Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation. If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games. The Big East is tough top to bottom,Even DePaul is going to be tough to beat, especially on the road.
If Buzz is willing to run with all the freshman, and give more steady minutes to Todd and STj, we can still get on a run.
At this point the season is up to Buzz, The kids are trying their hardest and haven't quit yet. It is time Buzz shows a little respect to the program and the University instead of too his vanity.
Coach Williams has, on numerous occasions, justified his starting backcourt, by stating how well they play defense, especially Derrick Wilson (and that Thomas helps spread the floor).
Yet, Villanova's 1, 2 and 3 combined for 70 points! This is not the first time the guards of the opposing team has torched the Warriors.
Thus, one might ask, if the present compliment of guards is out there for defensive purposes, and the opposing guards are often having a field day against the Warriors guards, might one also conclude that these Warrior guards are, in fact, playing rather poor defense?
If the present compliment of Warriors guards, are not what they are suppose to be on defense, would not a coach, after 20 games, do one of two things? This is, either change his starting guards, or switch to a different defense(s) scheme(s) to keep the guards of the opposing team (somewhat) in check?
With Mr. Cotton and company coming into Milwaukee on Thursday. Common sense would dictate to do something to address this weakness at guard. But, then again, as Mark Twain said, "The problem with common sense is that it is not very common."
Um, no, it's up to the players.
Do people really think that Buzz isn't playing the guys who give us the best chance to win bc he is stubborn or stupid or both? That is asinine when all evidence gathered over six years suggests Buzz is neither if those things.
Quote from: murara1994 on January 27, 2014, 06:57:40 AM
Um, no, it's up to the players.
Do people really think that Buzz isn't playing the guys who give us the best chance to win bc he is stubborn or stupid or both? That is asinine when all evidence gathered over six years suggests Buzz is neither if those things.
You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.
Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season? Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value. Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 02:12:56 PM
You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.
Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season? Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value. Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.
It's a ludicrous question. You saw snippets in game action. Buzz watches them every day. If Dawson can't stop De Wilson in practice, what makes you think he stands a chance against any one of Nova's guards?
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 02:12:56 PM
You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.
Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season? Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value. Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.
We should also ask another question: Did Dawson play well because he got more minutes or did he get more minutes because he was playing well?
You seem to be only open to the former while completely disregarding that the latter could be a possibility.
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 27, 2014, 02:31:41 AM
Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation. If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games. The Big East is tough top to bottom,Even DePaul is going to be tough to beat, especially on the road.
If Buzz is willing to run with all the freshman, and give more steady minutes to Todd and STj, we can still get on a run.
At this point the season is up to Buzz, The kids are trying their hardest and haven't quit yet. It is time Buzz shows a little respect to the program and the University instead of too his vanity.
Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads: You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen. Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed? Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn." A "nicer" word with the same meaning. Except what about the Georgetown game? Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime? Guess not. So is he selectively stubborn? Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn. So maybe he has a reason for what he does. Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose? After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right? So Buzz wants to lose. That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.
You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time, but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now. Thanks.
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 02:12:56 PM
You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.
Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season? Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value. Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.
If Buzz is not playing certain players because he is stubborn he should be fired, and never allowed to coach basketball again.
Quote from: connie on January 27, 2014, 03:04:58 PM
Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads: You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen. Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed? Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn." A "nicer" word with the same meaning. Except what about the Georgetown game? Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime? Guess not. So is he selectively stubborn? Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn. So maybe he has a reason for what he does. Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose? After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right? So Buzz wants to lose. That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.
You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time, but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now. Thanks.
+1
Too many people think because Derrick has struggled - defensively as well as on offense - that replacing him with anyone would be better.
Personally, I don't think we are losing anything with Dawson, but more than anything, Dawson will get better with more PT. I think we all realize that derrick is what he is. Anyone who is already a junior, and can barely shoot 50% from the line is not a good shooter, never has been nor ever will be.
Now, if he had Peyton Siva qualities at PG, the bad shooting can be overlooked, but we also haven't seen any great PG skills. So he can't shoot and isn't a penetrator, and has played very average defense.
So while I can't say categorically that dawson would be better, I don't feel he would be worse and as a freshman playing against top competition for the 1st time, I have no doubt he will improve with more minutes.
Quote from: connie on January 27, 2014, 03:04:58 PM
Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads: You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen. Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed? Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn." A "nicer" word with the same meaning. Except what about the Georgetown game? Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime? Guess not. So is he selectively stubborn? Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn. So maybe he has a reason for what he does. Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose? After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right? So Buzz wants to lose. That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.
