Poll
Question:
Who would you rather see starting?
Option 1: Derrick Wilson
votes: 38
Option 2: John Dawson
votes: 84
Lets nip this in the bud.
This isn't the all star game, getting more votes doesn't make that player the starter, this will resolve nothing.
Quote from: The Deane Team on January 28, 2014, 06:41:04 AM
This isn't the all star game, getting more votes doesn't make that player the starter, this will resolve nothing.
+1.
Early results show 45% of our fan base would continue to like to lose to every team in the Top 50....with a guy shooting 8% from 3 point land, 38% from the field, and 48% from the FT line. I suspect we are the only college basketball team that starts a junior PG who has made 2, 3 point field goals in his career. Add in the fact he's gotten the most minutes of anyone on the team? Wow. Just wow. Those 5ppg, 3.8 assits and 1.6 turnovers have made all the difference in the world for this team.
People comment, we are just so close, we are having such bad luck this year - maybe if we had a PG that could just score 8ppg, in 30 minutes, we'd have won a few more...
Quote from: Dreadman24 on January 28, 2014, 06:31:25 AM
Lets nip this in the bud.
Yes! A poll! That should "nip this in the bud". Whatever "this" is.
Are there any other threads related to Wilson / Dawson?
Quote from: leever on January 28, 2014, 08:44:47 AM
Yes! A poll! That should "nip this in the bud". Whatever "this" is.
Are there any other threads related to Wilson / Dawson?
Are there any that aren't?
Does it matter who starts?
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 08:47:32 AM
Are there any that aren't?
Not once NERS gets involved. I think the only safe one is the beer thread.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 08:21:37 AM
Early results show 45% of our fan base would continue to like to lose to every team in the Top 50
And the majority of our fan base thinks our head coach is an idiot.
The fact is, that 45% (apparently like Buzz) thinks we'd still lose to top 50 teams with Dawson...only probably by more.
Anyhow, take it up with Buzz.
Could we get a show of hands as to the Derrick Wilson voters? I thought there were only a handful of idiots on this topic. But I guess we have 16 at present.
Personally, I kind of enjoyed winning at Georgetown...and looking decent against Xavier.
I voted for Derrick because I trust Buzz to know the players' skill sets and readiness to play better than Ners, Nevada and Dreadman.
Guess that makes me an idiot. ::)
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 09:22:00 AM
Not once NERS gets involved. I think the only safe one is the beer thread.
nah, wilson is a hops guy, dawson likes porters and stouts.
Dawson.
A team can't compete in today's game without a PG that is at least somewhat of a threat to score.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 09:36:23 AM
Could we get a show of hands as to the Derrick Wilson voters? I thought there were only a handful of idiots on this topic. But I guess we have 16 at present.
Personally, I kind of enjoyed winning at Georgetown...and looking decent against Xavier.
I did not vote, but will tendd to vote against a poster who calls others idiots. It does not support my ability to believe their opinion is sound.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on January 28, 2014, 09:38:34 AM
I voted for Derrick because I trust Buzz to know the players' skill sets and readiness to play better than Ners, Nevada and Dreadman.
Guess that makes me an idiot. ::)
No Gooo....you are not an idiot....just on this topic....otherwise seem to have good insight. I'm just shocked that you feel we'd do worse with Dawson and lose by more to the Top 50 teams than we've done with Derrick.
Quote from: Archies Bat on January 28, 2014, 09:53:59 AM
I did not vote, but will tendd to vote against a poster who calls others idiots. It does not support my ability to believe their opinion is sound.
You'll note my original post said handful of idiots
on this topic.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 09:58:14 AM
No Gooo....you are not an idiot....just on this topic....otherwise seem to have good insight. I'm just shocked that you feel we'd do worse with Dawson and lose by more to the Top 50 teams than we've done with Derrick.
Since you know for a fact Dawson gives MU a better chance at winning, but Buzz continues to play Wilson, then Buzz must be so egregious in his coaching that you have to agree that he no longer deserves to be the coach at MU. So please clarify.
I've seen one game out of 20 where, to my eyes, Dawson was the better choice for more minutes than Derrick. JD had a really nice game against Georgetown. I thought he was abysmal against Butler and Villanova and got exactly the minutes he deserved.
The bigger issue is the starting backcourt logging 30-35 mpg. The more they play, their (already limited) effectiveness diminishes on both ends. Saw that against Nova in the second half/OT. Looked like they had concrete Nikes on down the stretch.
We just need a PG like 'Nova's Ryan A. He won the game.
If I could, I would vote for neither of those choices.
Mine would be "Both."
Go into every game expecting to split the minutes right down the middle and then adjust on the fly as game situations dictate. Don't put Dawson in and yank him 1 minute later after one mistake. But also don't put Dawson in and let him suck for more than the 4 minutes he sucked against Nova. Same is true of Derrick. Give him a leash because mistakes happen, but don't let the leash be too long.
Quote from: Earl Tatum on January 28, 2014, 10:11:18 AM
We just need a PG like 'Nova's Ryan A. He won the game.
Tough to argue. He did a very nice job of controlling the game.
Quote from: MU82 on January 28, 2014, 10:13:08 AM
If I could, I would vote for neither of those choices.
Mine would be "Both."
Go into every game expecting to split the minutes right down the middle and then adjust on the fly as game situations dictate. Don't put Dawson in and yank him 1 minute later after one mistake. But also don't put Dawson in and let him suck for more than the 4 minutes he sucked against Nova. Same is true of Derrick. Give him a leash because mistakes happen, but don't let the leash be too long.
And if you look at the last two games, that very well may be what Buzz intends.
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 10:07:49 AM
I've seen one game out of 20 where, to my eyes, Dawson was the better choice for more minutes than Derrick. JD had a really nice game against Georgetown. I thought he was abysmal against Butler and Villanova and got exactly the minutes he deserved.
Abysmal, is the production of what our guy getting 30+ minutes a game consistently, is "producing." Individually, and collectively the team's record.
It's beyond comical to me that you are so quick to judge Dawson as being abysmal in 3-8 minutes of total playing time against the likes of Butler and Villanova - when you have 30+ minutes of abysmal play by Derrick in 16 of our 20 games thus far. Dawson has gotten 1 game of 30 minutes of playing time, and he showed well. You simply cannot judge a player in a couple of 2-3 minute stints of action...
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 10:23:04 AM
Dawson has gotten 1 game of 30 minutes of playing time, and he showed well. You simply cannot judge a player in a couple of 2-3 minute stints of action...
You keep making this claim, but that doesn't make it true. There is no evidence whatsoever that says if I play 3 minutes or I play 5 minutes that I'm going to be better in the 5 minutes. How many games of 30 minute action do you require of Dawson? I don't see you advocating the same thing for JJJ over Jake, would that hold true there as well?
What is the threshold that signals an extended number of game minutes is required to evaluate the player?
