Hmm. Nearly 2 hours after the game and Ners didn't start a topic about Derrick Wilson deserving every single minute he played tonight.
Go figure.
Let's not be like the Ners gang.
Actually, Ners was very complimentary tonight.
Oh, I know. I was just funnin'.
We are allowed to have fun here, aren't we?
(Besides, I'm on the record as generally agreeing with Ners that Buzz needed to try something different because what we were doing wasn't working. And Buzz did try something different tonight. Nice job.)
Ners said he was "serviceable". Talk about watching a game with a jaundiced eye. LOL
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 30, 2014, 09:53:17 PM
Ners said he was "serviceable". Talk about watching a game with a jaundiced eye. LOL
I seriously thought that for some fairly long stretches Derrick was our best player tonight.
And while I'm not as over-the-top critical of Derrick as Ners & Co., I haven't exactly sung Derrick's praises.
I've said it many times before, Derrick is the least of our problems.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 30, 2014, 09:53:17 PM
Ners said he was "serviceable". Talk about watching a game with a jaundiced eye. LOL
I gave him my SOTG of the game award...still don't think he's the best option for the team, but Derrick played a solid PG tonight. Had several really nice assists...where he absolutely created a good look for his teammates - notably Burton and Gardner on a couple drives. Only turned it over once. Had an easy follow up off of someones miss as I recall bounce right to him for a wide open layup he converted. Still, I say serviceable, because 4 points in 30 minutes is still pretty minor production...but he did have the 8 assists and a couple of steals as well...and played well on Cotton.
Quote from: Ners on January 30, 2014, 10:35:07 PM
Still, I say serviceable, because 4 points in 30 minutes is still pretty minor production...but he did have the 8 assists and a couple of steals as well...and played well on Cotton.
He had 4 steals, not a couple. 8 assists to one turnover, which is terrific. And played GREAT defense (as the announcers pointed out several times) on Cotton. But because he only had 4 points (on 3 shots), you say serviceable. Wow. I guess when you're rooting against someone it can affect your eyesight.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 30, 2014, 10:42:52 PM
He had 4 steals, not a couple. 8 assists to one turnover, which is terrific. And played GREAT defense (as the announcers pointed out several times) on Cotton. But because he only had 4 points (on 3 shots), you say serviceable. Wow. I guess when you're rooting against someone it can affect your eyesight.
I didn't see the first half of the game...but I know Derrick played virtually the entire 2nd half and we got outscored that half 36-30...which is interesting, whereas in the 1st half we dominated...I'd still hypothesize that was due to less Derrick and Jake...and more Dawson, Burton, Mayo, JJJ...
But, because the bar has been set so incredibly low by Mr. Wilson, a game such as tonights which was probably the best of his MU career - seems really GREAT..when in reality, it really isn't anything more than a decent line of production for 30 minutes of play. Can you not concede that point??
If not, you simply have REALLY low standards.
Quote from: Ners on January 30, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
I didn't see the first half of the game...but I know Derrick played virtually the entire 2nd half and we got outscored that half 36-30...which is interesting, whereas in the 1st half we dominated...I'd still hypothesize that was due to less Derrick and Jake...and more Dawson, Burton, Mayo, JJJ...
But, because the bar has been set so incredibly low by Mr. Wilson, a game such as tonights which was probably the best of his MU career - seems really GREAT..when in reality, it really isn't anything more than a decent line of production for 30 minutes of play. Can you not concede that point??
If not, you simply have REALLY low standards.
NO, 8 assists, a dominating defensive performance, handled pressure well (1 TO) and managed every aspect of the game. That is what you want from a stud PG, not a serviceable one.
The difference between the 1st and 2nd half for the scoring was in the 2nd half they made a lot of really really difficult shots and we missed a ton of layups.
I'm shocked looking at the box score to see that all of the freshman played 15 minutes or less (Burton - 15, JJJ - 12, Dawson - 10). Felt like they were in for much longer. Perhaps they should've played more in the second half because they didn't do much wrong from what I saw. Sure, they are going to have defensive lapses, but for the offense they bring I think it's worth it.
Quote from: Ners on January 30, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
I didn't see the first half of the game...but I know Derrick played virtually the entire 2nd half and we got outscored that half 36-30...which is interesting, whereas in the 1st half we dominated...I'd still hypothesize that was due to less Derrick and Jake...and more Dawson, Burton, Mayo, JJJ...