You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time, but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now. Thanks.
Thank you. This is spot on.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 27, 2014, 02:36:21 PM
We should also ask another question: Did Dawson play well because he got more minutes or did he get more minutes because he was playing well?
You seem to be only open to the former while completely disregarding that the latter could be a possibility.
I think you hit the nail on the head - if Dawson comes in and makes so much as one screw up, and perhaps 1 missed shot on top of a screw up (such as a turnover, or bad defensive rotation), he's out the game, no ifs and buts about it thus far. It's hard to play well and relaxed when you know you are on such a short leash. So, perhaps Dawson has only gotten additional run when he's played virtually perfectly - or as in Georgetown - when Derrick told Buzz to keep playing John...
Best thing Buzz could do would be to say to John - I'm turning it over to you, your getting 30 minutes of run from here on out. Play your ass off. I'll ride with you through the bumps along the way - just as he's done for Derrick now through 20 games but has yet to be paid off on that loyalty. I feel quite confident Buzz would be rewarded with some very good play and some additional wins. Not to mention a freshman getting valuable game experience for next season to build off of..
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 02:12:56 PM
You certainly wouldn't think a head coach would be stubborn to the point of costing his team games, yet after seeing the results Dawson got against GTown and Xavier and for Buzz to not be willing to give him more than scrap minutes against Nova - seriously have to ask the question.
Also have to wonder, why was Gardner not playing 33+ minutes per game since the start of the season? Clearly, he's shown an ability to play 30+..and even if he is fatigued, the pressure he puts on the oppositions defense is still of high value. Particularly since Buzz continues to choose to run out such an inept backcourt combination for 27+ minutes per game.
So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:
1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.
Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.
Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?
nah, sometimes Buzz gets it - like when he played Dawson extended time and they actually won a game...
there is hope... :D
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 27, 2014, 03:40:05 PM
So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:
1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.
Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.
Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 27, 2014, 03:40:05 PM
So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:
1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.
Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.
Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?
I generally agree with the annoyance to so many over the top anti-Buzz comments lately (cause so many of them are just so freaking dumb and embaressing). But Buzz also isn't infallible and I just wish there could be a legitimate debate/criticism about what he is doing right/wrong this year instead of it turning into
Buzz is a Stubborn Idiot vs
Buzz Knows All argument every time. Doesn't always have to be black and white around here.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 27, 2014, 03:40:05 PM
So in your assessment there are 2 possibilities:
1.Buzz is a smart guy and a good coach. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that
Derrick is a piece of crap and that Marquette can't win with him at the point. He knows (hell, everybody knows) that he has a much better player on the bench who could have won MU a boatload of games that they've lost. He doesn't care. His loyalty to Derrick trumps winning, his loyalty to Marquette, etc. He's tanking the season because of it.
Or:
2. Buzz is a basketball idiot who couldn't pass basketball 101. He's got stars on the bench ready to win games but is too dumb to see it. Anybody who has played intramural basketball can see in 5 minutes what he hasn't seen in 5 months.
Given the two scenarios that you paint, isn't it about time to call for his head? Do you really want a coach who tanks games out of stubbornness or knows less about his team than you do?
You can drop the whole notion of "Derrick is a piece of crap." He's a good kid. However, his performance as a basketball player has been horsecrap - let's keep the distinction clear.
Are you satisfied with our results thus far? All my contention all along has been, was to get Dawson 20 minutes a game and get an idea for what he could do. Perhaps if he'd gotten more time against the cupcakes, he'd be in a better position to contribute at this point - since Buzz still apparently doesn't seem to think he's worthy.
I don't see Derrick showing much improvement, over where we were at Thanksgiving time, nor has the team shown much improvement. For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and about the 5 other Pro-Derrick guys - feel things could get worse if Buzz made the move..or that in absolute certainty you still believe Derrick gives this team the best chance to win. BUZZ HAS ONLY GIVEN DAWSON A LEGITIMATE CHANCE IN ONE GAME, AND DAWSON DELIVERED. CAN YOU POINT TO ONE GAME THAT DERRICK HAS ACTUALLY HAD A DIRECT HAND AND IMPORTANT ROLE IN US WINNING??
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 03:38:36 PM
I think you hit the nail on the head - if Dawson comes in and makes so much as one screw up, and perhaps 1 missed shot on top of a screw up (such as a turnover, or bad defensive rotation), he's out the game, no ifs and buts about it thus far.