Should we give Juan extended minutes over Jamil to make sure he can't out perform him?
What level would Dawson have to perform at and for how long does it take you to confirm or not confirm that Dawson is the man? Furthermore how would you establish that Dawson was the one making the impact and not something like another player getting hot or a favorable match up?
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 10:23:04 AM
It's beyond comical to me that you are so quick to judge Dawson as being abysmal in 3-8 minutes of total playing time against the likes of Butler and Villanova - when you have 30+ minutes of abysmal play by Derrick in 16 of our 20 games thus far. Dawson has gotten 1 game of 30 minutes of playing time, and he showed well. You simply cannot judge a player in a couple of 2-3 minute stints of action...
You also cannot judge a player on one game where they got extended minutes.
You need to judge a player based on a variety of factors: practice, game play, match ups, moon phase, etc.
You do not have access to all of this info, but I believe the Marquette coaching staff does. I will continue to defer to them. Judging by their entire portfolio of results, they seem to know what they are doing.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
You'll note my original post said handful of idiots on this topic.
So only partial idiots?
Quote from: Archies Bat on January 28, 2014, 09:53:59 AM
I did not vote, but will tendd to vote against a poster who calls others idiots. It does not support my ability to believe their opinion is sound.
Must be the nicest, self-employed person ever!
John plays 10+ minutes per game. Derrick plays 29+. Adjusting Dawson's to reflect Wilson's playing time, here's how they compare:
Dawson Wilson
PPG 5.8 5.1
APG 3.6 3.8
RPG 2.8 4.2
STLS .3 .9
TOs 1.7 1.6
FG% 32.3 38.6
FT% 75.0 48.0
3PT%. 30.0 08.3
Dawson is a much better 3 point shooter and free throw shooter. No surprise. And he gives you .7 more points per game. For all that you get fewer assists, fewer rebounds, fewer steals, a lower overall field goal % and more turnovers. And decidedly worse on ball and team defense. I like Dawson's potential. I'd like to see him get more minutes. But the idea that he's earned 30 minutes a game or that our record would be better if he was given those minutes is in your "eye test" and your bias, not in the facts.
Any and all stats that contradict NERS opinion will be met with either (A) you can't make a fair assessment because Dawson isn't getting enough consecutive minutes, or (B) ask how can possibly think that because Derrick Wilson is soooooooo bad. Perhaps for another 500 posts.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 28, 2014, 11:07:06 AM
John plays 10+ minutes per game. Derrick plays 29+. Adjusting Dawson's to reflect Wilson's playing time, here's how they compare:
Dawson Wilson
PPG 5.8 5.1
APG 3.6 3.8
RPG 2.8 4.2
STLS .3 .9
TOs 1.7 1.6
FG% 32.3 38.6
FT% 75.0 48.0
3PT%. 30.0 08.3
Dawson is a much better 3 point shooter and free throw shooter. No surprise. And he gives you .7 more points per game. For all that you get fewer assists, fewer rebounds, fewer steals, a lower overall field goal % and more turnovers. And decidedly worse on ball and team defense. I like Dawson's potential. I'd like to see him get more minutes. But the idea that he's earned 30 minutes a game or that our record would be better if he was given those minutes is in your "eye test" and your bias, not in the facts.
Something that doesn't show up in your numbers is better offensive flow when Dawson is in. Just having Dawson in instead of Wilson opens up our offense so much more for everyone and stats don't show that.
Along with not being consistent at scoring or assist, Derrick's very poor free throw shooting and recent defensive slump should certify his position on the bench. Dawson should get 30+ mins per, at least til Wilson can make free throws.
Where's the choice "whoever Buzz decides to start"? I choose that one.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on January 28, 2014, 11:21:22 AM
Along with not being consistent at scoring or assist, Derrick's very poor free throw shooting and recent defensive slump should certify his position on the bench. Dawson should get 30+ mins per, at least til Wilson can make free throws.
Not quite sure what this means. The slump has been all year. Derrick's defensive ability was predicated on his ability to use his strength and 'body up' on opposing guard. He can't do that anymore with the new rules.
Quote from: mubuzz on January 28, 2014, 11:20:28 AM
Something that doesn't show up in your numbers is better offensive flow when Dawson is in. Just having Dawson in instead of Wilson opens up our offense so much more for everyone and stats don't show that.
+1, kinda
Dwilson seems to pick up his dribble a lot, which disrupts the offensive flow. However, I love the stats, and these facts should show up in the stats somewhere.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on January 28, 2014, 09:38:34 AM
I voted for Derrick because I trust Buzz to know the players' skill sets and readiness to play better than Ners, Nevada and Dreadman.
Guess that makes me an idiot. ::)
I didn't even comment on this... How I get involved....
Marquette will not... I repeat "NOT" Win a game this year against a top 200 team if Derrick Wilson plays +30 Minutes in the game... Unless D. Wade is coming back and Bringing Vander, DJO, Acker, Novak and Wes Matthews with him....
Period.... Im not voting because its useless...
But this team is not winning anything not even this Thursday against Providence with him as Point Guard....
In the 18 Games and 2 previous seasons anyone can see that....
We have the least effective back court in all of the Big East and anyone knows Guard Play is everything....
So the losses will continue and "We are Marquette the Pre Season Ranked 17th Laughing Stock of the Big East"...
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 28, 2014, 11:07:06 AM
John plays 10+ minutes per game. Derrick plays 29+. Adjusting Dawson's to reflect Wilson's playing time, here's how they compare:
Dawson Wilson
PPG 5.8 5.1
APG 3.6 3.8
RPG 2.8 4.2
STLS .3 .9
TOs 1.7 1.6
FG% 32.3 38.6
FT% 75.0 48.0
3PT%. 30.0 08.3
Dawson is a much better 3 point shooter and free throw shooter. No surprise. And he gives you .7 more points per game. For all that you get fewer assists, fewer rebounds, fewer steals, a lower overall field goal % and more turnovers. And decidedly worse on ball and team defense. I like Dawson's potential. I'd like to see him get more minutes. But the idea that he's earned 30 minutes a game or that our record would be better if he was given those minutes is in your "eye test" and your bias, not in the facts.
You are making apples to oranges comparisons - you are taking stats Dawson has accumulated for the year, when much of his playing time has been so limited/spotty and in 2 minute stints - it isn't even close to comparing to a guy who gets 30+ per game, every game and can run for 10 minutes straight of game action. What do you think Derrick's numbers would look like this year if he was consistently getting 8 minutes a game, and it was broken up into 3 different stints of playing time??
What is our record when Dawson's gotten 25+ minutes of playing time? 1-0. That's the argument...he's only been given 1 chance, and in that 1 chance...the team won the game. Why not try it a few more times and see what happens - it's not like we are winning at a high level with the alternative..
Quote from: mubuzz on January 28, 2014, 11:20:28 AM
Something that doesn't show up in your numbers is better offensive flow when Dawson is in. Just having Dawson in instead of Wilson opens up our offense so much more for everyone and stats don't show that.
