that(DuWil, Juan, Jamil, Gardner, Otule)

If he needs to go defensive he can easily do that (DeWil,Mayo,Jamil,McKay or Taylor, Otule)

If he needs to go with an arc team he can easily do that (DuWil,Mayo,Jamil or JJJ,Taylor,Gardner)

If he wants rebounds and high eFG% (DeWil,Juan,Burton,Taylor,Gardner)

If he wants a jack of all trades (DuWil,Mayo,Jamil,McKay,Gardner)

I think there will be people even more frustrated with substitutions and starting line-up patterns, but Buzz is going to go with a lot of pace adjusted metrics to attack other team's weaknesses.

Quote from: mu03eng on October 10, 2013, 10:06:26 AM
I think there will be people even more frustrated with substitutions and starting line-up patterns, but Buzz is going to go with a lot of pace adjusted metrics to attack other team's weaknesses.

If people can't figure out why Buzz what he does with regards to substitutions by now, there really is no hope for them.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on October 10, 2013, 09:08:50 AMYou really think the highest rated recruit we have gotten since Doc Rivers (JJJ) will only get 4 minutes off the bench?

In a word, yes. Because by looking at him and hearing reports about him, he doesn't have a body ready to compete at this level and his best attributes are on the offensive end, but if he can't play defense, he won't get into the game to showcase them. I think Johnson could end up being the best of the three top-100 freshmen long-term, but as a freshman, I think he will be the least impactful. I simply don't think he's ready to be a 15 mpg guy at this level.

In addition, it comes down to need. With the guys we have ahead of him, we just don't need him to play that kind of minutes right away. That wasn't the case with Blue or Mayo, both of whom were (in my opinion) more physically ready and showed more on the defensive end, and also didn't have the quality in front of them Johnson does now. Also, it wouldn't surprise me if Johnson was our best player as soon as his sophomore year. I just don't think it happens for him as a freshman.

Quote from: Brewtown Andy on October 10, 2013, 09:19:29 AMThat was kind of my point.

I'm clearly missing it then. Jamil was remarkably consistent the second half of this past season. If he puts together a season that follows what he did in the second half of last season with even marginal improvement, say 13 ppg, 6 rpg, and 38% from three while getting double-digits and 4+ rebounds in 85% of our contests, he is probably first or second team all league. You said Jamil has never consistently put in outstanding performances. His statlines those last 15 games show otherwise. That's a pretty long stretch to be consistent over.

I'm confused wasnt vander ranked higher than Johnson? I know espn ranks Johnson higher but I thought blue was a five star and Johnson a four star.

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 10, 2013, 10:20:10 AM
I'm confused wasnt vander ranked higher than Johnson? I know espn ranks Johnson higher but I thought blue was a five star and Johnson a four star.

Scout had Vander as a four star.  Rivals had him as a five star.

No idea how each service determines who earns how many stars.

Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on October 10, 2013, 10:22:37 AM

Scout had Vander as a four star.  Rivals had him as a five star.

No idea how each service determines who earns how many stars.

Looking at the RSCI composite rankings, Vander was #48 and JaJuan was #30.

EDIT: What he said ^

Usage in 2013-14.. Jamil.. what say you?

I hope/think he could be a 23-24% guy and STILL raise his eFG% a touch this season.

Could be a pretty stat line for him (speaking non-traditional stats... don't know if this is odd, but I rarely pay any attention to a players points per game average [directly, that is]).

Buzz will play everybody in non-conference, play 10-11 in the early conference season and as competition permits and tighten up to 7-8 at the end of the season and into the tournaments.   The toughest and most talented at the end of the season will play 35 minutes a game.

Has happened every year.

Quote from: Badgerhater on October 10, 2013, 10:35:15 AM
Buzz will play everybody in non-conference, play 10-11 in the early conference season and as competition permits and tighten up to 7-8 at the end of the season and into the tournaments.   The toughest and most talented at the end of the season will play 35 minutes a game.

Has happened every year.

Disagree.  Unless injuries or or a just complete lack of progression happen, I don't think any one player will consistently see more than 32 minutes at the end of the season.  I'm sure there will be the occasional game where one player is crushing it or the match-up is just stupid good in our favor, but there is no way we underutilize our depth that way.

Quote from: mu03eng on October 10, 2013, 10:57:21 AM
Disagree.  Unless injuries or or a just complete lack of progression happen, I don't think any one player will consistently see more than 32 minutes at the end of the season.  I'm sure there will be the occasional game where one player is crushing it or the match-up is just stupid good in our favor, but there is no way we underutilize our depth that way.

Jamil can play 2-5 and will be hard to take off the court. There's no one else I can see averaging 32 mpg, but I could easily see him cracking that barrier. Vander, DJO, Crowder, Jimmy (twice), Lazar, Jerel, and WesMat all averaged over 32 mpg in their last season here. Buzz usually has at least 1-2 guys he virtually never takes off the court. I think Jamil will be one. Not sure there will be another, but I'd put DeWil, Mayo, and Gardner as the most likely candidates if there is a second.

Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on October 10, 2013, 09:40:17 AM
Oh I don't know.  Seems to me in 2005-06, we had some "decent" freshmen who competed for starter's minutes from day one.  

Just sayin'

Those guys were great, but they really didn't have to "compete" for starter's minutes. They were given out of necessity. Buzz has the program at a much higher level. Rather than fill gaping holes, freshmen have talented, more experienced guys ahead of them. Tough on the frosh, great for our program.

Quote from: Brewtown Andy on October 10, 2013, 09:22:29 AM
Where this gets interesting is that Marquette's glaring weaknesses are exactly where the freshmen fit in.

Which is exactly why there is so much uncertainty not only about minutes, but about wins and losses, winning the BEast, making the tournament, reaching the Sweet 16 again and on and on is particularly difficult for this year.

Wondering how Jamil Wilson and Davante will perform is tough enough, and they are relative known entities is tough enough, but needing to rely on unknown freshmen to fill in some notable weaknesses is another.

That said, this is the best thread about the season that I've read in a long time.

He wasn't at the end of the season, either...

Quote from: Skitch on October 09, 2013, 03:53:14 PM
Was Vander considered an "obvious" NBA talent at the start of last season?  If not, how is this year any different from the last?

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 10, 2013, 11:21:59 AM
Those guys were great, but they really didn't have to "compete" for starter's minutes. They were given out of necessity. Buzz has the program at a much higher level. Rather than fill gaping holes, freshmen have talented, more experienced guys ahead of them. Tough on the frosh, great for our program.

I realize that Lenny.  I was using the word "compete" in the loosest sense of the word.  I was mainly making a point about the post saying "we've never had freshmen like these."  Obviously, we have.

Quote from: mug644 on October 10, 2013, 11:24:07 AM
Which is exactly why there is so much uncertainty not only about minutes, but about wins and losses, winning the BEast, making the tournament, reaching the Sweet 16 again and on and on is particularly difficult for this year.

Wondering how Jamil Wilson and Davante will perform is tough enough, and they are relative known entities is tough enough, but needing to rely on unknown freshmen to fill in some notable weaknesses is another.

That said, this is the best thread about the season that I've read in a long time.