I want to see more of Dawson, too, but hyperbole is not a good way to make a compelling argument. Dawson was really bad for several minutes before Buzz yanked him out against Nova.
Again, just stick to the facts. They make the argument for you.
Quote from: Aughnanure on January 27, 2014, 03:54:33 PM
I generally agree with the annoyance to so many over the top anti-Buzz comments lately (cause so many of them are just so freaking dumb and embaressing). But Buzz also isn't infallible and I just wish there could be a legitimate debate/criticism about what he is doing right/wrong this year instead of it turning into Buzz is a Stubborn Idiot vs Buzz Knows All argument every time. Doesn't always have to be black and white around here.
Certainly not infallible. I would actually like to see a little more Dawson, maybe even a little more JJJ. Of course last year there was a time I would have liked to have seen a little more Mayo and a little less Lockett - I couldn't have been more wrong. I try to remember that when I get frustrated with our players.
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 03:55:39 PM
I don't see Derrick showing much improvement, over where we were at Thanksgiving time, nor has the team shown much improvement. For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and about the 5 other Pro-Derrick guys - feel things could get worse if Buzz made the move..or that in absolute certainty you still believe Derrick giveso this team the best chance to win. BUZZ HAS ONLY GIVEN DAWSON A LEGITIMATE CHANCE IN ONE GAME, AND DAWSON DELIVERED. CAN YOU POINT TO ONE GAME THAT DERRICK HAS ACTUALLY HAD A DIRECT HAND AND IMPORTANT ROLE IN US WINNING??
Please stop yelling at the 5 guys you think are "pro Derrick guys". We're not pro Derrick. We're pro Marquette. Unlike you, we root for all of our players, including Dawson. But also unlike you, we feel that Buzz has a reason for limiting Dawson's minutes and that the reason is neither a)trying to lose nor b)being a basketball know nothing. You disagree. Yell at Buzz. Email him. Email the BOT. Email Fr Wild. Email the Journal. He's gotta go.
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 27, 2014, 02:31:41 AM
Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation. If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games.
This is one of the more unbelievable statements I've read on here in a while. That's saying a lot.
I've long been in the dawson camp in the dwil/dawson debate. I obviously don't think Buzz is an idiot. He's forgotten more basketball than I'll ever know. I get it.
But in my opinion, Buzz likes to have/be in control of everything that he can. He strikes me as someone who is extremely averse to risk. This makes him neither stupid nor stubborn. But let's face it, we are a mediocre team. Mediocre teams should play risky. Sports econ studies show bad teams should take more risks.
In a word, I want Buzz to take more risks (eg play Dawson more)
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 27, 2014, 04:06:18 PM
Certainly not infallible. I would actually like to see a little more Dawson, maybe even a little more JJJ. Of course last year there was a time I would have liked to have seen a little more Mayo and a little less Lockett - I couldn't have been more wrong. I try to remember that when I get frustrated with our players.
I was against Lockett at the beginning of last year as well, but the team was winning and the guy even had a contract with Kings at some point last year. Hard to compare that with the likes of Thomas and Wilson. Hopefully I'm wrong again.
I see it as you have X players and you have Y players. I think X is better and hence I play X. But I never tried Y to see if my conclusions were correct. Hence I stay with X right or wrong because I think X is best.
Quote from: connie on January 27, 2014, 03:04:58 PM
Let's just cut to the chase of all of these disparate threads: You are claiming that Buzz is stupid because Buzz plays Derrick and Jake over freshmen. Except what about the last 6 years when by most measures our teams over performed? Was he stupid then? Hard to defend that, so instead of "stupid" we get "stubborn." A "nicer" word with the same meaning. Except what about the Georgetown game? Was Buzz stubborn then when Dawson played most of the second half and overtime? Guess not. So is he selectively stubborn? Possibly, but if you are willing to change based upon at least one situation then almost by definition you are not stubborn. So maybe he has a reason for what he does. Or are you saying that Buzz wants to lose? After all he must be able to see what you see, and unless he changes what he has been doing we are going to lose every single game we have left, right? So Buzz wants to lose. That's the way for any coach to get ahead--lose intentionally.
You may not agree with him, and I admit I don't understand his thinking all of the time, but I am tired of talking and reading about it, so I'll stop now. Thanks.
But what if Buzz honored his scholarships? What if all of his JUCOS never stepped foot on campus?