To see things tht don't show up in individual statistics, you might want to look to the +/- numbers. If the entire offense runs better with Dawson in, it should have a positive impact on those numbers. If Dawson's defense is bad, it might have a negative impact.
If I recall correctly, we were -2 against Nova with Derrick in, and -7 with Dawson in. I understand that you can't take too much from +/- numbers from a single game because there are other variables as well (i.e., are you playing PG with Jake or Todd at SG), but I suspect many of those variables would even out over the course of the season.
Anyone know the "whole season" +/- numbers?
Quote from: brandx on January 28, 2014, 11:28:12 AM
Not quite sure what this means. The slump has been all year. Derrick's defensive ability was predicated on his ability to use his strength and 'body up' on opposing guard. He can't do that anymore with the new rules.
Scoopers told me the new rules ended about three weeks into season and have no effect, but your statement is still true. My bad.
De Wilson numbers are unreal... glad Lenny can extrapolate Dawson's with no comparison to how they run the team / impact on other team members...
oh right, the other team members are supposed to make our point guard better, not the other way around :)
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 08:21:37 AM
Early results show 45% of our fan base would continue to like to lose to every team in the Top 50....with a guy shooting 8% from 3 point land, 38% from the field, and 48% from the FT line. I suspect we are the only college basketball team that starts a junior PG who has made 2, 3 point field goals in his career. Add in the fact he's gotten the most minutes of anyone on the team? Wow. Just wow. Those 5ppg, 3.8 assits and 1.6 turnovers have made all the difference in the world for this team.
People comment, we are just so close, we are having such bad luck this year - maybe if we had a PG that could just score 8ppg, in 30 minutes, we'd have won a few more...
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 11:34:03 AM
You are making apples to oranges comparisons - you are taking stats Dawson has accumulated for the year, when much of his playing time has been so limited/spotty and in 2 minute stints - it isn't even close to comparing to a guy who gets 30+ per game, every game and can run for 10 minutes straight of game action. What do you think Derrick's numbers would look like this year if he was consistently getting 8 minutes a game, and it was broken up into 3 different stints of playing time??
What is our record when Dawson's gotten 25+ minutes of playing time? 1-0. That's the argument...he's only been given 1 chance, and in that 1 chance...the team won the game. Why not try it a few more times and see what happens - it's not like we are winning at a high level with the alternative..
Exactly. IMO, it is our only shot at winning the BE tourney, which, IMO is the only way we are getting to the NCAAs.
10 games left. Use them to prime Dawson for a possible BE tourney run. Use them to prime him for the beginning of next season.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 28, 2014, 11:07:06 AM
John plays 10+ minutes per game. Derrick plays 29+. Adjusting Dawson's to reflect Wilson's playing time, here's how they compare:
Dawson Wilson
PPG 5.8 5.1
APG 3.6 3.8
RPG 2.8 4.2
STLS .3 .9
TOs 1.7 1.6
FG% 32.3 38.6
FT% 75.0 48.0
3PT%. 30.0 08.3
Dawson is a much better 3 point shooter and free throw shooter. No surprise. And he gives you .7 more points per game. For all that you get fewer assists, fewer rebounds, fewer steals, a lower overall field goal % and more turnovers. And decidedly worse on ball and team defense. I like Dawson's potential. I'd like to see him get more minutes. But the idea that he's earned 30 minutes a game or that our record would be better if he was given those minutes is in your "eye test" and your bias, not in the facts.
Lenny, I think a more apt comparison would be Derrick's stats last year versus John's stats this year since Derrick averaged about 13 minutes and usually it was only a couple minutes at a time.
The comparison doesn't play out quite so well for Derrick in this case even tho' he already had a year under his belt and John is a freshman.
I'm just surprised anyone thought Derrick would be OK starting. In 2 years he shot under 30% from the floor and under 50% from the line. Guys who shoot that poorly DO NOT become good shooters. Ever. And the coaches knew (or should have known that his one asset (defense) would be mitigated by the new rules. (I don't consider low turnovers an asset because he doesn't create offense.)
Quote from: mu03eng on January 28, 2014, 10:36:06 AM
You keep making this claim, but that doesn't make it true. There is no evidence whatsoever that says if I play 3 minutes or I play 5 minutes that I'm going to be better in the 5 minutes. How many games of 30 minute action do you require of Dawson? I don't see you advocating the same thing for JJJ over Jake, would that hold true there as well?
What is the threshold that signals an extended number of game minutes is required to evaluate the player?
Should we give Juan extended minutes over Jamil to make sure he can't out perform him?
What level would Dawson have to perform at and for how long does it take you to confirm or not confirm that Dawson is the man? Furthermore how would you establish that Dawson was the one making the impact and not something like another player getting hot or a favorable match up?
Usually you make cogent posts..this one is a head scratcher. Did you not think Dawson played his best game of the year in the game he got ample opportunity to run the point - Georgetown - 30 minutes? To me that confirms that at least for the 1 game he's been given Derrick Wilson minutes - he performs pretty well.
The issue is we have a huge data set of what Derrick brings - neither he, nor the team have improved since November.
The Juan/Jamil argument? Come on man. Jamil Wilson has shown to be a productive player - his player rating is nowhere near the clear cut last on the team, as is Derricks.
I want to see Dawson get 30 minutes the rest of the way. Guarantee you his numbers would be much better than Derrick - I'd guess he'd put up 10ppg, 5 assists, 3 rebounds the rest of the way...and suspect the team would go 9-2. As for confirming Dawson was the one making the impact - I'd say it was quite evident he made the impact in overtime, on the road, playing against the arguably the best backcourt in the Big East, at Georgetown. Think his 7 in OT were pretty clutch and don't think that was a case of a teammate getting hot...
Quote from: madtownwarrior on January 28, 2014, 11:40:40 AM
De Wilson numbers are unreal... glad Lenny can extrapolate Dawson's with no comparison to how they run the team / impact on other team members...
Did you realize that we are scoring more a game (72 pts) than we did at the end of last year (68)?
That will likely decrease, but kind of takes away from the whole "team isn't better" concept.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on January 28, 2014, 11:05:19 AM
Must be the nicest, self-employed person ever!
Nahh, not necessarily nice. Old enough to have learned to be able to wade through yellers and name callers.
The biggest disagreement I have with the "Dawson for starter" crowd is the assumption that "there's nothing to lose" by playing him 25+ minutes, and the assumption that we'd be better than 11-9 if he was starting.
This season is far from over - I know Buzz and the players would agree with me there - so there is still plenty to lose. Buzz will continue to play for every win right now regardless of our record, and his belief is that Derrick is the best PG to get us wins right now.
Dawson has more votes, now what?
Quote from: The Deane Team on January 28, 2014, 12:14:13 PM
Dawson has more votes, now what?