But, because the bar has been set so incredibly low by Mr. Wilson, a game such as tonights which was probably the best of his MU career - seems really GREAT..when in reality, it really isn't anything more than a decent line of production for 30 minutes of play. Can you not concede that point??
If not, you simply have REALLY low standards.
I am not - repeat, am not - a huge Derrick Wilson fan. He has limitations that I'm well aware of. But tonight, he was not "serviceable". He was the best player on the court. On either team. He forced Providence's best player into a bunch of turnovers and hurried possessions and dominated the game defensively. His 4 steals and 8 to 1 assists to turnover ratio were outstanding. His diving steal at mid court and pass to Jamil (who fed Burton for the dunk) was as good a play as an MU player has made this year. So he scored 4 points - he only took 3 shots and we don't need him to score. There are other ways to be the best player on the floor than scoring. Derrick showed that tonight.
Quote from: Ners on January 30, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
I didn't see the first half of the game...but I know Derrick played virtually the entire 2nd half and we got outscored that half 36-30...which is interesting, whereas in the 1st half we dominated...I'd still hypothesize that was due to less Derrick and Jake...and more Dawson, Burton, Mayo, JJJ...
But, because the bar has been set so incredibly low by Mr. Wilson, a game such as tonights which was probably the best of his MU career - seems really GREAT..when in reality, it really isn't anything more than a decent line of production for 30 minutes of play. Can you not concede that point??
If not, you simply have REALLY low standards.
According to stat sheet play-by-play, Wilson played from 20 to the 15:43 mark. Score 8-2. Team 8 points scored in 4:17 minutes
Dawson entered at 15:43. Dawson played until the 11:45 (4 minute run). He scored 2pts. Score 11-5. Team 3 points scored in 4 minutes
Wilson entered at 11:45 and played until 7:09 (4:30 run) Score is 20-10. Team 9 Points in 4:30.
Dawson game in a 7:09 and played until 4:54 score is 24-10 (2:15 run) Team 4 points
Wilson comes in a 4:54 and plays to 2:12 (2:40 run) score is 26-12 Team 2 points
Dawson from 2:12 - 1:46 (:26 run) score is 28-14 Team 2 points
Derrick 1:46 - :55 (~1:00 run) score is 31-14 Team 3 points
Dawson :55 - 0 (:55 run) score is 31-14 0 points
First half
Derrick 21pts for but 9 points scored against
Dawson 10 points and 5 points against
Second half
Wilson plays 20 - 15:02 Team points 6 Score 37-23
Dawson plays 15:02 - 11:33 (3:30) Team point 0 score 37-34
Wilson plays 11:33 - end of game Score 61-50 24 Team points
Derrick Wilson 30 points. Points against 25 points
Dawson 0 points Points against 11 points
Overall
Wilson 51 points while in game. 34 point against
Dawson 10 points while in game. 16 points against with 3:30 offensive dry spell and 11-0 run
Doesn't support your story. Wilson was +17 while Dawson was -6 and the PG for the Providence 11-0 run.
If D.Wilson can continue to play like this, rotating him and Dawson as Dawson develops will be a very nice PG combo.
Dawson had a really good first half. His play dictated that he get extended run. In the second half, he came in on the line change early in the 16-0 run and was the PG for 11 of the 16. His play in the second half dictated that he only play 3:30 of the second half. The upperclassmen came in and Buzz rode them the last 10 minutes when MU righted the ship and pulled away. This is good coaching. Dawson's defense in the first half on Cotton was superb. His play in the first half meant that Derrick wasn't gassed having to go the last 10 minutes. This is as it should be.
NERS, if the rookie relief pitcher that you really like comes in and goes walk, walk, HBP, slam, do you argue the manager pulled him to quick when he doesn't face another batter? Dawson looked like a freshman last night. No shame in that. He was great in the first half, not so much in the second. He'll get better. Enjoy the win.
Dawson did not seem comfortable against Providence's press.
dawson was just fine, and he continues to impress me with his confidence (buzz says he's too dumb to know better...which cracks me up). wilson played a good game, and i don't think buzz will go away from wilson unless teams really play off of him. that hasn't happened the last two games, which is interesting. personally, if i were providence, i would have been fouling him anytime he got the ball in an advantageous position.
does anyone know how buzz subs...or did he comment at all on his philosophy last night?? i was trying to figure it out as the starters expanded the lead and were pulled after 3 min in the first half, on to have the second group come in and give up a 10-0 run over about 10 min. before he subbed again.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 30, 2014, 10:42:52 PM
He had 4 steals, not a couple. 8 assists to one turnover, which is terrific. And played GREAT defense (as the announcers pointed out several times) on Cotton. But because he only had 4 points (on 3 shots), you say serviceable. Wow. I guess when you're rooting against someone it can affect your eyesight.