The fact of the matter is that Buzz & Co are not very good evaluators of high school talent. Either that, or they can't get their top targets to commit. So then they settle. And then kids transfer for WHATEVER REASON. Then Buzz fills in his classes with older, more physically mature player that are "more" ready right away.
To the haters that don't like UK or KU or UConn, etc....
Those programs don't regularly have to fill holes in their rosters due to poor high school recruiting. We do. And some of Buzz's kid were academically in eligible out of high school. That's a fact.
Quote from: wardle2wade on January 27, 2014, 04:31:50 PM
This is one of the more unbelievable statements I've read on here in a while. That's saying a lot.
The point is if we play our current guards there is a pretty high probability we lose all our remaining games. This conference is tough top to bottom. There is not one game left that is a sure win if Buzz insists on the current rotation.
If he is willing to go with Mayo starting, extensive time to the freshman and STj we have a real chance of winning.
I think he has to eat some humble pie and admit he screwed up.
Not making the NCAA is a very expensive proposition for a school like Marquette. Buzz has to get out of his bubble and realize what is at stake here.
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 27, 2014, 07:49:19 PM
The point is if we play our current guards there is a pretty high probability we lose all our remaining games.
Wow, wow, wow...
(http://www.pbh2.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/best-family-guy-gifs-bear-slap.gif)
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 27, 2014, 07:49:19 PM
The point is if we play our current guards there is a pretty high probability we lose all our remaining games. This conference is tough top to bottom. There is not one game left that is a sure win if Buzz insists on the current rotation.
If he is willing to go with Mayo starting, extensive time to the freshman and STj we have a real chance of winning.
I think he has to eat some humble pie and admit he screwed up.
Not making the NCAA is a very expensive proposition for a school like Marquette. Buzz has to get out of his bubble and realize what is at stake here.
When you decide to expand on a really stupid post it only gets more stupid.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 27, 2014, 08:11:45 PM
When you decide to expand on a really stupid post it only gets more stupid.
Please explain to me how we win with the current rotation.
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 27, 2014, 08:19:22 PM
Please explain to me how we win with the current rotation.
How about...we already have.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 27, 2014, 08:20:16 PM
How about...we already have.
Current rotation did not beat Georgetown. we had Dawson and lots of minutes to STj. We barely beat Seton Hall at home. And yes we did beat DePaul , and my point is that we are going to have a hard time beating them on the road.
An off the wall tangent to this discussion.
Is it possible that in years past our best players were also the hardest working in practice, etc, and that this year that is not the case? Guys like Crowder, Butler, Hayward, the 3 Amigos, DJO, etc. seemed like they were pathological hard workers in addition to being great players. I am guessing that Buzz said Derrick deserved to start over Cadougan last year because he was the harder worker, but Buzz didn't actually do it because he couldn't ignore the difference in the quality of their games and he had remaining years to reward Derrick with, anyway.
I've coached many teams in my day (though certainly not at anything near this level), and it is a pain in the neck when your hardest workers are your worst players, which in actuality is a lot of the time. (Poor players seemingly never want to give you a non-basketball reason not to play them) Balancing the desire to win with rewarding those who have earned time through dedicated work is a tough line to follow. Guys who work hard and are not rewarded (with PT) may cease to work hard, and guys who don't work hard but are rewarded may continue to not work hard. Maybe Buzz does what he does with player rotation in hopes of motivating young men to be the best that they can be.
All admitted guesswork on my part, but Buzz strikes me as a guy who is thinking about today, tomorrow, next year and 10 years from now. I believe he has a carefully considered and very good reason for everything he does.
I really do not enjoy watching the lifeless style of basketball we play with Derrick at the helm, but I honestly think that Buzz thinks that in the long run, what he is doing is what is best for Marquette basketball, and "loyalty" is not high on his list of reasons.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 28, 2014, 07:50:46 AM
An off the wall tangent to this discussion.
Is it possible that in years past our best players were also the hardest working in practice, etc, and that this year that is not the case? Guys like Crowder, Butler, Hayward, the 3 Amigos, DJO, etc. seemed like they were pathological hard workers in addition to being great players. I am guessing that Buzz said Derrick deserved to start over Cadougan last year because he was the harder worker, but Buzz didn't actually do it because he couldn't ignore the difference in the quality of their games and he had remaining years to reward Derrick with, anyway.