Clearly we must get this valuable information to Buzz somehow.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 12:17:21 PM
Clearly we must get this valuable information to Buzz somehow.
But how? HOW?!?!!?!
Quote from: brandx on January 28, 2014, 11:42:06 AM
Lenny, I think a more apt comparison would be Derrick's stats last year versus John's stats this year since Derrick averaged about 13 minutes and usually it was only a couple minutes at a time.
The comparison doesn't play out quite so well for Derrick in this case even tho' he already had a year under his belt and John is a freshman.
I'm just surprised anyone thought Derrick would be OK starting. In 2 years he shot under 30% from the floor and under 50% from the line. Guys who shoot that poorly DO NOT become good shooters. Ever. And the coaches knew (or should have known that his one asset (defense) would be mitigated by the new rules. (I don't consider low turnovers an asset because he doesn't create offense.)
Derrick is nowhere near as talented a basketball player as John. That's not in question. The question is whether John as a freshman playing 30 minutes a game gives us a better chance to win games than Derrick as a junior does. I frankly don't know, but I do know the numbers don't say it. What Buzz sees every day doesn't say it. Again, maybe it's true. But those who think it's a slam dunk for what ails us are basing it on hope, not facts. John Dawson had a wonderful 5 minute stretch against Georgetown. Scored 7 points and made a really good defensive play, but why those 5 minutes and not the other 200 he's played are who he is right now eludes me.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on January 28, 2014, 12:26:05 PM
But how? HOW?!?!!?!
*Smoke signal
*Skywriting
*Telegram
*Strippergram
*Morse Code
*And this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy-g0j8mdEI
I'm actually interested in this poll to see where fellow MUScoopers stand--and for nothing else. I want to know exactly how divisive of a topic it is or if it's just a few in either camp making a lot of noise.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 28, 2014, 12:32:15 PM
Derrick is nowhere near as talented a basketball player as John. That's not in question. The question is whether John as a freshman playing 30 minutes a game gives us a better chance to win games than Derrick as a junior does. I frankly don't know, but I do know the numbers don't say it. What Buzz sees every day doesn't say it. Again, maybe it's true. But those who think it's a slam dunk for what ails us are basing it on hope, not facts. John Dawson had a wonderful 5 minute stretch against Georgetown. Scored 7 points and made a really good defensive play, but why those 5 minutes and not the other 200 he's played are who he is right now eludes me.
Exactly. And I guess this is what get's people labelled "pro Derrick."
And this has a well worn history on Scoop. People who think its obvious that the bench player is a better alternative than the guy Buzz plays.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 28, 2014, 12:32:15 PM
Derrick is nowhere near as talented a basketball player as John. That's not in question. The question is whether John as a freshman playing 30 minutes a game gives us a better chance to win games than Derrick as a junior does. I frankly don't know, but I do know the numbers don't say it. What Buzz sees every day doesn't say it. Again, maybe it's true. But those who think it's a slam dunk for what ails us are basing it on hope, not facts. John Dawson had a wonderful 5 minute stretch against Georgetown. Scored 7 points and made a really good defensive play, but why those 5 minutes and not the other 200 he's played are who he is right now eludes me.
It's too bad this is all falling on Derrick. Jake, Jamil, Juan, Otule, and the freshmen have not been what most of us expected this year, but the PG will usually get the blame much as the QB does in football.
But a lot of people here see it isn't working this year and doubt it would be worse if the young guys were seeing more time. We are already at the point where it appears the only way in is to win the conference tournament.
Throughout Buzz' tenure, the improvement as the season wore on has been very clear. For whatever reason, it hasn't happened this year. I just don't see any way we win the tournament with the current lineup.That is about the best argument I can make to give the young guys more minutes.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 11:44:47 AM
Usually you make cogent posts..this one is a head scratcher. Did you not think Dawson played his best game of the year in the game he got ample opportunity to run the point - Georgetown - 30 minutes? To me that confirms that at least for the 1 game he's been given Derrick Wilson minutes - he performs pretty well.
The issue is we have a huge data set of what Derrick brings - neither he, nor the team have improved since November.
The Juan/Jamil argument? Come on man. Jamil Wilson has shown to be a productive player - his player rating is nowhere near the clear cut last on the team, as is Derricks.
I want to see Dawson get 30 minutes the rest of the way. Guarantee you his numbers would be much better than Derrick - I'd guess he'd put up 10ppg, 5 assists, 3 rebounds the rest of the way...and suspect the team would go 9-2. As for confirming Dawson was the one making the impact - I'd say it was quite evident he made the impact in overtime, on the road, playing against the arguably the best backcourt in the Big East, at Georgetown. Think his 7 in OT were pretty clutch and don't think that was a case of a teammate getting hot...
What ranking are you using to determine that G'town's back court is the best in the Big East? I would put Nova's, Xavier's and Providence's ahead of Georgetown.
You are the king of sample size, so one game means nothing right? I stated it in a couple of other posts, Georgetown was playing zone and a weaker backcourt defensively, which plays to Dawson's strengths and to Wilson's weaknesses. Nova is more athletic and plays to Dawson's weakensses, and I saw nothing in the minutes Dawson played to feel differently.
How many consecutive game minutes do we need to see Dawson to determine if he will be effective in the game or not in your mind? The answer is not 30 minutes.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 12:33:54 PM
*Smoke signal
*Skywriting
*Telegram
*Strippergram
*Morse Code
*And this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy-g0j8mdEI
If someone can locate Willie Wampum, I'd go with the smoke signal....
Quote from: mu03eng on January 28, 2014, 12:46:02 PM
What ranking are you using to determine that G'town's back court is the best in the Big East? I would put Nova's, Xavier's and Providence's ahead of Georgetown.
You are the king of sample size, so one game means nothing right? I stated it in a couple of other posts, Georgetown was playing zone and a weaker backcourt defensively, which plays to Dawson's strengths and to Wilson's weaknesses. Nova is more athletic and plays to Dawson's weakensses, and I saw nothing in the minutes Dawson played to feel differently.
How many consecutive game minutes do we need to see Dawson to determine if he will be effective in the game or not in your mind? The answer is not 30 minutes.
This is draining. How you and 30% of posters here can't see our PG play is far and away the biggest issue with the team stumbling to an 11-9 record with 1 win over a Top 50 team, is flat out baffling.
Question for you - can you elaborate for me, what exactly Derrick Wilson's strengths are offensively? And what do you see as being Dawson's weaknesses, and what do you base those assessments off of?
Has Derrick Wilson EVER took over a game and led us to the winner's circle in his entire MU career? Is an 8% shooter from 3 point land, 35% from the field and 48% from the FT line, worthy or in Buzzspeak, worthy of earning the most minutes on the team?? We have a HUGE sample size of Derrick getting max minutes, and guess what - neither he, nor the team are showing any improvement. We aren't any better now than we were in December.