That's exactly why I don't think they'll be counted on as heavily as some seem to think. The point is the only position where we really don't have a ton of depth, which is why I think we could see Duane get some significant minutes. Everywhere else, we have experience. Mayo, Jamil, Juan, and Taylor all have experience in the 2-4 switchable roles. I find it hard to believe that freshmen will walk in and easily take their minutes. McKay may not have that same experience, but he's been dominating at a higher level for the past couple years. Most of our JUCO transfers have been more ready to at least contribute significant minutes (Butler, Buycks, DJO, Crowder, with Buzz's boy Fulce the lone exception) from day one.

If they earn it, great. But there are a ton of bodies for them to climb over to get those minutes, and honestly, I think their best chance of playing major minutes would be injury. I'm really hoping we don't have to see a lot of Burton or Johnson this year. That could bode very ill for this year's team.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 11:33:05 AM
That's exactly why I don't think they'll be counted on as heavily as some seem to think. The point is the only position where we really don't have a ton of depth, which is why I think we could see Duane get some significant minutes. Everywhere else, we have experience. Mayo, Jamil, Juan, and Taylor all have experience in the 2-4 switchable roles. I find it hard to believe that freshmen will walk in and easily take their minutes. McKay may not have that same experience, but he's been dominating at a higher level for the past couple years. Most of our JUCO transfers have been more ready to at least contribute significant minutes (Butler, Buycks, DJO, Crowder, with Buzz's boy Fulce the lone exception) from day one.

If they earn it, great. But there are a ton of bodies for them to climb over to get those minutes, and honestly, I think their best chance of playing major minutes would be injury. I'm really hoping we don't have to see a lot of Burton or Johnson this year. That could bode very ill for this year's team.

I think back just a few years and recall when we had difficulty suiting up 10 true D1 players for practice.  My have times changed.  Whatever happens, it'll be earned in the Kasten gym in the bowels of the Al.

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 09, 2013, 11:30:03 PM
If it's a gaurds game how is it that we were good in 2009-10 cause Hayward led us... and in 2010-11 cause Butler led us... and in 2011-12 I know we had DJO but we were led by Crowder.  It kinda seems to me like it's a forwards game.  I'll be the first to say typical centers can be overrated in the college game but it seems like Buzz likes to rely on forwards. 

Yes, Hayward "led" us....where would that team be without Acker, Cubillan, DJO?  Dead in the water.   Where would the "Crowder" led team be without DJO's 18 points per game, JC at the point, etc?

Don't get me wrong, to be a great team you need great guards, great bigs.

Good guards are plentiful and allow anyone to compete.  Good bigs are not plentiful.  Good bigs without good guards don't get it done.  Good guards without good bigs can still win. 

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 11:03:35 AM
Jamil can play 2-5 and will be hard to take off the court. There's no one else I can see averaging 32 mpg, but I could easily see him cracking that barrier. Vander, DJO, Crowder, Jimmy (twice), Lazar, Jerel, and WesMat all averaged over 32 mpg in their last season here. Buzz usually has at least 1-2 guys he virtually never takes off the court. I think Jamil will be one. Not sure there will be another, but I'd put DeWil, Mayo, and Gardner as the most likely candidates if there is a second.

Jamil cannot play 2 or 3 effectively unless you want him to catch and shoot all day. He has shown no ability to dribble or handle the ball like a guard. He is a low post player with outside range on a catch and shoot. His defensive footwork isn't good enough to stay with most experienced guards. That's Mayo downfall as a 2 guard as well. His dribbling ability is limited and he cannot crest his own shot. Jamil's advantage is his length, but keep him in the post.

Quote from: Sunbelt15 on October 10, 2013, 11:52:27 AM
Jamil cannot play 2 or 3 effectively unless you want him to catch and shoot all day. He has shown no ability to dribble or handle the ball like a guard. He is a low post player with outside range on a catch and shoot. His defensive footwork isn't good enough to stay with most experienced guards. That's Mayo downfall as a 2 guard as well. His dribbling ability is limited and he cannot crest his own shot. Jamil's advantage is his length, but keep him in the post.

While I do agree with most of what you said, I think Jamil does a lot of things well...yet nothing spectacular.  He will play huge minutes - unless injured I have no doubt that he will lead the team in mpg.  He is usually in fantastic shape and developed more consistency as the season went along last year. 

Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 10, 2013, 06:14:55 AM
Listen, it is a stretch claim, but as I stated this summer, Jamil has the potential to be a "five tool guy".  If, and if it is a big if, he can consistently take over games like we all see in him, the NBA will be intrigued, mainly because it is a league that has gotten smaller in recent years.  Scouts fall in love with potential, tend to go with bigs here, but if he dominates like at the end of the Davidson game, don't discount.  He is starting to turn heads.

Now has he moved past a Rodney Hood or Doug McDermott?  No. He will have to show it on the floor.  The Creighton games, 3-5 potentially, will be well attended.

When he has that killer instinct, he is absolutely awesome to watch.  Unfortunately, I don't see it much from him. 

Anyone remember after he made a HUUGE three against Davidson (Butler?) and he blew a kiss at one of the Davidson (Butler?) defenders?  I jumped out of my seat and said "Yea Jamil!  That's the competitiveness I've been longing for, bro!!!"

Quote from: Sunbelt15 on October 10, 2013, 11:52:27 AM
Jamil cannot play 2 or 3 effectively unless you want him to catch and shoot all day. He has shown no ability to dribble or handle the ball like a guard. He is a low post player with outside range on a catch and shoot. His defensive footwork isn't good enough to stay with most experienced guards. That's Mayo downfall as a 2 guard as well. His dribbling ability is limited and he cannot crest his own shot. Jamil's advantage is his length, but keep him in the post.

So, Jamil is a low post player that can't play the 3 effectively?  ?-(

He'll start at the 3 and be an All-Big East selection. Book it.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 10, 2013, 11:42:46 AM
Yes, Hayward "led" us....where would that team be without Acker, Cubillan, DJO?  Dead in the water.   Where would the "Crowder" led team be without DJO's 18 points per game, JC at the point, etc?

Don't get me wrong, to be a great team you need great guards, great bigs.

Good guards are plentiful and allow anyone to compete.  Good bigs are not plentiful.  Good bigs without good guards don't get it done.  Good guards without good bigs can still win. 

You're absolutely right but there is a ceiling, no pun intended.  The nice thing about this season is we have really good bigs with (presumably) talented but unproven guards.  It beats the usual of really good guards with hard working but low-ceiling bigs.  

Quote from: Nukem2 on October 10, 2013, 10:27:20 AM
Looking at the RSCI composite rankings, Vander was #48 and JaJuan was #30.

But wasn't Vander a Mcdonalds all american?  I don't think Johnson was. 

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 10, 2013, 12:49:07 PM
But wasn't Vander a Mcdonalds all american?  I don't think Johnson was. 

Neither one of them were.

Quote from: The Lens on October 10, 2013, 12:46:48 PM
You're absolutely right but there is a ceiling, no pun intended.  The nice thing about this season is we have really good bigs with (presumably) talented but unproven guards.  It beats the usual of really good guards with hard working but low-ceiling bigs.  

No disagreement there.  If the guards are as good as advertised in combination with the bigs, then all systems go.

Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on October 10, 2013, 12:49:07 PM
But wasn't Vander a Mcdonalds all american?  I don't think Johnson was. 

We've only had three McDonald's all Americans in our history and the last one was 31 years ago.

I was reading the players profiles on gomarquette the other day and saw that Derrick Wilson was nominated to be a McDonald's AA which was kind of suprising.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 11:33:05 AM
If they earn it, great. But there are a ton of bodies for them to climb over to get those minutes, and honestly, I think their best chance of playing major minutes would be injury. I'm really hoping we don't have to see a lot of Burton or Johnson this year. That could bode very ill for this year's team.

We know how good our returning players are. Our freshmen are unproven. If they prove themselves and earn minutes over our returners, i think that's a very good sign for our program. We know that we can develop two, three, and low four stars into great players. The next step towards reaching blue blood status is proving that we can recruit and develop four and five star players.

Quote from: swoopem on October 10, 2013, 01:19:07 PM
I was reading the players profiles on gomarquette the other day and saw that Derrick Wilson was nominated to be a McDonald's AA which was kind of suprising.

If you look at the nominating process, not entirely.  There are states like Illinois in the past that only had 3 or 4, including Steve Taylor if I recall.  Then a small state like Iowa had something crazy like 35.  Becoming a nominee is more for show.  Hell, becoming an actual recipient is political and for show as well, but the nominee process definitely is.

Case in point, look at this past year.  Indiana, a basketball crazy state that puts out a ton of talent had 7 nominees.  Iowa has 34.  California, with a population that crushes Iowa, had 24.   It's a bit of a circus.

http://www.mcdonaldsallamerican.com/content/dam/allamerican/pdfs/2013_Nominee_List_Boys_Girls_updated012913.pdf

My gut feeling(and that is all it is) that Buzz starts either 3 or 4 seniors this year. Chris will start as center. Gardner would like to play some four, so Buzz will start him there to get that out of the way. Wilson probably wants to play some three, so Buzz will start him there to get that out of the way. However, the majority of their playing times Jamil will be at the four and Gardner will be at the center. I could see Thomas starting at 2, play three minutes and then in most cases never enter the game again. Of course Derrick will start at point, but will play less than Duane, if Duane shows he is ready.

Buzz does not like to play freshman. In fact he's dead last in giving time to freshmen compared to his peers even after adjusting for talent level and circumstances.

http://basketball.realgm.com/article/228847 (http://basketball.realgm.com/article/228847)

Quote from: hoyasincebirth on October 10, 2013, 01:44:27 PM
Buzz does not like to play freshman. In fact he's dead last in giving time to freshmen compared to his major conference peers even after adjusting for talent level and circumstances.

http://basketball.realgm.com/article/228847 (http://basketball.realgm.com/article/228847)

Well hes going to have to this year. Derrick Wilson is not the answer at PG. Even though hes a freshman theres no way Duane will struggle so much where he wont get playing time.

Quote from: hoyasincebirth on October 10, 2013, 01:44:27 PM
Buzz does not like to play freshman. In fact he's dead last in giving time to freshmen compared to his peers even after adjusting for talent level and circumstances.

http://basketball.realgm.com/article/228847 (http://basketball.realgm.com/article/228847)

Adjusting for talent level and circumstance is difficult for some to do.

Do you think Buzz thinks, "well, player A is far and away better than player B. But, player A is a freshman. Therefore, screw playing him."

Sounds like Chicos and his 5 year requirement before judging a coach.

Quote from: esard2011 on October 10, 2013, 01:47:40 PM
Well hes going to have to this year. Derrick Wilson is not the answer at PG. Even though hes a freshman theres no way Duane will struggle so much where he wont get playing time.

That is the biggest question surrounding this team.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 10, 2013, 01:14:38 PM
We've only had three McDonald's all Americans in our history and the last one was 31 years ago.

Huh don't know where I got that idea then. 

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2013, 01:54:36 PM
Adjusting for talent level and circumstance is difficult for some to do.

Do you think Buzz thinks, "well, player A is far and away better than player B. But, player A is a freshman. Therefore, screw playing him."

Sounds like Chicos and his 5 year requirement before judging a coach.

Something I never said.  5 years to FULLY JUDGE, but you can judge plenty along the way...something I wasn't shy about.  "SO FAR SO GOOD"

This is becoming like oft stated error that marriages end in divorce 50% of the time.  No they don't, not close.  Just like I never said you have to wait 5 years to judge a coach....to fully judge, yes (let the recruited classes come through).  Big difference.

On your statements about Freshmen, I agree...he will adapt and play the best players.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 10, 2013, 02:31:11 PM
Something I never said.  5 years to FULLY JUDGE, but you can judge plenty along the way...something I wasn't shy about.  "SO FAR SO GOOD"

This is becoming like oft stated error that marriages end in divorce 50% of the time.  No they don't, not close.  Just like I never said you have to wait 5 years to judge a coach....to fully judge, yes (let the recruited classes come through).  Big difference.

How the mighty have backtracked.

Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on October 10, 2013, 02:32:52 PM

How the mighty have backtracked.

Bullshyte........search is your friend.  I'm sure the apology is on the way.   ::)  The mighty SEARCH ENGINE has spoken and consistency from day one.  Sorry your bubble just burst.  Thank you search engine!

"I've said on numerous occasions...so far so good"
May 28, 2008

"Too many guys have failed in years 3 - 5 just as many have succeeded....I'll wait to pass full judgment thank you very much, but so far so good."
April 29, 2009

"I'll pass full judgment after I get more facts, but there is a reason why I wait 5 years to evaluate a coach, because it's too easy to fall in love with someone in the first year or two before some of the shine comes off."
June 29, 2010

"That's why you don't completely judge coaches on just the first few years of work.  Sometimes it takes awhile.  Doesn't mean he will succeed, but plenty of examples out there of guys struggling out of the gates only to hit on all cylinders a few years down the road."
Sept 29, 2010

"This is why I wait 4 or 5 years to evaluate coaches because only then are the players truly purged from the previous regime and it gives a full recruiting class under the new coach to matriculate all the way through. "
March 2, 2010

"I like Buzz, always have and probably always will.  Good guy, definitely not a poser.  I have been consistent from day one that I will wait to see what happens with his guys, that typically takes 4 or 5 years. So far so good. I'll stick to it....you fall in love easier than I do....I like to kick the tires, take her for a few test drives before getting down on one knee.  I've seen way too many Bruiser Flints, Steve Lavin at UCLA, etc, etc to not be cautious."
May 13, 2011


And on and on and on.  Despite the evidence, the same mantra from the uninformed here.  Hey, guess what...marriages end in divorce 50% of the time.  Chico said you can't evaluate a coach until 5 years, and you will not have to change your doctor after this new health care bill.  It's amazing what people want to believe.

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2013, 01:54:36 PM
Adjusting for talent level and circumstance is difficult for some to do.

Do you think Buzz thinks, "well, player A is far and away better than player B. But, player A is a freshman. Therefore, screw playing him."

Sounds like Chicos and his 5 year requirement before judging a coach.