The announcers, who you just applauded, also picked Ox as player of the game. So who are you listening to? Derrick did play well for most of the game, but his guy did score 20, most of it when Derrick was on him and he had help. If you want to go with him for 30 minutes a game, fine. Then they better be the first 30, because in close games they will play Hack a Derrick. And we all know how that will roll, for a 47% FT shooter.
OK, Derrick is now the stud and elite defender that Buzz says he is. One game out of 21.
Quote from: forgetful on January 30, 2014, 11:01:30 PM
NO, 8 assists, a dominating defensive performance, handled pressure well (1 TO) and managed every aspect of the game. That is what you want from a stud PG, not a serviceable one.
The difference between the 1st and 2nd half for the scoring was in the 2nd half they made a lot of really really difficult shots and we missed a ton of layups.
Managed every aspect of the game? His guy got 20. How did he manage the two brick FT's? He played well in one game and the crowd goes apesh$t. Embellishment is at an all time high here.
Oh, I get it. Now all cylinders are clicking. I feel it, Elite 8 or bust. All is well with the world.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2014, 07:31:00 AM
Managed every aspect of the game? His guy got 20. How did he manage the two brick FT's? He played well in one game and the crowd goes apesh$t. Embellishment is at an all time high here.
Oh, I get it. Now all cylinders are clicking. I feel it, Elite 8 or bust. All is well with the world.
Some people don't want to see. They have too much invested in a counter narrative. Others can't see. If you saw the game and didn't see how Derrick dominated on defense then you're in group #2.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2014, 07:31:00 AM
Managed every aspect of the game? His guy got 20. How did he manage the two brick FT's? He played well in one game and the crowd goes apesh$t. Embellishment is at an all time high here.
Oh, I get it. Now all cylinders are clicking. I feel it, Elite 8 or bust. All is well with the world.
"His guy got 20" on an EFG% of 41.6% (season average 46.5%) and a 94.5 offensive rating (117.7 average). It's ok though, keep picking a stat at random to demonstrate your points.
Lol you D Wil lovers are so delusional
Quote from: Dreadman24 on January 31, 2014, 08:02:03 AM
Lol you D Wil lovers are so delusional
Lol can't wait till all your JJJ predictions come true.
Quote from: Ners on January 30, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
I didn't see the first half of the game...but I know Derrick played virtually the entire 2nd half and we got outscored that half 36-30...which is interesting, whereas in the 1st half we dominated...I'd still hypothesize that was due to less Derrick and Jake...and more Dawson, Burton, Mayo, JJJ...
But, because the bar has been set so incredibly low by Mr. Wilson, a game such as tonights which was probably the best of his MU career - seems really GREAT..when in reality, it really isn't anything more than a decent line of production for 30 minutes of play. Can you not concede that point??
If not, you simply have REALLY low standards.
I think you hypothosis is off, I think the issue is when it is Jake and Derrick together. Derrick and Mayo/JJJ or Dawson and Jake would be much preferred.
I guess I won't concede the point because I don't understand what makes an extraordinary stat line for you. Wilson was responsible for 22 points either via assist or direct scoring. He also limited the highest scoring point guard in the big east to below his average. I'm not saying it's an amazing stat line, but I think within the context of the game it is just as impressive as Dawson's performance against Georgetown.
Not saying all is right, just saying last night Derrick earned it more, at Georgetown Dawson earned it more....against St John's we'll see who earns it more, I suspect Dawson will have a larger impact in that game than last night's
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2014, 07:26:03 AM
The announcers, who you just applauded, also picked Ox as player of the game. So who are you listening to? Derrick did play well for most of the game, but his guy did score 20, most of it when Derrick was on him and he had help. If you want to go with him for 30 minutes a game, fine. Then they better be the first 30, because in close games they will play Hack a Derrick. And we all know how that will roll, for a 47% FT shooter.
OK, Derrick is now the stud and elite defender that Buzz says he is. One game out of 21.