Plain and simple, Buzz is being an absolute idiot continuing to think he's somehow going to coax victory out of a team being led by Derrick Wilson for 30+ minutes a game against Top 50 teams. Certainly, the numbers don't lie. Believe we are 1-9 against the Top 50. But hey, things could get a lot worse at this point, so we better not dare take the risk of moving to Dawson and running the risk of him potentially playing awesome in overtime on the road and leading the team to a victory.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 01:32:55 PM
This is draining.
Apparently, you are oblivious to irony.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 11:55:06 AM
Did you realize that we are scoring more a game (72 pts) than we did at the end of last year (68)?
That will likely decrease, but kind of takes away from the whole "team isn't better" concept.
So, since we are playing an all world defender at PG, yet scoring more points than last year, yet have a much worse record - how do you reconcile that?
Unfortunately, there is more to basketball than scoring points as you know Sultan - so our scoring 72 a game isn't enough, since we are 11-9. It is odd to think that with a much better defensive PG in Derrick, that our scoring is up from last year, yet our record is so much worse...all while playing in a more watered down Big East.
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 01:37:39 PM
Apparently, you are oblivious to irony.
Touche. Much like roughly 70% of the board feel you and the other Pro-Derrick guys are oblivious to reality. :D
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 12:17:21 PM
Clearly we must get this valuable information to Buzz somehow.
That's easy, just copy paste here http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=41704.0 ;D :P
Quote from: The Deane Team on January 28, 2014, 12:14:13 PM
Dawson has more votes, now what?
MUScoop has spoken. It's why we get the big bucks.
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 01:37:39 PM
Apparently, you are oblivious to irony.
+1 ;D
But Ners does have a point - how can it get worse if Dawson and the other freshman play more minutes? We have already played ourselves out of the tournament.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 01:44:44 PM
So, since we are playing an all world defender at PG, yet scoring more points than last year, yet have a much worse record - how do you reconcile that?
Unfortunately, there is more to basketball than scoring points as you know Sultan - so our scoring 72 a game isn't enough, since we are 11-9. It is odd to think that with a much better defensive PG in Derrick, that our scoring is up from last year, yet our record is so much worse...all while playing in a more watered down Big East.
It's interesting, but if you look at certain offensive statistics...like eFG%, Efficiency, PPG, turnovers, etc. We are pretty much the *exact* same team as last year.
I personally think our problem is on the defensive end more than the offensive end. But even then, teams are scoring at pretty much the same rate and with the same eFG% as last year.
So I think it's not a simple answer...at least not as simple as "IT'S THE PG!!!!" make it out to be.
Nah, I'm not oblivious. This is a frustrating team. I just don't believe that the magic bean is to give Dawson 30 minutes a night. IMO, PG is just one of several different areas where this team is struggled. For example, Steve Taylor came back, was player of the game against Georgetown, but showed himself to still be defensively challenged guarding the pick and roll and more than able to miss an open layup. For example, Jamil, after attacking effectively several times from the wing against Villanova, makes a post pass to Davante that was a mistake an 8th grader shouldn't make. When the post has his man pinned, throw to the hand away from the defense. For example, Buzz keeps insisting on starting Oxtule when it is more than obvious that neither can guard a stretch 4.
I have advocated, at different times, starting Todd/ Deonte/JJJ..... starting someone who will give more offense at the beginning of the game. Not starting Juan, or 1/2 of Oxtule. I'm ok with starting Chris but still giving Gardner 30 a game. More than that and his defense just gets horrible. I've advocated playing more small ball, with Jamil as a stretch 4. I haven't given Buzz a pass. I just haven't seen Dawson as a gamechanger.
Unlike you, I haven't called Buzz an idiot if he doesn't agree with my opinion.
Taking your cue from a radio talk show host and vowing to not stop posting your opinion until everyone agrees with you isn't healthy.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 01:32:55 PM
Plain and simple, Buzz is being an absolute idiot continuing to think he's somehow going to coax victory out of a team being led by Derrick Wilson for 30+ minutes a game against Top 50 teams. Certainly, the numbers don't lie. Believe we are 1-9 against the Top 50. But hey, things could get a lot worse at this point, so we better not dare take the risk of moving to Dawson and running the risk of him potentially playing awesome in overtime on the road and leading the team to a victory.
I know that you have invested a lot of yourself in this argument. But when you find yourself making statements like the one bolded above, it might be good for you to take a step back and take a couple of days off to put some things into perspective.
Because honestly this doesn't make you or your POV look good.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 02:03:59 PM
It's interesting, but if you look at certain offensive statistics...like eFG%, Efficiency, PPG, turnovers, etc. We are pretty much the *exact* same team as last year.
I personally think our problem is on the defensive end more than the offensive end. But even then, teams are scoring at pretty much the same rate and with the same eFG% as last year.
So I think it's not a simple answer...at least not as simple as "IT'S THE PG!!!!" make it out to be.
We do not have good man-to-man defenders. Derrick is only a small part of the problem there. Davante is terrible and Jamil has been surprisingly bad, Mayo not much better. Jamil has played excellent team defense, but surprising - to me anyway - sorely lacking one-on-one this year.
Quote from: The Deane Team on January 28, 2014, 12:14:13 PM
Dawson has more votes, now what?
Check the first post. Dreadman wanted to nip it in the bud.
Quote from: mu03eng on January 28, 2014, 12:46:02 PM
What ranking are you using to determine that G'town's back court is the best in the Big East? I would put Nova's, Xavier's and Providence's ahead of Georgetown.
You are the king of sample size, so one game means nothing right? I stated it in a couple of other posts, Georgetown was playing zone and a weaker backcourt defensively, which plays to Dawson's strengths and to Wilson's weaknesses. Nova is more athletic and plays to Dawson's weakensses, and I saw nothing in the minutes Dawson played to feel differently.
How many consecutive game minutes do we need to see Dawson to determine if he will be effective in the game or not in your mind? The answer is not 30 minutes.
Give Dawson the whole first half. Sink or swim.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 02:07:52 PM
I know that you have invested a lot of yourself in this argument. But when you find yourself making statements like the one bolded above, it might be good for you to take a step back and take a couple of days off to put some things into perspective.
Because honestly this doesn't make you or your POV look good.
LOL - Think I need to step back from the ledge?!! Obviously I have invested a lot into the whole argument, because I hate to just see the season thrown away...which it looks like it is headed that direction if we continue to make no change at PG. Is it all PG? Maybe not....but our backcourt is so entirely dominated each and every game statistically...it's hard to not put all the fault there. We have our best post player in 30 years, and seems we are going to waste his talent/senior season - because Buzz has just been too hesitant to play Dawson 30 minutes. Dawson will at least launch 3's, make some of them, shoot well if he gets to the FT line..and put pressure on the defense. Derrick simply does not do that - it makes every guy's job that much more difficult to execute...