It's a comfort level for Buzz - it's all about a player earning his trust. And obviously the longer a guy has been here, the better chance he has to know what Buzz wants where he can earn that trust.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 10, 2013, 03:01:45 PM
Bullshyte........search is your friend.  I'm sure the apology is on the way.   ::)  The mighty SEARCH ENGINE has spoken and consistency from day one.  Sorry your bubble just burst.  Thank you search engine!

"I've said on numerous occasions...so far so good"
May 28, 2008

Wow. On May 28, 2008 (Buzz had been HC for all of 50 days) you had already, on numerous occasions, said "so far, so good"?

I'll give you some of my remembrances of you from your "so far, so good" period:
1. Printing anything and everything negative you could find on Buzz, from UNO fan boards to some hack blogger from Milwaukee.
2. "Squirming" over and over again about a bunch of stuff that was either made up or never amounted to anything
3. Accepting Brad Forster and Philly Coach's version of the DJ Newbill fiasco lock, stock and barrel, basically calling Buzz a liar.
4. Reflexively coming down on the side of Pilarz and LW in every battle with Buzz, whether real or imagined
5. Calling his (and your) team "choking dogs", something I never recall you doing during the previous administration.

I could go on and on, but it's all been said before. Buzz is someone all Marquette fans should celebrate, not nitpick. But the more his accomplishments dwarf TC's the snarkier you get.

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2013, 01:54:36 PM
Do you think Buzz thinks, "well, player A is far and away better than player B. But, player A is a freshman. Therefore, screw playing him."

I'll be one to say that I don't think Buzz has any real problem playing freshmen. He played Blue and he played Mayo. Even guys like Taylor and Gardner got chances. I just feel this team is deep enough that we won't need many minutes from freshmen. Duane could play, sure, but I think people are really underrating DeWil. How many people had written off Vander after his freshman year, and again after his sophomore year? Then he played at an all-conference level as a junior.

I'm not saying Derrick will be all-conference, but the idea that he could be a solid 25 mpg starting PG isn't at all far-fetched, especially if we see improvement from Mayo, consistency from Jamil, and the same performance out of the centers we got last year.

Just as this board is way too quick to hype the next freshman who has never played a minute of D1 ball as the second coming, they are way too quick to write off the guy who's been toiling behind others off the bench. Jimmy Butler and Maurice Acker went from reserves with pedestrian statlines in 08-09 to leaders and stars in 09-10. Otule, Gardner, Jamil, Buycks, all guys who saw their production improve as they gained confidence and the coach's trust.

Guys develop. They improve. And just like people wrote off guys like Butler, Acker, and Blue too early, maybe we've written Derrick off a bit too early. It amazes me the confidence people have that he's going to be hot garbage considering the success Buzz has had developing players and how guys have emerged when it was their time to shine. Before we hand his position to a kid who's never faced a single team the caliber of Grambling, much less teams like Wisconsin or Georgetown, let's see what DeWil can do as a junior. Because there's a very good chance it will be better than what he's shown us in the past.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 04:52:00 PM
I'll be one to say that I don't think Buzz has any real problem playing freshmen. He played Blue and he played Mayo. Even guys like Taylor and Gardner got chances. I just feel this team is deep enough that we won't need many minutes from freshmen. Duane could play, sure, but I think people are really underrating DeWil. How many people had written off Vander after his freshman year, and again after his sophomore year? Then he played at an all-conference level as a junior.

I'm not saying Derrick will be all-conference, but the idea that he could be a solid 25 mpg starting PG isn't at all far-fetched, especially if we see improvement from Mayo, consistency from Jamil, and the same performance out of the centers we got last year.

Just as this board is way too quick to hype the next freshman who has never played a minute of D1 ball as the second coming, they are way too quick to write off the guy who's been toiling behind others off the bench. Jimmy Butler and Maurice Acker went from reserves with pedestrian statlines in 08-09 to leaders and stars in 09-10. Otule, Gardner, Jamil, Buycks, all guys who saw their production improve as they gained confidence and the coach's trust.

Guys develop. They improve. And just like people wrote off guys like Butler, Acker, and Blue too early, maybe we've written Derrick off a bit too early. It amazes me the confidence people have that he's going to be hot garbage considering the success Buzz has had developing players and how guys have emerged when it was their time to shine. Before we hand his position to a kid who's never faced a single team the caliber of Grambling, much less teams like Wisconsin or Georgetown, let's see what DeWil can do as a junior. Because there's a very good chance it will be better than what he's shown us in the past.

I agree, remember Steve Taylor got huge defensive minutes in the regular season match up with Syracuse at the end of the game.  Buzz doesn't care what age they are as long as they have shown ability.

Also, during the non-conference last year he said after the Wisco game(I think) that DeWil deserved to be starting over Junior...that doesn't just get said because he has no ability and Buzz is saying weird things

I don't think anyone actually read the content of the article. It's a little, long, but here is the key point:

"In today's analysis, I essentially attempt to control for circumstances. I predict each player's playing time based on his stats (his measured production) and the stats of his teammates. If a coach is playing an optimal lineup, the player with the best measured stats (high ORtg given usage rate, high steal rate, ect.) should play the most. But what you see is that most coaches will typically play a freshman less than an upperclassman producing at the same level.

The main new variable is shown in the next table under the heading "Fr Rel to Soph". This shows how many minutes a freshman will receive relative to a sophomore with equivalent statistics. In the vast majority of cases, the freshmen will play less. For example, under Mike Krzyzewski if a freshman and sophomore have equivalent stats the freshman will play 9.0% fewer minutes. Under Bill Self, if a freshman and sophomore have equivalent stats the freshman will play 9.7% less. Amazingly, under John Calipari, if a freshman and sophomore have equivalent stats, the freshman will play 3% more minutes. This is exceedingly rare."

It's not a complete negative things. Most coaches favor upper classmen. But Buzz more so than most. The point is not that you're playing someone significantly worse due to seniority, but a freshman has to be clearly better than the alternative to earn playing time.

Quote from: hoyasincebirth on October 10, 2013, 07:30:24 PM
I don't think anyone actually read the content of the article. It's a little, long, but here is the key point:

"In today's analysis, I essentially attempt to control for circumstances. I predict each player's playing time based on his stats (his measured production) and the stats of his teammates. If a coach is playing an optimal lineup, the player with the best measured stats (high ORtg given usage rate, high steal rate, ect.) should play the most. But what you see is that most coaches will typically play a freshman less than an upperclassman producing at the same level.

The problem is it doesn't seem he takes much improvement into account. Anyone who tried to predict Vander's last season based on his measured previous production would end up vastly wrong, I believe he improved his ORtg by 10 points while also increasing his usage. And if he is attempting to predict freshman to sophomore jumps, remember that Van's jump was sophomore to junior.

Every preview will have its flaws...I don't blame the writer for whichever ones his may have as I'm sure if I did one myself it would be just as flawed, if not more so. I just think if you aren't intimately close to each team, you'll likely miss some stuff. Hell, guys that watched MU every game the past decade never expected Blue to make the jump he did. Sometimes, you just never can tell.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 10, 2013, 02:31:11 PM
Something I never said.  5 years to FULLY JUDGE, but you can judge plenty along the way...something I wasn't shy about.  "SO FAR SO GOOD"

This is becoming like oft stated error that marriages end in divorce 50% of the time.  No they don't, not close.  Just like I never said you have to wait 5 years to judge a coach....to fully judge, yes (let the recruited classes come through).  Big difference.