You have absolutely zero clue as to what happened in that game last night. Did you even watch it or did you just look at the box score this morning?
That's a serious question.
As for Hack a Derrick, we have played in a LOT of close games this year...haven't seen that brilliant strategy once that I can recall.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 31, 2014, 07:57:02 AM
"His guy got 20" on an EFG% of 41.6% (season average 46.5%) and a 94.5 offensive rating (117.7 average). It's ok though, keep picking a stat at random to demonstrate your points.
Yes, Derrick Wilson had only 4 points but he had 8 assists that led to 18 points (6 twos and 2 3's) so he had a direct hand in 36% of MU's offense in the game without counting a couple potential assists that led to FTs. In addition...
In the 10 minutes that Derrick was out of the game, Cotton went 3-5 from the floor, 1-3 on 3s, 2-2 on FTs, scored 9 points and didn't turn the ball over. During that time PC outscored MU by 7.
In the 30 minutes that Derrick was in the game, Cotton went 4-13 from the floor, 0-1 on 3s, 3-4 on FTs, scored 11 points and committed 5 TOs. During that time MU outscored PC by 18.
Enough said.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 31, 2014, 08:04:07 AM
Lol can't wait till all your JJJ predictions come true.
+1000
Quote from: Ners on January 30, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
I didn't see the first half of the game...but I know Derrick played virtually the entire 2nd half and we got outscored that half 36-30...which is interesting, whereas in the 1st half we dominated...I'd still hypothesize that was due to less Derrick and Jake...and more Dawson, Burton, Mayo, JJJ...
Plus/Minus for Providence:
Derrick Wilson: +18 (highest on the team)
John Dawson: -7 (lowest on the team...and only negative)
He was much more than "serviceable."
Quote from: mu03eng on January 31, 2014, 08:06:53 AM
I think you hypothosis is off, I think the issue is when it is Jake and Derrick together. Derrick and Mayo/JJJ or Dawson and Jake would be much preferred.
I don't disagree with that at all. I liked seeing JJJ out there early for that reason alone.
I was rooting for Buzz to put Dawson in during the last 2 minutes for offensive defensive switches, a la Oxtule. I was afraid of Providence going to a hack-a-Derrick strategy. Other than that, I thought the minute distribution was effective and deserved.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 31, 2014, 08:24:29 AM
Plus/Minus for Providence:
Derrick Wilson: +18 (highest on the team)
John Dawson: -7 (lowest on the team...and only negative)
He was much more than "serviceable."
This is 100% correct, and before we all become slurpers....this doesn't mean Dawson can't "flip the script" in the next game and have the highest positive impact. However this game Derrick was clearly better(like Dawson was against G'Town) and the minutes reflected that. It's not a 1 or 0 decision....it's called coaching.
Quote from: mu03eng on January 31, 2014, 08:30:29 AM
This is 100% correct, and before we all become slurpers....this doesn't mean Dawson can't "flip the script" in the next game and have the highest positive impact. However this game Derrick was clearly better(like Dawson was against G'Town) and the minutes reflected that. It's not a 1 or 0 decision....it's called coaching.
Right. God forbid we bring nuance into the discussion however.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 08:08:38 AM
In the 10 minutes that Derrick was out of the game, Cotton went 3-5 from the floor, 1-3 on 3s, 2-2 on FTs, scored 9 points and didn't turn the ball over. During that time PC outscored MU by 7.
In the 30 minutes that Derrick was in the game, Cotton went 4-13 from the floor, 0-1 on 3s, 3-4 on FTs, scored 11 points and committed 5 TOs. During that time MU outscored PC by 18.
Enough said.
It certainly is enough said. Wow. Thanks for putting that together.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 31, 2014, 08:34:47 AM
It certainly is enough said. Wow. Thanks for putting that together.
So Sultan, you are now personally monitoring Derrick's time on the floor. Where are you getting your stats from? By the way, when Derrick was guarding Cotton, he was getting much more help than when Mayo was on him, from my personal monitoring. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Merritt's Mustache put the numbers together. Sultan repeated them in a slightly different format.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2014, 08:49:14 AM
So Sultan, you are now personally monitoring Derrick's time on the floor. Where are you getting your stats from? By the way, when Derrick was guarding Cotton, he was getting much more help than when Mayo was on him, from my personal monitoring. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2013-2014/mugame21.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2013-2014/mugame21.html)
Go here, do math, find answer
Quote from: mu03eng on January 31, 2014, 08:52:40 AM
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2013-2014/mugame21.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2013-2014/mugame21.html)
Go here, do math, find answer
actually do work, harm agenda.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 31, 2014, 08:24:29 AM
Plus/Minus for Providence:
Derrick Wilson: +18 (highest on the team)
John Dawson: -7 (lowest on the team...and only negative)
He was much more than "serviceable."