Just don't see why at this point being 1-9 against Top 50 teams, and there being little evidence of things getting better - you won't make a radical change - when the 1 game you did make a radical change, it was rewarded with a road win against a somewhat decent team..
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on January 28, 2014, 02:48:19 PM
Give Dawson the whole first half. Sink or swim.
This could work. But let's just say the results aren't what people are expecting. Do we then demand he play 3/4 of the game? The whole game? Every minute until things are proven right for the pro-Dawson crowd?
Quote from: The Deane Team on January 28, 2014, 03:01:23 PM
This could work. But let's just say the results aren't what people are expecting. Do we then demand he play 3/4 of the game? The whole game? Every minute until things are proven right for the pro-Dawson crowd?
I for one would love to see the excuses being made when we are down to somebody after an entire half of JD at the point.
Then it will be because we can't shoot, can't play D, don't have consistent play from our most talented players. In other words, all the reasons why this team is really struggling.
Quote from: The Deane Team on January 28, 2014, 12:14:13 PM
Dawson has more votes, now what?
Have a vote on Jake vs. Todd vs. JJJ? The Scoop server built into the Colorado mountain might explode.
I dont know about the others in the pro-dawson camp, but Im not claiming dawson is the savior. All im saying is that he might be. He has shown some good potential. Lets see if its legit. If hes given, say, a couple games at the helm and we still only beat the likes of seton hall by one, ill admit that i was "wrong."
Notice that nobody is crying as loudly about jake vs jjj/burton/mayo.
Note that i am working under the assumption that the season is gone and our only hope is winning the BE tourney.
Quote from: tower912 on January 28, 2014, 10:07:49 AM
I've seen one game out of 20 where, to my eyes, Dawson was the better choice for more minutes than Derrick. JD had a really nice game against Georgetown. I thought he was abysmal against Butler and Villanova and got exactly the minutes he deserved.
That was probably the only chance Dawson has gotten all season to show he is better than Derrick, and he succeeded. At least give him a real chance rather than playing him for 2 minute spurts.
Quote from: brandx on January 28, 2014, 02:25:47 PM
We do not have good man-to-man defenders. Derrick is only a small part of the problem there. Davante is terrible and Jamil has been surprisingly bad, Mayo not much better. Jamil has played excellent team defense, but surprising - to me anyway - sorely lacking one-on-one this year.
That's kind of what my thoughts are all well. We are missing Vander and Trent...and replaced them with Jake and Davante/Juan/STJ....eesh.
If it's in Buzz we trust, where is the Wilson that Buzz went on and on about here:
http://www.replaytheseries.com/10/14/13/Marquette-PG-Derrick-Wilson-working-on-e/landing.html?blockID=950743&feedID=8461 (http://www.replaytheseries.com/10/14/13/Marquette-PG-Derrick-Wilson-working-on-e/landing.html?blockID=950743&feedID=8461)
so now at 5 ppts per game, 3.8 assists per game, terrible shooting percentages from FT, 2p and 3pt - all leading to a 11 - 9 record and a possible CBI psot-season - maybe that is why some are questioning buzz's judgement of how good Wilson is good Dawson is...
"Junior Cadougan is not nearly the athlete that Derrick was the day he took his first team picture"
"I think because people only saw him in glimpses last year because of Junior, a lot of people don't know everything he's capable of."
"I would say Derrick is a phenomenal player. He's great at what he does on both sides of the floor."
"In some ways he's a lot better than Junior,"
"Williams told Wilson he had earned the right to start at point guard at a point during last season, but he then explained why he was sticking with Cadougan"
I like Dawson's game. He shows stealth - the ability to steal and run with the ball; and, he has an outside shot; and seems to be a better passer than DW. Bottom line is that he gives us a better chance to win.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 11:34:03 AM
You are making apples to oranges comparisons - you are taking stats Dawson has accumulated for the year, when much of his playing time has been so limited/spotty and in 2 minute stints - it isn't even close to comparing to a guy who gets 30+ per game, every game and can run for 10 minutes straight of game action. What do you think Derrick's numbers would look like this year if he was consistently getting 8 minutes a game, and it was broken up into 3 different stints of playing time??
What is our record when Dawson's gotten 25+ minutes of playing time? 1-0. That's the argument...he's only been given 1 chance, and in that 1 chance...the team won the game. Why not try it a few more times and see what happens - it's not like we are winning at a high level with the alternative..
+ 1000000000
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 02:53:02 PM
We have our best post player in 30 years, and seems we are going to waste his talent/senior season - because Buzz has just been too hesitant to play Dawson 30 minutes.
WTF are you talking about? How are Davante's talents being wasted? He is scoring more (both overall and points per 40), rebounding more, assisting more and turning the ball over less. He's also has a better 2FG% than he has at the end of any other year so far...over 70%. The only thing that's dragging down his overall FG% and his OR is his three point shooting (2/13). In fact, Davante is launching more shots per minute played *this* year (.36) than he did last year (.29).
So in the final analysis, you are blaming Derrick Wilson for wasting Gardner's talents even though Gardner is:
**Being used more
**Shooting more often
**Scoring more both overall and a per 40 basis
**Shooting better from the 2 point range.
**Assisting more
**Rebounding more
**Turning the ball over less
Yet.Another.Eye.Test.Fail.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 11:34:03 AM
What is our record when Dawson's gotten 25+ minutes of playing time? 1-0. That's the argument...he's only been given 1 chance, and in that 1 chance...the team won the game. Why not try it a few more times and see what happens - it's not like we are winning at a high level with the alternative..
But that's just change for change sake. And that might be OK, but there is no evidence to suggest that John Dawson is better right now than Derrick Wilson. None. You find a way to support the statistics you like...and discredit and ignore the ones you don't.
And as I have said, I would like to see Dawson play more. But don't assert that it is a slam dunk case and that Buzz is "stupid" for not giving Dawson 30+ minutes. It's simply not the case.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 04:21:20 PM
WTF are you talking about? How are Davante's talents being wasted? He is scoring more (both overall and points per 40), rebounding more, assisting more and turning the ball over less. He's also has a better 2FG% than he has at the end of any other year so far...over 70%. The only thing that's dragging down his overall FG% and his OR is his three point shooting (2/13). In fact, Davante is launching more shots per minute played *this* year (.36) than he did last year (.29).
So in the final analysis, you are blaming Derrick Wilson for wasting Gardner's talents even though Gardner is:
**Being used more
**Shooting more often
**Scoring more both overall and a per 40 basis
**Shooting better from the 2 point range.
**Assisting more
**Rebounding more
**Turning the ball over less
Eye.Test.Fail.
I"m talking about we have our best post player in 30 years, and a shooting guard in Mayo putting up the same per minute numbers as the amazing Vander Blue, and a talented 5th year senior in Jamil Wilson, sputtering to a 11-9 record and on course to miss the NCAA tourney...because our coach continues to roll out Derrick and Jake for 60+ minutes a game, while consistently getting outscored by a 35-10 margin....all the while you have a freshman PG who's shown some promise, and a junior shooting guard in Todd who does virtually everything better than Jake on a basketball court.