I've coached many teams in my day (though certainly not at anything near this level), and it is a pain in the neck when your hardest workers are your worst players, which in actuality is a lot of the time. (Poor players seemingly never want to give you a non-basketball reason not to play them) Balancing the desire to win with rewarding those who have earned time through dedicated work is a tough line to follow. Guys who work hard and are not rewarded (with PT) may cease to work hard, and guys who don't work hard but are rewarded may continue to not work hard. Maybe Buzz does what he does with player rotation in hopes of motivating young men to be the best that they can be.
All admitted guesswork on my part, but Buzz strikes me as a guy who is thinking about today, tomorrow, next year and 10 years from now. I believe he has a carefully considered and very good reason for everything he does.
I really do not enjoy watching the lifeless style of basketball we play with Derrick at the helm, but I honestly think that Buzz thinks that in the long run, what he is doing is what is best for Marquette basketball, and "loyalty" is not high on his list of reasons.
I've suspected the same, but it is guesswork also. In my career experience, I've found that when I reward more talented, less hard working employees, the hard working employees are demotivated more than the less hard working employees are motivated by the reward. Sometime that choice has to be made, but there are impacts.
Quote from: ElDonBDon on January 27, 2014, 07:25:55 PM
I've long been in the dawson camp in the dwil/dawson debate. I obviously don't think Buzz is an idiot. He's forgotten more basketball than I'll ever know. I get it.
But in my opinion, Buzz likes to have/be in control of everything that he can. He strikes me as someone who is extremely averse to risk. This makes him neither stupid nor stubborn. But let's face it, we are a mediocre team. Mediocre teams should play risky. Sports econ studies show bad teams should take more risks.
In a word, I want Buzz to take more risks (eg play Dawson more)
All coaches are 'averse to risk' to a degree. Buzz did quit a D1 job, however, without knowing if he would ever land one again. That was a bit of a risk. But, risks Buzz has taken: Jeronne, when everyone warned about his dad. Vander, when everybody talked about his grades and his decommit. Jae, when it was learned that his first JUCO wasn't accredited and the only game he ever saw him play in person, he sucked. Butler, the roommate of Fulce. Gardner, the 2 star 350 pounder. But we could go on and on with the stories of the players he has recruited. It does seem that the longer the shot, the better the player turns out.
Coaching: His clear pattern is that, unless there are extenuating circumstances and overwhelming need, that minutes have to be earned and that freshmen, in particular, have to learn to do it his way. That is a risk in and of itself, because it can lead to players leaving because they did not get instant minutes. In short, every decision has risk and consequences.
Quote from: Archies Bat on January 28, 2014, 08:01:42 AM
I've suspected the same, but it is guesswork also. In my career experience, I've found that when I reward more talented, less hard working employees, the hard working employees are demotivated more than the less hard working employees are motivated by the reward. Sometime that choice has to be made, but there are impacts.
I agree, but to add to this, you set bad examples for the less experienced employees.
IOW, playing players who don't work as hard or don't take the time to understand the scouting reports versus those who are more "talented," hurts those who are more "talented" in the long run. JJJ...Deonte...Dawson...all need to understand that while you may beat Jake, Juan and Derrick in games of one on one, that doesn't automatically make you more valuable to the basketball team.
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 08:22:09 AM
All coaches are 'averse to risk' to a degree. Buzz did quit a D1 job, however, without knowing if he would ever land one again. That was a bit of a risk. But, risks Buzz has taken: Jeronne, when everyone warned about his dad. Vander, when everybody talked about his grades and his decommit. Jae, when it was learned that his first JUCO wasn't accredited and the only game he ever saw him play in person, he sucked. Butler, the roommate of Fulce. Gardner, the 2 star 350 pounder. But we could go on and on with the stories of the players he has recruited. It does seem that the longer the shot, the better the player turns out.
Coaching: His clear pattern is that, unless there are extenuating circumstances and overwhelming need, that minutes have to be earned and that freshmen, in particular, have to learn to do it his way. That is a risk in and of itself, because it can lead to players leaving because they did not get instant minutes. In short, every decision has risk and consequences.
So if Buzz is such a risk taker, why doesn't he try a different offense, By the way, you do have some flaws in your reasoning about Buzz's risks: Gardner was never 350 pounds and won some accolades in Va. in HS; Butler was not a risk, he was a top 20 JUCO; Jae Crowder was a JUCO All American and player of the year--not much of a risk. The longer the shot the better the player has worked out?: What about Mbao; McMorrow; Durley; Roseboro--how did they work out. Two big risks Buzz did take were starting Erik Williams and Reggie Smith for 3 minutes a half, and they both were pissed and moved on--how did that work out? Yes Buzz has taken some risks, but many have not worked out. And yes, Freshman have to learn to do it his way--or it is the Highway. Just like Homer and Mac have had to learn to do it his way--and according to many on this board, Larry Williams also.