Derrick played well...many feel his best game in MU career - and I'd probably agree with that. I know you and the other Derrick guys have been looking for anything to hang your hat on and support your argument, and finally after 21 games, you have a decent case you can make.
As for +/- I like it as a general indicator, yet a lot goes into that, such as who you are paired on the floor with. In the 2nd half Dawson was -11 in a 3:32 stint. In that time, he had the "pleasure" of playing with 9 different guys. YES 9 DIFFERENT GUYS in a 3:32 stint of action. Talk about disjointed. Meanwhile, Carson Desroisers was +13 during his stint of 5 minutes during that same 3:32 stretch - think Desroisers was a huge difference maker in the game? Hence the slippery slope of +/-
All that said, Derrick played well last night - I do wonder if teams will continue to press, because that actually gave us a fast break game for the 1st time all year. Was a little surprised Derrick handled it as well as he did..and it ultimately helped him and the team a lot. Curious decision by Cooley with a roster only going 6 deep.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 31, 2014, 08:49:14 AM
So Sultan, you are now personally monitoring Derrick's time on the floor. Where are you getting your stats from? By the way, when Derrick was guarding Cotton, he was getting much more help than when Mayo was on him, from my personal monitoring. I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
The +/- stats I got from the boxscore:
http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/2014/01/30/providence-50-marquette-61
Yeah...beauty to me is seeing our starting PG go +18 and holding a likely first team all conference PG to 4-13 shooting and 5 TOs when he is in the game.
I know...silly of me....I'm such a slurper.
Quote from: mu03eng on January 31, 2014, 08:52:40 AM
http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2013-2014/mugame21.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2013-2014/mugame21.html)
Go here, do math, find answer
Exactly right.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 31, 2014, 08:57:36 AM
The +/- stats I got from the boxscore:
http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/2014/01/30/providence-50-marquette-61
Yeah...beauty to me is seeing our starting PG go +18 and holding a likely first team all conference PG to 4-13 shooting and 5 TOs when he is in the game.
I know...silly of me....I'm such a slurper.
Not the plus and minus stats, which are meaningless, but shots when being guarded by Derrick. Or was that just the eyeball test?
Derrick played very well last night, maybe his best game and he was crucial to us winning. I still like mixing in Dawson, but last night Wilson was definitely the better option.
One of the differences against the press was that they kept an offensive player behind the ball to throw the crosscourt outlet pass to. They failed to do that against SH. The press would come, the PG would pass across to (usually) Jamil, who would then pass forward before the trap arrived. Press break 101.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 08:56:03 AM
Derrick played well...many feel his best game in MU career - and I'd probably agree with that. I know you and the other Derrick guys have been looking for anything to hang your hat on and support your argument, and finally after 21 games, you have a decent case you can make.
As for +/- I like it as a general indicator, yet a lot goes into that, such as who you are paired on the floor with. In the 2nd half Dawson was -11 in a 3:32 stint. In that time, he had the "pleasure" of playing with 9 different guys. YES 9 DIFFERENT GUYS in a 3:32 stint of action. Talk about disjointed. Meanwhile, Carson Desroisers was +13 during his stint of 5 minutes during that same 3:32 stretch - think Desroisers was a huge difference maker in the game? Hence the slippery slope of +/-
I don't disagree with you regarding +/-. However it was pretty clear that Derrick was way better last nigh. Merritt's more detailed breakdown pretty much showed that.
Quote from: tower912 on January 31, 2014, 09:02:10 AM
One of the differences against the press was that they kept an offensive player behind the ball to throw the crosscourt outlet pass to. They failed to do that against SH. The press would come, the PG would pass across to (usually) Jamil, who would then pass forward before the trap arrived. Press break 101.
And Derrick waited for the second guy to commit to coming to him before making the pass to Jamil.
Quote from: frozena pizza on January 31, 2014, 08:59:40 AM
Derrick played very well last night, maybe his best game and he was crucial to us winning. I still like mixing in Dawson, but last night Wilson was definitely the better option.