On your statements about Freshmen, I agree...he will adapt and play the best players.

What is the difference between a "judgment" and a "full judgment"? I think your definition necessarily will include the amount of available evidence, not the action (i.e., judging is judging... this isn't entering a verdict in court.. you're always judging a coach based on all available evidence you find relevant).

That is, you're simply saying that FOR YOU, "full judgment" includes the opportunity to purge the last guys players and bring in the current coaches own... there are many reasons why 5 years may or may not be reasonable to make a good judgment.. or a "full judgment".. by your definition a "full judgment" is nothing more than a subjective clarification of when you feel like you're ready to lock into a decision. But, a judgment is a judgment is a judgment is a judgment.

Reasonable thinkers are able to make decisions when appropriate. Full judgment? Half pregnant? SHEESH.

Also.. you say marriages don't end in divorce 50% of the time.. "not close" to 50% you say. I believe otherwise - I believe the number is probably trending around 40-50%. What do you believe it to be and why? I understand the issue with the origin of the "50% claim", but that doesn't mean it doesn't coincidentally happen to be a reasonable estimate of a difficult-to-gauge figure. Curious as to what "not close to 50%" is.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 04:52:00 PM
I'll be one to say that I don't think Buzz has any real problem playing freshmen. He played Blue and he played Mayo. Even guys like Taylor and Gardner got chances. I just feel this team is deep enough that we won't need many minutes from freshmen. Duane could play, sure, but I think people are really underrating DeWil. How many people had written off Vander after his freshman year, and again after his sophomore year? Then he played at an all-conference level as a junior.

I'm not saying Derrick will be all-conference, but the idea that he could be a solid 25 mpg starting PG isn't at all far-fetched, especially if we see improvement from Mayo, consistency from Jamil, and the same performance out of the centers we got last year.

Just as this board is way too quick to hype the next freshman who has never played a minute of D1 ball as the second coming, they are way too quick to write off the guy who's been toiling behind others off the bench. Jimmy Butler and Maurice Acker went from reserves with pedestrian statlines in 08-09 to leaders and stars in 09-10. Otule, Gardner, Jamil, Buycks, all guys who saw their production improve as they gained confidence and the coach's trust.

Guys develop. They improve. And just like people wrote off guys like Butler, Acker, and Blue too early, maybe we've written Derrick off a bit too early. It amazes me the confidence people have that he's going to be hot garbage considering the success Buzz has had developing players and how guys have emerged when it was their time to shine. Before we hand his position to a kid who's never faced a single team the caliber of Grambling, much less teams like Wisconsin or Georgetown, let's see what DeWil can do as a junior. Because there's a very good chance it will be better than what he's shown us in the past.

For me -- and, I'm guessing, for Buzz -- it will be pretty simple.

If JJJ and Duane are hitting 3s, that is an area of definite need, and they will get playing time because of it. Hell, Buzz was even willing to give Jake a chance last year just for the threat of 3s.

In college basketball, you must hit outside shots. Not only do you need the shots themselves, you need the threat of those shots to open up the court for the likes of Gardner.

Just as Buzz played Vander and Mayo as freshmen, and a very unproven (if not a freshman) Jake last year, he will play JJJ and Duane during the nonconference games. If they are hitting 3s, he will keep playing them. If they stop hitting them (as Jake did), they'll see pine unless they can do something else to help the team.

Oh, and I still say if Duane is a better PG than Derrick, Buzz eventually will relent and play Duane the majority of minutes. For all of his loyalty to Derrick and for all of the times Buzz said Derrick should have played over Junior, to whom did Buzz give most of the minutes? Not Derrick. Because Junior was a better offensive PG, period.

This just in: Buzz is a coach and coaches want to win. If the freshmen give us the best chance to win, Buzz will play them.

Quote from: MU82 on October 10, 2013, 09:30:13 PM
In college basketball, you must hit outside shots. Not only do you need the shots themselves, you need the threat of those shots to open up the court for the likes of Gardner.

Yeah, as proven by the most recent national champion. Had their starting backcourt not shot a sensational 31.6% from deep, who knows how awful they would have been?!?!

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2013, 08:03:01 PM
What is the difference between a "judgment" and a "full judgment"? I think your definition necessarily will include the amount of available evidence, not the action (i.e., judging is judging... this isn't entering a verdict in court.. you're always judging a coach based on all available evidence you find relevant).

That is, you're simply saying that FOR YOU, "full judgment" includes the opportunity to purge the last guys players and bring in the current coaches own... there are many reasons why 5 years this may or may not be reasonable to make a good judgment.. or a "full judgment".. by your definition of a "full judgment" is nothing more than a subjective clarification of when you feel like you're ready to lock into a decision. But, a judgment is a judgment is a judgment is a judgment.

Reasonable thinkers are able to make decisions when appropriate. Full judgment? Half pregnant? SHEESH.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Quote from: MU82 on October 10, 2013, 09:30:13 PMOh, and I still say if Duane is a better PG than Derrick, Buzz eventually will relent and play Duane the majority of minutes. For all of his loyalty to Derrick and for all of the times Buzz said Derrick should have played over Junior, to whom did Buzz give most of the minutes? Not Derrick. Because Junior was a better offensive PG, period.

I do believe that Duane is likely more talented than Derrick. I do believe he has more physical upside. But I'm far from convinced Duane is a better PG for this team than Derrick is. Will Buzz be willing to stomach the inevitable mistakes and higher turnover percentage that a freshman would bring? Maybe so. But it wouldn't surprise me at all if he went with the guy he trusts to value the ball and accepts that he can get scoring from other places on the floor.

All I'm really trying to say is people are willing to write a guy off way too easily who hasn't been given much of a chance. But I suppose that's the thankless job of being a Marquette point guard.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 10, 2013, 08:01:28 PM
The problem is it doesn't seem he takes much improvement into account. Anyone who tried to predict Vander's last season based on his measured previous production would end up vastly wrong, I believe he improved his ORtg by 10 points while also increasing his usage. And if he is attempting to predict freshman to sophomore jumps, remember that Van's jump was sophomore to junior.

Every preview will have its flaws...I don't blame the writer for whichever ones his may have as I'm sure if I did one myself it would be just as flawed, if not more so. I just think if you aren't intimately close to each team, you'll likely miss some stuff. Hell, guys that watched MU every game the past decade never expected Blue to make the jump he did. Sometimes, you just never can tell.

It's retrospective not prospective. It's looking at did freshman get as many minutes as their performance on the court indicated they should. In buzz's case no they didn't.

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 11, 2013, 07:04:26 AM
I do believe that Duane is likely more talented than Derrick. I do believe he has more physical upside. But I'm far from convinced Duane is a better PG for this team than Derrick is. Will Buzz be willing to stomach the inevitable mistakes and higher turnover percentage that a freshman would bring? Maybe so. But it wouldn't surprise me at all if he went with the guy he trusts to value the ball and accepts that he can get scoring from other places on the floor.

All I'm really trying to say is people are willing to write a guy off way too easily who hasn't been given much of a chance. But I suppose that's the thankless job of being a Marquette point guard.

In many ways, this is yet another version of fandom writing off a guy too early (Derrick), and anointing the new guy too quickly (Duane.)