Buzz is an OK Coach--better recruiter than X and O's; but much of what he has done this year is very open to criticism and speculation. Nothing deserving of the Hosannas he gets though. The guy has good practice facilities, good weight room, good dorm, about 8th highest budget in the country(Only pure blue bloods ahead of him there), an NBA facility to play in, a jet to recruit, and results this year leave much to be desired. OK--based on his record in the past, give him a pass this year, but come next year, there should be much better results.
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 08:22:09 AM
All coaches are 'averse to risk' to a degree. Buzz did quit a D1 job, however, without knowing if he would ever land one again. That was a bit of a risk. But, risks Buzz has taken: Jeronne, when everyone warned about his dad. Vander, when everybody talked about his grades and his decommit. Jae, when it was learned that his first JUCO wasn't accredited and the only game he ever saw him play in person, he sucked. Butler, the roommate of Fulce. Gardner, the 2 star 350 pounder. But we could go on and on with the stories of the players he has recruited. It does seem that the longer the shot, the better the player turns out.
Coaching: His clear pattern is that, unless there are extenuating circumstances and overwhelming need, that minutes have to be earned and that freshmen, in particular, have to learn to do it his way. That is a risk in and of itself, because it can lead to players leaving because they did not get instant minutes. In short, every decision has risk and consequences.
This is an excellent synopsis of the situation. Nicely done.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 28, 2014, 07:50:46 AM
An off the wall tangent to this discussion.
Is it possible that in years past our best players were also the hardest working in practice, etc, and that this year that is not the case? Guys like Crowder, Butler, Hayward, the 3 Amigos, DJO, etc. seemed like they were pathological hard workers in addition to being great players. I am guessing that Buzz said Derrick deserved to start over Cadougan last year because he was the harder worker, but Buzz didn't actually do it because he couldn't ignore the difference in the quality of their games and he had remaining years to reward Derrick with, anyway.
I've coached many teams in my day (though certainly not at anything near this level), and it is a pain in the neck when your hardest workers are your worst players, which in actuality is a lot of the time. (Poor players seemingly never want to give you a non-basketball reason not to play them) Balancing the desire to win with rewarding those who have earned time through dedicated work is a tough line to follow. Guys who work hard and are not rewarded (with PT) may cease to work hard, and guys who don't work hard but are rewarded may continue to not work hard. Maybe Buzz does what he does with player rotation in hopes of motivating young men to be the best that they can be.
All admitted guesswork on my part, but Buzz strikes me as a guy who is thinking about today, tomorrow, next year and 10 years from now. I believe he has a carefully considered and very good reason for everything he does.
I really do not enjoy watching the lifeless style of basketball we play with Derrick at the helm, but I honestly think that Buzz thinks that in the long run, what he is doing is what is best for Marquette basketball, and "loyalty" is not high on his list of reasons.
Your comments are dead on. Buzz is a program builder, and he always returns to our culture and being "who we are" to explain the success that we've had. Is it sometimes frustrating to watch talented players like Todd Mayo sit because they're fighting that culture rather than buying in? You bet. But here's the thing - that culture is more important than one player or winning one game. If he (or any other player) doesn't get it, he'll sit and/or leave, but if/when the light goes on (here's hoping, Todd) the benefits go beyond basketball. That legacy is important to Buzz but not to a large portion of our fan base. Guys like Ners want time given to guys like Mayo simply because of their talent. Expecting them to earn it by being a good teammate, student, person, etc., is the equivalent of "riding" Todd. Sorry, but that's how Buzz rolls. He feels his responsibility to these guys and their families goes beyond basketball. A lot of people here claim to love that about Buzz (it's easy when you're winning Big East titles and going deep in the tournament) but abandon ship (and the principles Buzz's teams have been based on) at the first sign of trouble. That doesn't surprise me, but it does disappoint me a little.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 08:47:11 AM
I agree, but to add to this, you set bad examples for the less experienced employees.
IOW, playing players who don't work as hard or don't take the time to understand the scouting reports versus those who are more "talented," hurts those who are more "talented" in the long run. JJJ...Deonte...Dawson...all need to understand that while you may beat Jake, Juan and Derrick in games of one on one, that doesn't automatically make you more valuable to the basketball team.