You may recall some previous arguments I've made? Such in Gardner's first 10 games of his freshman year I said he'd be as good, if not better than Robert Jackson - for which I was ridiculed...how's that turned out - and Gardner doesn't even get to play with D-WAde and Travis Diener - but instead Jake Thomas and Derrick Wilson!!
May recall I said DJ Newbill was going to be a very good player, for which you ridiculed..you said only because he was playing inferior competition at Southern Miss..when I said the kid had a lot of game.
I've been bullish on Todd Mayo since freshman year...he's hit some big time shots for the team, and is having a year comparable to your guy - the amazing Vander Blue last year.
I was bullish on Buzz in his first season at the helm - said he had "it." You and others ridiculed and told me to take off the blue and gold colored glasses.
Now...I'm critical of Buzz, and you get your panties in a bunch. You can love a coach, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with his every move.
Now, I know you've said you'd like to see Dawson get some more minutes, so at least you have conceded that point, which is respectable.
here is a list of top 20 frosh
most are on better teams than MQ getting more minutes than any of our rookies
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1931782-college-basketball-freshman-power-rankings-week-12-edition/page/21
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:38:28 PM
You may recall some previous arguments I've made? Such in Gardner's first 10 games of his freshman year I said he'd be as good, if not better than Robert Jackson
Which I agreed with you on. It was a good call on your part.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:38:28 PM
May recall I said DJ Newbill was going to be a very good player, for which you ridiculed..you said only because he was playing inferior competition at Southern Miss..when I said the kid had a lot of game.
I did not ridicule you for that. I ridiculed you for saying he was having a better career than Vander Blue. Which is false.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:38:28 PM
I've been bullish on Todd Mayo since freshman year...he's hit some big time shots for the team, and is having a year comparable to your guy - the amazing Vander Blue last year.
He's not. Continuing to say it doesn't make it so.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:38:28 PM
I was bullish on Buzz in his first season at the helm - said he had "it." You and others ridiculed and told me to take off the blue and gold colored glasses.
Now...I'm critical of Buzz, and you get your panties in a bunch. You can love a coach, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with his every move.
I never ridiculed you for liking Buzz. I like Buzz. I just thought your love for the guy was a little over the top.
And I don't have my panties in a bunch, I just don't like when you make assertions (like we are wasting Davante Gardner) when they simply aren't true.
Quote from: harigtad on January 28, 2014, 04:39:51 PM
here is a list of top 20 frosh
most are on better teams than MQ getting more minutes than any of our rookies
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1931782-college-basketball-freshman-power-rankings-week-12-edition/page/21
Compelling.
Is your contention that you would like to have these guys in an MQ uniform?
Or is your contention that any of our current freshman are nearly as good as any of these guys?
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 04:37:40 PM
But that's just change for change sake. And that might be OK, but there is no evidence to suggest that John Dawson is better right now than Derrick Wilson. None. You find a way to support the statistics you like...and discredit and ignore the ones you don't.
And as I have said, I would like to see Dawson play more. But don't assert that it is a slam dunk case and that Buzz is "stupid" for not giving Dawson 30+ minutes. It's simply not the case.
It isn't just change for the sake of change. It's change because they guy you've put all your eggs in basket - is failing. 5.1ppg, 3.8 apg, and 1.6 turnovers a game in 30 minutes of action on 8%, 35% and 48% shooting from 3, 2 and 1 isn't getting it done after 20 games. A pre-season Top 20 team, favorite to win the league, is 11-9...and has handed Butler its only win in 8 games in conference play.
I know this is true: Dawson shoots 75% from the FT line. 30% from 3 point line, and 32% from the field, largely in very fragmented segments of minutes. I know Dawson's 6 3pt shots made this year, triple the total Derrick has made in almost 3 full years at Marquette. And I know we won the 1 game this year Dawson played 30 minutes, and he far and away put up his best numbers in that game. Think it was a total fluke that he put up better numbers THE ONE GAME he's been given extended run??
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 04:43:41 PM
I did not ridicule you for that. I ridiculed you for saying he was having a better career than Vander Blue. Which is false.
He's not. Continuing to say it doesn't make it so.
Okay...since you are the king of loving statistics to base arguments off of...here's Mayo, VAnder and DJ Newbill in their Junior Years. Pretty sure Vander doesn't compare all that favorable to either Newbill or Todd...but don't let the stats get in the way of your eye test on the matter...
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=todd-mayo&i=1&p1=vander-blue&p2=devonte-newbill
Ners,
Todd Mayo versus Vander Blue is the incorrect comparison. I would think someone with your acumen would understand this.
The correct comparison is Jake Thomas versus Vander Blue. Who would you rather have on this team?
Vander leaving is the absolute worst thing that happened to this team. Not Derrick Wilson being given the keys to the PG position.
With Vander still on the team, you have two guys (VB an TM) on the team and likely on the floor together a lot, that cause all kinds of problems for defenses. Even if Todd was purely Vander's backup, you have little to no drop-off in talent at the SG position for the entire 40 minutes per game.
This team would be stacked if Vander had stayed. He left, Buzz has deemed Jake his primary replacement, our guard core is depleted, and there you have it.
I don't say this to rag on Jake. He's doing the best he can and leaving it on the floor every night (just like Derrick), but the drop-off between Vander and Jake is a lot sharper than the dropoff between Junior and Derrick.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on January 28, 2014, 04:59:18 PM
Ners,
Todd Mayo versus Vander Blue is the incorrect comparison. I would think someone with your acumen would understand this.
The correct comparison is Jake Thomas versus Vander Blue. Who would you rather have on this team?
Vander leaving is the absolute worst thing that happened to this team. Not Derrick Wilson being given the keys to the PG position.
With Vander still on the team, you have two guys (VB an TM) on the team and likely on the floor together a lot, that cause all kinds of problems for defenses. Even if Todd was purely Vander's backup, you have little to no drop-off in talent at the SG position for the entire 40 minutes per game.
This team would be stacked if Vander had stayed. He left, Buzz has deemed Jake his primary replacement, our guard core is depleted, and there you have it.
I don't say this to rag on Jake. He's doing the best he can and leaving it on the floor every night (just like Derrick), but the drop-off between Vander and Jake is a lot sharper than the dropoff between Junior and Derrick.
I get your point in all the above and it's a reasonable one...and have no doubt the team would be a lot better off with Vander on it!! My only contention is that Mayo's production, essentially has replaced Vander's from last year. Todd hardly got any minutes last year, and had limited production - ultimately Jake probably could have contributed similar type of production this year in reduced minutes that Mayo did last year.
So then you go to who else are we missing? Lockett. I think Lockett was a decent player, but for the most part, he was just marginal through the month of February..really upticked in March.