I can already see the "Wow has Derrick improved!" posts, and the "What's wrong with Duane?" posts

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 10, 2013, 04:45:20 PM
Wow. On May 28, 2008 (Buzz had been HC for all of 50 days) you had already, on numerous occasions, said "so far, so good"?

I'll give you some of my remembrances of you from your "so far, so good" period:
1. Printing anything and everything negative you could find on Buzz, from UNO fan boards to some hack blogger from Milwaukee.
2. "Squirming" over and over again about a bunch of stuff that was either made up or never amounted to anything
3. Accepting Brad Forster and Philly Coach's version of the DJ Newbill fiasco lock, stock and barrel, basically calling Buzz a liar.
4. Reflexively coming down on the side of Pilarz and LW in every battle with Buzz, whether real or imagined
5. Calling his (and your) team "choking dogs", something I never recall you doing during the previous administration.

I could go on and on, but it's all been said before. Buzz is someone all Marquette fans should celebrate, not nitpick. But the more his accomplishments dwarf TC's the snarkier you get.

Are you denying 50 days in that I said that?  Sure sounds like it....please clarify so I can point you to the exact post, or do you want me to save you the trouble.

1) Funny how one sided your point of view is.  I tried to be an equal opportunity poster.  Yup, I posted UNO fan postings....I could have been like you and buried my head in the sand and pretended it wasn't there, but I didn't.  Hmmm, did I also post really good things from posters and administrators at Texas A&M?  Wow, I did'  From Billie Gillespie....hey, I did.  Did I post positive comments from Colorado State....oh my Gosh, I did.   Hmm, you don't seem to mention those.

2)  All legit, most of it taken care of, some we got lucky on.  Happens at many places.  To this day there are things like Newbill, etc, that were BS.  It doesn't bother you, it does me.  We all have different moral compasses.

3) Actually, accepting Newbill's relatives version as plausible, but again some people want to put heads in sand and refuse to consider all the evidence...you excel at that. 

4) Every battle with Pilarz and Williams...not even close.  Some, absolutely.  Every, never, always...words that I associate with you and your argumentative skills.  Shows a person unable to process all sides of the story, just like I proved out in item one here.

5) Yup, I did call them choking dogs, and apologized for it....which you never mention.  I also said we peed down our leg a few times, for which you got hellbent on only to then be reminded they were the EXACT same words Buzz used and I just reused them.  LOL.  And yes, I have said that about the previous administration, but again your tunnel vision is so extremely narrow you don't process them, just as I proved out in point one here and have many times in the past.  You look at the critiques, and never the other stuff.  It's how you are...you get all bent when  I correct someone on Crean and call me a defender, yet you do the exact same thing with Buzz.  The irony is delicious.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 10, 2013, 04:45:20 PM
Wow. On May 28, 2008 (Buzz had been HC for all of 50 days) you had already, on numerous occasions, said "so far, so good"?

(http://i42.tinypic.com/1239t9l.jpg)


I'm sure an apology is coming soon from you.....................

EDIT: Meh...not worth continuing a dead discussion.

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2013, 08:03:01 PM
What is the difference between a "judgment" and a "full judgment"? I think your definition necessarily will include the amount of available evidence, not the action (i.e., judging is judging... this isn't entering a verdict in court.. you're always judging a coach based on all available evidence you find relevant).

That is, you're simply saying that FOR YOU, "full judgment" includes the opportunity to purge the last guys players and bring in the current coaches own... there are many reasons why 5 years may or may not be reasonable to make a good judgment.. or a "full judgment".. by your definition a "full judgment" is nothing more than a subjective clarification of when you feel like you're ready to lock into a decision. But, a judgment is a judgment is a judgment is a judgment.

Reasonable thinkers are able to make decisions when appropriate. Full judgment? Half pregnant? SHEESH.

Also.. you say marriages don't end in divorce 50% of the time.. "not close" to 50% you say. I believe otherwise - I believe the number is probably trending around 40-50%. What do you believe it to be and why? I understand the issue with the origin of the "50% claim", but that doesn't mean it doesn't coincidentally happen to be a reasonable estimate of a difficult-to-gauge figure. Curious as to what "not close to 50%" is.

I think it is pretty clear Jay Bee. I've also said on numerous times that some people can make that judgment very quickly, but for me I wanted 4 or 5 years.  In the meantime, so far so good.  Sorry, but there is a difference, a big difference.  I laid it out consistently from day one.  I want a coach to have his guys go through the program which takes 4 or 5 years for a recruiting class to go all the way through.  Thus, I see no reason why you can't judge someone early on (so far so good) but hold final judgment for that timeline to go through.  

I'm glad you believe otherwise on the marriage stuff, but you are wrong.  It is one of the great myths out there.  I invite you to do some reading on it.  All it takes is for one or two people to say it and it gets legs.  Scary.  Remember when Toyotas had a defect and were out of control cuz the media said so...oops.  Breast implants caused cancer...oops.  Here are some starters, but the stat is Urban Legend and complete fiction.  The real number is closer to 30%.  It's urban legend which was my point.  You keep saying I said to wait 5 years, that's not what I said.  I said wait 5 years to FULLY judge because you need to get a class or two to matriculate.  Never did I say you have to wait 5 years to render any judgment.  You are perpetuating an urban legend, just like divorce rates at 50%. 

http://psychcentral.com/lib/the-myth-of-the-high-rate-of-divorce/00011473

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/07/divorce-myths-debunked_n_804934.html#s219156title=Half_of_All

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/divorce.htm#.UlgQeZzl358

http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/05/11/myths-about-divorce/

etc, etc, etc

Wow even posts about marriage and divorce rates? Guess I got in before the lock!

Quote from: newsdrms on October 11, 2013, 10:18:41 AM
Wow even posts about marriage and divorce rates? Guess I got in before the lock!

With references including HuffPo, this is a very serious Internet fight!

(http://i.imgur.com/RKe0kS4.jpg)

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 11, 2013, 09:56:51 AM
I think it is pretty clear Jay Bee. I've also said on numerous times that some people can make that judgment very quickly, but for me I wanted 4 or 5 years.  In the meantime, so far so good.  Sorry, but there is a difference, a big difference.  I laid it out consistently from day one.  I want a coach to have his guys go through the program which takes 4 or 5 years for a recruiting class to go all the way through.  Thus, I see no reason why you can't judge someone early on (so far so good) but hold final judgment for that timeline to go through.  

I'm glad you believe otherwise on the marriage stuff, but you are wrong.  

Marriage - I said I believe the number is probably trending in the 40-50% range. You say it's closer to 30% and "not even close" to 50%. We could both provide various studies and offer critiques of each one. I'd challenge your belief that there is a firm 30% known divorce rate while 40% is "wrong". Again, the origins of the 50% "myth" are silly, but the coincidentally the percentage may not be far off and it's certainly not what I'd call "not even close" to 50%.

OK, now you're saying a "full judgment" is the same as a "final judgment", which is equally bizarre. There are many reasons, even for a guy that refuses to make a final judgment until 5 years have passed, why you may need more information or your judgment of someone may change.