Really? We are playing high major basketball here. This isn't grade school.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 10:53:19 AM
Really? We are playing high major basketball here. This isn't grade school.
Actually, in grade school it's all pretty much whose wins one on one. Gets more complicated (defensive rotations, playing within the offense, etc) at higher levels.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 28, 2014, 10:36:28 AM
Your comments are dead on. Buzz is a program builder, and he always returns to our culture and being "who we are" to explain the success that we've had. Is it sometimes frustrating to watch talented players like Todd Mayo sit because they're fighting that culture rather than buying in? You bet. But here's the thing - that culture is more important than one player or winning one game. If he (or any other player) doesn't get it, he'll sit and/or leave, but if/when the light goes on (here's hoping, Todd) the benefits go beyond basketball. That legacy is important to Buzz but not to a large portion of our fan base. Guys like Ners want time given to guys like Mayo simply because of their talent. Expecting them to earn it by being a good teammate, student, person, etc., is the equivalent of "riding" Todd. Sorry, but that's how Buzz rolls. He feels his responsibility to these guys and their families goes beyond basketball. A lot of people here claim to love that about Buzz (it's easy when you're winning Big East titles and going deep in the tournament) but abandon ship (and the principles Buzz's teams have been based on) at the first sign of trouble. That doesn't surprise me, but it does disappoint me a little.
I agree with the vast majority of your post. I will say that culture, without victory, eventually doesn't matter - but Buzz has proven of course that his culture, recruiting, coaching have gotten results historically better than we've gotten since Al.
Having said that, it doesn't mean he's infallible, and just like any coach, can make poor coaching decisions. I won't argue with you on Todd - even though I'd love him to get more PT from Jake, and I don't even hate on Jake a whole lot - as he at least is a very good floor spacer and has shown he can hit clutch shots, and greatly contribute to victory in some games.
But, with regard to Dawson - Buzz has said he's a hard worker, a great kid - therefore, if we are making the culture argument - it wouldn't seem Dawson isn't passing the culture test. And, the on court test - he's shown he has some talent, and can help the team win games. But, it is unfair to expect a kid to be perfect every time he goes out on the floor - he needs to be given some slack to play through a few bumps. Let the kid play 20-30 per game from here on out and let's see what he's got...for this year, and for next moving forward..
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 08:47:11 AM
I agree, but to add to this, you set bad examples for the less experienced employees.
IOW, playing players who don't work as hard or don't take the time to understand the scouting reports versus those who are more "talented," hurts those who are more "talented" in the long run. JJJ...Deonte...Dawson...all need to understand that while you may beat Jake, Juan and Derrick in games of one on one, that doesn't automatically make you more valuable to the basketball team.
Listen when I tell you, this guy is an assistant or Buzz himself. His statements sounds too close to the action.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 11:25:23 AM
I agree with the vast majority of your post. I will say that culture, without victory, eventually doesn't matter - but Buzz has proven of course that his culture, recruiting, coaching have gotten results historically better than we've gotten since Al.
Having said that, it doesn't mean he's infallible, and just like any coach, can make poor coaching decisions. I won't argue with you on Todd - even though I'd love him to get more PT from Jake, and I don't even hate on Jake a whole lot - as he at least is a very good floor spacer and has shown he can hit clutch shots, and greatly contribute to victory in some games.
But, with regard to Dawson - Buzz has said he's a hard worker, a great kid - therefore, if we are making the culture argument - it wouldn't seem Dawson isn't passing the culture test. And, the on court test - he's shown he has some talent, and can help the team win games. But, it is unfair to expect a kid to be perfect every time he goes out on the floor - he needs to be given some slack to play through a few bumps. Let the kid play 20-30 per game from here on out and let's see what he's got...for this year, and for next moving forward..
My sentiments exactly. There is a reason I am sweating Dawson getting more minutes and not Todd, Burton, JJJ, etc. (though I do wish Todd played more)
I assuming Lenny is there handing out the juice boxes and orange slices after practice.
Besides - how would they know who won if they not keep score too?
what a joke statement - it's not who the better player is, wow - I assume Boeheim and Calapari will start changing they philosophy once they read Lenny's brilliance...
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 10:53:19 AM
Really? We are playing high major basketball here. This isn't grade school.