Having said all of this, in my view...the team doesn't look that* different talent-wise than what we had last year....other than at PG...yet our record is drastically different. Gardner is now able to play 30+ minutes per game and his numbers have improved, albeit, its been challenging to get there when teams decide to not play Derrick honestly...which Nova did defend him honestly/like you would a normal player - they didn't sag off Derrick and collapse the paint...part of why DG went off big against Nova...
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 28, 2014, 02:07:52 PM
I know that you have invested a lot of yourself in this argument. But when you find yourself making statements like the one bolded above, it might be good for you to take a step back and take a couple of days off to put some things into perspective.
Because honestly this doesn't make you or your POV look good.
i can't believe you, of all people, posted this. perfect!
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 05:10:59 PM
I get your point in all the above and it's a reasonable one...and have no doubt the team would be a lot better off with Vander on it!! My only contention is that Mayo's production, essentially has replaced Vander's from last year. Todd hardly got any minutes last year, and had limited production - ultimately Jake probably could have contributed similar type of production this year in reduced minutes that Mayo did last year.
So then you go to who else are we missing? Lockett. I think Lockett was a decent player, but for the most part, he was just marginal through the month of February..really upticked in March.
Having said all of this, in my view...the team doesn't look that* different talent-wise than what we had last year....other than at PG...yet our record is drastically different. Gardner is now able to play 30+ minutes per game and his numbers have improved, albeit, its been challenging to get there when teams decide to not play Derrick honestly...which Nova did defend him honestly/like you would a normal player - they didn't sag off Derrick and collapse the paint...part of why DG went off big against Nova...
And I get that from a statistical POV Mayo this year looks a lot like Vander last year.
But, having this year's Mayo and last year's Vander TOGETHER is the key to the entire thing.
Would you rather have lineup A or B this year?
A B
Derrick Derrick
Vander Jake
Mayo Juan
Jamil Jamil
DG DG
This is why I say PG isn't the worst problem on the team. Lineup A would be far and away better than lineup B, and Derrick is the PG on both.
In the end, it's all conjecture and we have the team we have. And we all wish they were better. So there's that.
Quote from: brandx on January 28, 2014, 02:02:28 PM
+1 ;D
But Ners does have a point - how can it get worse if Dawson and the other freshman play more minutes? We have already played ourselves out of the tournament.
Got two more losses before we have played out of the tournament.
Lose three and I will be on the play the freshman bus.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 09:36:23 AM
Could we get a show of hands as to the Derrick Wilson voters? I thought there were only a handful of idiots on this topic. But I guess we have 16 at present.
Personally, I kind of enjoyed winning at Georgetown...and looking decent against Xavier.
Put this thread off until today. Voted for DW "to start." All of a sudden I'm an idiot!?! The poll isn't about minute distribution or quality minutes, etc. It's about starting and I don't think JD has shown enough to take the starting spot from DW. Perhaps the poll selections should be:
DW (idiots)
JD (basketball savants)
And I would also vote to keep Otule starting.
This season.... Is NIT or Bust
Opinions are just that opinions. No one is an idiot for having an opinion. Those who make such statements might want to reflect a little and offer there opinion with evidence without demeaning those that disagree. Let's be respectful of one another since life is hard enough. I think folks from Marquette can do better than that and if we are not then we have lost much more than a basketball season.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:46:32 PM
It isn't just change for the sake of change. It's change because they guy you've put all your eggs in basket - is failing. 5.1ppg, 3.8 apg, and 1.6 turnovers a game in 30 minutes of action on 8%, 35% and 48% shooting from 3, 2 and 1 isn't getting it done after 20 games. A pre-season Top 20 team, favorite to win the league, is 11-9...and has handed Butler its only win in 8 games in conference play.
I know this is true: Dawson shoots 75% from the FT line. 30% from 3 point line, and 32% from the field, largely in very fragmented segments of minutes. I know Dawson's 6 3pt shots made this year, triple the total Derrick has made in almost 3 full years at Marquette. And I know we won the 1 game this year Dawson played 30 minutes, and he far and away put up his best numbers in that game. Think it was a total fluke that he put up better numbers THE ONE GAME he's been given extended run??
Is your main concern Derrick playing or Dawson not playing? What I mean, is, would you be ok if Buzz decided to start/play Mayo at the point and sit Derrick? If the argument is for outside shooting and putting pressure on the defense and better FT percentage, etc. wouldn't Mayo qualify? We'd get improved offense and Derrick would be relegated to backup PG minutes. Thoughts?
Quote from: Class71 on January 28, 2014, 06:33:16 PM
Opinions are just that opinions. No one is an idiot for having an opinion. Those who make such statements might want to reflect a little and offer there opinion with evidence without demeaning those that disagree. Let's be respectful of one another since life is hard enough. I think folks from Marquette can do better than that and if we are not then we have lost much more than a basketball season.
Thank you. I've seen the use of the terms idiot, moron, ignorant and the like more in the last two weeks than than in all my previous time as a registered scoop user. One of the strengths of this board was the ability to debate differing opinions in an open, respectful manner. We are not there yet, but we are beginning to resemble congress.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
You'll note my original post said handful of idiots on this topic.
We thank you, Buzz thanks you. We are all grateful for the times we've agreed with you. It's all that stands between us and complete idiocy.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:46:32 PM
It isn't just change for the sake of change. It's change because they guy you've put all your eggs in basket - is failing. 5.1ppg, 3.8 apg, and 1.6 turnovers a game in 30 minutes of action on 8%, 35% and 48% shooting from 3, 2 and 1 isn't getting it done after 20 games. A pre-season Top 20 team, favorite to win the league, is 11-9...and has handed Butler its only win in 8 games in conference play.
Marquette hasn't put all its eggs into one basket. Derrick is a member of a team, and the team has multiple issues.
Quote from: Ners on January 28, 2014, 04:52:43 PM
Okay...since you are the king of loving statistics to base arguments off of...here's Mayo, VAnder and DJ Newbill in their Junior Years. Pretty sure Vander doesn't compare all that favorable to either Newbill or Todd...but don't let the stats get in the way of your eye test on the matter...
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=todd-mayo&i=1&p1=vander-blue&p2=devonte-newbill
Basketball is played on both ends. You forget that often.
Quote from: Archies Bat on January 28, 2014, 06:41:55 PM
Thank you. I've seen the use of the terms idiot, moron, ignorant and the like more in the last two weeks than than in all my previous time as a registered scoop user. One of the strengths of this board was the ability to debate differing opinions in an open, respectful manner. We are not there yet, but we are beginning to resemble congress.
Wow. What a truly idiotic, moronic, ignorant comment!
::)♏
Now, on to more important interesting poll topics.
Does Dawson prefer jigs or spinners?
Does Derrick use crawlers or minnows?
What do their dads sip on during MU games.
Now there's a poll.
Try the ignore feature. It works well.