"Final" and full judgment? So you're locked into the coach after 5 years? What if he gets better? What if there were issues largely outside of his control that affected the program in years 4 and 5? Too bad. Chicos locks in a FINAL judgment. It's a done deal.

You're refusing to back off of your bizarre, ultra-strict PERSONAL rules and it just doesn't work in the world of rational thought.

But, more importantly I'm still curious on what you think about IU's buyout due to Crean for termination w/o cause starting at $16MM last November?

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 10, 2013, 10:12:38 PM
Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

...said Homer while drooling over Aaron Rodgers.

Didn't read the entire thread, but how the hell do we go from a 2013-2014 preview of MU to arguments about divorce rate.

I've been part of some wildly tangent arguments, but this one is special.

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 11, 2013, 11:24:45 AM
Marriage - I said I believe the number is probably trending in the 40-50% range. You say it's closer to 30% and "not even close" to 50%. We could both provide various studies and offer critiques of each one. I'd challenge your belief that there is a firm 30% known divorce rate while 40% is "wrong". Again, the origins of the 50% "myth" are silly, but the coincidentally the percentage may not be far off and it's certainly not what I'd call "not even close" to 50%.

OK, now you're saying a "full judgment" is the same as a "final judgment", which is equally bizarre. There are many reasons, even for a guy that refuses to make a final judgment until 5 years have passed, why you may need more information or your judgment of someone may change.

"Final" and full judgment? So you're locked into the coach after 5 years? What if he gets better? What if there were issues largely outside of his control that affected the program in years 4 and 5? Too bad. Chicos locks in a FINAL judgment. It's a done deal.

You're refusing to back off of your bizarre, ultra-strict PERSONAL rules and it just doesn't work in the world of rational thought.

But, more importantly I'm still curious on what you think about IU's buyout due to Crean for termination w/o cause starting at $16MM last November?

The 50% number is wrong.  Dead wrong.  It has been wrong from the start and continues to be wrong.  NY Times, USA Today, Psychology today, Catholic services, doesn't matter who you use, the number is wrong and it isn't close.  40% isn't 50%.  It isn't close.  If you read what I provided you, one analysis says 33%...which isn't even close to 40% (closer to 30%) let alone 50%.   The 50% number is wrong, but the point is that it lives on with people because someone said it, didn't get it right but a bunch of dopes kept repeating it.  Just as their are dopes out there that think a certain guy was born in Kenya or another guy let 9/11 happen.  The trouble is, a LOT of people hear this crap and just keep parroting it.

Fair point on final judgment.  I'll state again, as I have since 2008, I like for coaches to have classes matriculate to give a full judgment (or fuller judgment, however you wish to define it).  Some of you are in love at first sight, I am not.  Some were in love with Matt Doherty 1 year in, Tennessee fans with Kevin O'Neill, Umass fans with Bruiser Flint, ND fans with Charlie Weiss, USC fans with Lane Kiffin....that is your right.  I like to give it some time, but your characterization that I said you have to wait 5 years to make any judgment is blatantly false.  I've provided the evidence and you seem to be an evidence kind of guy (unlike Lenny who will never apologize for being wrong).  The evidence is right there and there have to be 100's of other posts that confirm the same thing. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 11, 2013, 09:24:14 AM
...you get all bent when  I correct someone on Crean and call me a defender, yet you do the exact same thing with Buzz.  The irony is delicious.

I consistently defend Buzz from all your BS because I think very highly of him as a coach and a person. I'm critical of Crean because I think he's moderately inferior to Buzz as a coach and a disaster as a human being. The more I know about both the more confident I am of my opinion/observation.

You're the one who's engaged in an odd/ironic kabuki dance on the subject. You say you love Buzz, think he's a great guy, but never miss an opportunity to take a passive aggressive shot at him. And you say you hate Crean, think he's a total douche, but you never miss a chance to defend/praise him. Maybe you just love being the contrarian - it's a way to get noticed and you certainly are a "Hey, look at me!" kind of guy. Or maybe you're just plain disingenuous. Who knows?

Quote from: Skatastrophy on October 11, 2013, 10:28:03 AM
With references including HuffPo, this is a very serious Internet fight!

LOL.  I like that one.


NY Times if you prefer   http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/19divo.html?_r=0     They say never topped 41%, often lower.  Other study says 33%.  No one believes 50%, except for a bunch of Americans too stupid to know better.

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 11, 2013, 11:24:45 AM


You're refusing to back off of your bizarre, ultra-strict PERSONAL rules and it just doesn't work in the world of rational thought.

Bizarre and ultra-strict rules are his life blood. They conger up remembrances of those much better than now days, where white guys had it all and women and Negroes knew their place, where young boys never ratted out the molester priest for fear of added recriminations from their own parents. Those were the days.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 11, 2013, 01:21:24 PM
I consistently defend Buzz from all your BS because I think very highly of him as a coach and a person. I'm critical of Crean because I think he's moderately inferior to Buzz as a coach and a disaster as a human being. The more I know about both the more confident I am of my opinion/observation.

You're the one who's engaged in an odd/ironic kabuki dance on the subject. You say you love Buzz, think he's a great guy, but never miss an opportunity to take a passive aggressive shot at him. And you say you hate Crean, think he's a total douche, but you never miss a chance to defend/praise him.

Still waiting for the apology....I've been saying "so far so good" within 50 days of his hire, despite your comments.  Proof was provided....apology waiting..... Why is it so hard for you to ever admit you can be wrong, too?

I don't know if the other guy is a disaster of a human being...I didn't care for him, but there are others I haven't cared for personally that have been fine human beings, philanthropic, etc, but I trust Diener, Wade, Novak and others wouldn't be with a disaster of a human being.   To each their own.  If you wish to say they aren't as good as you at judging character, that is up to you.   I actually miss plenty of chances to "defend" him...there you go with "never".."always"...it's like clockwork.  Lazy, small, incapable or broader thought or full analysis.

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 11, 2013, 11:24:45 AM


You're refusing to back off of your bizarre, ultra-strict PERSONAL rules and it just doesn't work in the world of rational thought.

I don't even know what this means.  Do you think I'm using leaches on my daughter?  Do I have a chastity belt on my wife?  Do I go to church every day (or for that matter every Sunday)?  Do I live in a gated community with all white people?  Exactly what do yo mean with this charge?  You mean because I think life was better back in the day as evidence of lower crime rates, not having to lock the door when you leave, not worrying about kids walking to school, etc?  I can't imagine what else it is that you are referencing, but I'm sure it is bizarre and ultra strict. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 11, 2013, 01:24:23 PM
LOL.  I like that one.


NY Times if you prefer   http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/19divo.html?_r=0     They say never topped 41%, often lower.  Other study says 33%.  No one believes 50%, except for a bunch of Americans too stupid to know better.

Good grief. You're looking at HuffPo and the NY Times for data on a complex estimate? Might as well ask a homeless man on the street.

The reality is MOST believe it's well above 30 and many think 40-50% is a reasonable estimate. You're simply off base when you say "it's not close to 50%". You're combining two things together inappropriately: (1) the "myth" of a 50% divorce rate related to faulty math and (2) reasonable estimates of 40-50% based on variuos research (btw, with the change in demographics and the economic status of the country, it could go higher).