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 27, 2014, 02:31:41 AM
Buzz is playing with fire by sticking with this absurd backcourt rotation. If he continues to stick with it, we are highly likely to lose all the remaining games. The Big East is tough top to bottom,Even DePaul is going to be tough to beat, especially on the road.
If Buzz is willing to run with all the freshman, and give more steady minutes to Todd and STj, we can still get on a run.
At this point the season is up to Buzz, The kids are trying their hardest and haven't quit yet. It is time Buzz shows a little respect to the program and the University instead of too his vanity.
We will win plenty of games even with this rotation. In my view, he isn't getting consistency from any of them. Mayo took a donut at Butler until OT. Other games he has been out to lunch while others he has been consistent. Jake has hit some big 3's in some games and others non existent. Derrick, some games solid, others not. Lack of consistency all around. Jamil...for a senior...really inconsistent. DG, been really big in a number of games, but he has also either lapsed in one part of his game or disappeared for a few.
You know me, Buzz's biggest defender, I think he's looking for a group that does it consistently and they seldom do in all facets of the game. Now, where people have some legitimate gripes is playing for now vs playing for the future. Are some of the kids being played actually giving you a better chance to win now? Up for debate.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on January 28, 2014, 11:46:11 AM
I assuming Lenny is there handing out the juice boxes and orange slices after practice.
Besides - how would they know who won if they not keep score too?
what a joke statement - it's not who the better player is, wow - I assume Boeheim and Calapari will start changing they philosophy once they read Lenny's brilliance...
Al started Bill Neary (who was way, way, worse than Derrick or Jake) over Bernard Toone (who was way, way better than John or Todd). Guess he was doling out the juice boxes before there were juices boxes.
Your statement couldn't be more simplistic or ignorant.
Quote from: Ners on January 27, 2014, 03:55:39 PM
Are you satisfied with our results thus far? All my contention all along has been, was to get Dawson 20 minutes a game and get an idea for what he could do. Perhaps if he'd gotten more time against the cupcakes, he'd be in a better position to contribute at this point - since Buzz still apparently doesn't seem to think he's worthy.
I don't see Derrick showing much improvement, over where we were at Thanksgiving time, nor has the team shown much improvement. For the life of me, I cannot understand why you and about the 5 other Pro-Derrick guys - feel things could get worse if Buzz made the move..or that in absolute certainty you still believe Derrick gives this team the best chance to win.
I am not a pro Derrick guy. I see the dynamic dimension that Dawson adds. I trust Buzz to know how to channel it and when to. Would you have benched Lockett last year?
I certainly hope that Dawson earns the PT by the end of the year, because Derrick seems to be a good backup, but Dawson ain't there yet.
Until you can give us a report live from practice you can't demand that Dawson plays.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 10:53:19 AM
Really? We are playing high major basketball here. This isn't grade school.
And you claim that I didn't pass Basketball 101? I think you just advocated having a series of one-on-ones to determine Marquette's starting line up. Welcome to CYO League.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 11:25:23 AM
Let the kid play 20-30 per game from here on out and let's see what he's got...for this year, and for next moving forward..
Derrick Wilson is the likely starter next year as well. So we get to relive this entire debate again.
YAY!!!
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2014, 12:04:33 PM
We will win plenty of games even with this rotation. In my view, he isn't getting consistency from any of them. Mayo took a donut at Butler until OT. Other games he has been out to lunch while others he has been consistent. Jake has hit some big 3's in some games and others non existent. Derrick, some games solid, others not. Lack of consistency all around. Jamil...for a senior...really inconsistent. DG, been really big in a number of games, but he has also either lapsed in one part of his game or disappeared for a few.
You know me, Buzz's biggest defender, I think he's looking for a group that does it consistently and they seldom do in all facets of the game. Now, where people have some legitimate gripes is playing for now vs playing for the future. Are some of the kids being played actually giving you a better chance to win now? Up for debate.
My compliments on this and several other posts on what has been a very disappointing season. I may not always agree with your conclusions but you've been fair and objective throughout.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on January 28, 2014, 11:33:42 AM
Listen when I tell you, this guy is an assistant or Buzz himself. His statements sounds too close to the action.
Really?
I guess you missed the part where I said Dawson should have played more on Saturday.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2014, 12:04:33 PM
You know me, Buzz's biggest defender, I think he's looking for a group that does it consistently and they seldom do in all facets of the game. Now, where people have some legitimate gripes is playing for now vs playing for the future. Are some of the kids being played actually giving you a better chance to win now? Up for debate.
Made me laugh. Thanks! Teal?