Is it reasonable to argue that the divorce rate COULD BE as low as 35%? Probably. Is it reasonable to argue the divorce rate COULD BE around 50%? Absolutely.

Are countless "facts and figures" presented by the media wrong every single day? You better believe it, or else you're believing bad info.

http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/cas/file94173.pdf (http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/cas/file94173.pdf)

Now, you gonna chime in on the $16MM monster-buyout provision or what?

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 11, 2013, 02:08:54 PM
I don't even know what this means.  Do you think I'm using leaches on my daughter?  Do I have a chastity belt on my wife?  Do I go to church every day (or for that matter every Sunday)?  Do I live in a gated community with all white people?  Exactly what do yo mean with this charge?  You mean because I think life was better back in the day as evidence of lower crime rates, not having to lock the door when you leave, not worrying about kids walking to school, etc?  I can't imagine what else it is that you are referencing, but I'm sure it is bizarre and ultra strict. 

Uhh, no. I referencing your refusal to acknowledge that "full judgment" isn't an action, rather it's just your own personal rules for determining when you would like to make a "full" or "final" judgment on a coach. It's not a term, as defined by you, that can be used in talking about others. It's your own strict and PERSONAL rules you go by, based on your individual decision.

To use your own odd rules to try and differentiate one judgment from another is what's bizarre.

I take no issue with most of your comments (including those in the past) regarding a better country that we had years ago. We're probably quite closely aligned on many things. It's just that you're 100% nuts when it comes to certain topics and/or people... such as "full judgments" and Buzz.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 11, 2013, 01:57:37 PM
Still waiting for the apology....I've been saying "so far so good" within 50 days of his hire, despite your comments.  Proof was provided....apology waiting..... Why is it so hard for you to ever admit you can be wrong, too?

Apologize for what? Why would I apologize for your inability to read? I never said you didn't say "so far, so good" 50 days in - evidently you had said it multiple times, over and over again by then - when you knew almost nothing about him. Just shows how hollow and meaningless "so far, so good" is for you. Nothing but a throwaway, "We'll see". That was my point.

I won't ask you for an apology for your lack of reading skills - I'm not that needy.

(http://theculturevulture.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/offtopic.jpg)

Seriously? Divorce rates? WTF happened in here?

Quote from: brewcity77 on October 11, 2013, 02:34:34 PM
(http://theculturevulture.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/offtopic.jpg)

Seriously? Divorce rates? WTF happened in here?

Just hope none of the recruits look at this......... :P

Quote from: Jay Bee on October 11, 2013, 02:17:35 PM
Good grief. You're looking at HuffPo and the NY Times for data on a complex estimate? Might as well ask a homeless man on the street.

The reality is MOST believe it's well above 30 and many think 40-50% is a reasonable estimate. You're simply off base when you say "it's not close to 50%". You're combining two things together inappropriately: (1) the "myth" of a 50% divorce rate related to faulty math and (2) reasonable estimates of 40-50% based on variuos research (btw, with the change in demographics and the economic status of the country, it could go higher).

Is it reasonable to argue that the divorce rate COULD BE as low as 35%? Probably. Is it reasonable to argue the divorce rate COULD BE around 50%? Absolutely.

Are countless "facts and figures" presented by the media wrong every single day? You better believe it, or else you're believing bad info.

http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/cas/file94173.pdf (http://www.bgsu.edu/downloads/cas/file94173.pdf)

Now, you gonna chime in on the $16MM monster-buyout provision or what?

Oy vei.   

Is the common, believed stat thrown around all the time that the rate is 50%?  Yes or No?  With so much certainly you would think it is as certain as day will follow night?  Yes or no?

Is the actual rate 50%?  Yes or No?  Is there ANY legitimate study out there done by real sociologists, etc, that put it at 50%?  Yes or No?  Are there some cohorts do exceed in 50% or even higher?  Absolutely.  But overall, no.  National Center for Health Statistics pegs it at 43%.  Last I checked, 43% was closer to 40% than 50%, but maybe people like to change the rounding rules.  Other studies put it at 33%.  Feel free to dismiss those studies.

It is an urban myth that the divorce rate is 50% in this country. PERIOD.  Yet 50% is repeated so often you would think it is one of Newton's laws.

I like to wait 4 or 5 years to judge a coach fully, others do not.  I never said someone had to wait 5 years.  When you continue to say it, you are wrong as those words didn't come from me.  You are perpetuating a myth despite the evidence to the contrary.

I'm waiting to hear on the contract, as I told you the other day in an email.  Nothing has changed.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 11, 2013, 01:39:01 PM
conger up

Sounds fishy to me!

Quote from: newsdrms on October 11, 2013, 03:45:02 PM
Just hope none of the recruits look at this......... :P

You're giving them entirely too much credit....they have better things to do.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 11, 2013, 05:58:19 PM


I like to wait 4 or 5 years to judge a coach fully

4? Epiphany or typo?

As for the divorce rate it used to be around 50% but people don't marry as often as in the past and just live together and so that rate may have diminished.  As for apologies between bloggers, please don't. This is not Oprah or Dr. Phil. As for coaches Buzz is better than Crean. As to NBA talent there is no doubt that some of our players at MU  will be in the NBA in the near future, which ones is still to be seen. MU is loaded with talent and hopefully we can get a couple more recruits this weekend.

Quote from: raul on October 11, 2013, 11:48:45 PM
As for the divorce rate it used to be around 50% but people don't marry as often as in the past and just live together and so that rate may have diminished.  As for apologies between bloggers, please don't. This is not Oprah or Dr. Phil. As for coaches Buzz is better than Crean. As to NBA talent there is no doubt that some of our players at MU  will be in the NBA in the near future, which ones is still to be seen. MU is loaded with talent and hopefully we can get a couple more recruits this weekend.

Five for five, batting 1.000. Well done, Raul.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on October 11, 2013, 06:18:08 PM
4? Epiphany or typo?

Go back to what I posted two days ago with quotes from 2008 and beyond.  Not a typo....reading is your friend.

Where's the apology?

Quote from: raul on October 11, 2013, 11:48:45 PM
As for the divorce rate it used to be around 50% but people don't marry as often as in the past and just live together and so that rate may have diminished.  As for apologies between bloggers, please don't. This is not Oprah or Dr. Phil. As for coaches Buzz is better than Crean. As to NBA talent there is no doubt that some of our players at MU  will be in the NBA in the near future, which ones is still to be seen. MU is loaded with talent and hopefully we can get a couple more recruits this weekend.

Raul, according to the NY Times article they indicate that is not true.  Yes, less people marry now and wait longer, but the divorce rate has never been above 43% per that article. 0 for 1

It's just good manners when you are wrong and accuse someone to apologize.  Has nothing to do with Dr. Phil.  For a certain person who likes to label people horrible human beings, simple apologies are one way to show a person is a decent human being.  Hmmmm....when you are wrong you are wrong, just apologize.  0 for 2

Buzz better coach? All subject to opinion.  Other coaches rank them about the same and they don't have red and crimson or blue and gold glasses on.  I believe the last such ranking was out a few months ago.  Draw

Agree on your last two points.

2 for 5.....Lenny likes to give hits out when they should be errors, he's a solid human being like that.  :P

Sigh...Chicos...knock it off.  Everyone else...you don't need to reply.