Exactly. And against SJU Dawson might be. It's what I have been saying all along.
Another epic thread. Where we discuss the same things as 15 other threads.
Can't wait for tomorrow.
Wonder why a lot of the better/older posters left.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 08:56:03 AM
As for +/- I like it as a general indicator, yet a lot goes into that, such as who you are paired on the floor with. In the 2nd half Dawson was -11 in a 3:32 stint. In that time, he had the "pleasure" of playing with 9 different guys. YES 9 DIFFERENT GUYS in a 3:32 stint of action. Talk about disjointed. Meanwhile, Carson Desroisers was +13 during his stint of 5 minutes during that same 3:32 stretch - think Desroisers was a huge difference maker in the game? Hence the slippery slope of +/-
You like it as a general indicator - translation - when the numbers confirm your bias, you like them and take them at face value. When they don't, the numbers are flawed. I GUARANTEE that if John Dawson ever is a +18 while Derrick is a -7 those numbers would be referenced by you as proof positive that Derrick should never see the floor. No excuses, no mitigation. Just another couple hundred posts about how right you are.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 31, 2014, 09:19:22 AM
You like it as a general indicator - translation - when the numbers confirm your bias, you like them and take them at face value. When they don't, the numbers are flawed. I GUARANTEE that if John Dawson ever is a +18 while Derrick is a -7 those numbers would be referenced by you as proof positive that Derrick should never see the floor. No excuses, no mitigation. Just another couple hundred posts about how right you are.
Happy to bathe in the glory when he is right, but won't admit it when he is wrong.
Sounds like most of the population of the USA.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 08:56:03 AM
As for +/- I like it as a general indicator, yet a lot goes into that, such as who you are paired on the floor with. In the 2nd half Dawson was -11 in a 3:32 stint. In that time, he had the "pleasure" of playing with 9 different guys. YES 9 DIFFERENT GUYS in a 3:32 stint of action. Talk about disjointed. Meanwhile, Carson Desroisers was +13 during his stint of 5 minutes during that same 3:32 stretch - think Desroisers was a huge difference maker in the game? Hence the slippery slope of +/-
All that said, Derrick played well last night - I do wonder if teams will continue to press, because that actually gave us a fast break game for the 1st time all year. Was a little surprised Derrick handled it as well as he did..and it ultimately helped him and the team a lot. Curious decision by Cooley with a roster only going 6 deep.
Please specify the exact laboratory conditions under which Dawson should get his extended run time to verify his viability. Holy crap, how could a point guard possibly play with 9 different players and be successful...the MADNESS!!! Derrick played with 9 different players over the course of the game as well.
Lastly, and this is where I've turned on you from a passionate Dawson advocate to just an irrational guy
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 08:56:03 AM
Derrick played well...many feel his best game in MU career - and I'd probably agree with that. I know you and the other Derrick guys have been looking for anything to hang your hat on and support your argument, and finally after 21 games, you have a decent case you can make.
Hang our hat? Really? The group that tends to disagree with you has brought up Dawson's less than stellar performances in the Xavier, Butler, and a couple of other games. Your response "but he got 30+ minutes at Georgetown and look how that turned out". So if we are being "hat hangers" with last nights game that's only because we learned from you the professional.
I'm thinking I should add this to my signature "I support both DWil and Dawson, without malice or bias" and hope I can shed the slurper label ;D
Quote from: mu03eng on January 31, 2014, 09:21:40 AM
Please specify the exact laboratory conditions under which Dawson should get his extended run time to verify his viability. Holy crap, how could a point guard possibly play with 9 different players and be successful...the MADNESS!!! Derrick played with 9 different players over the course of the game as well.
Lastly, and this is where I've turned on you from a passionate Dawson advocate to just an irrational guy
Hang our hat? Really? The group that tends to disagree with you has brought up Dawson's less than stellar performances in the Xavier, Butler, and a couple of other games. Your response "but he got 30+ minutes at Georgetown and look how that turned out". So if we are being "hat hangers" with last nights game that's only because we learned from you the professional.
I'm thinking I should add this to my signature "I support both DWil and Dawson, without malice or bias" and hope I can shed the slurper label ;D
The point as I've said 1000 times is that we've had 18 of 21 games with Derrick getting 30 and very similar results. Essentially, he's failed 8 of 10 times against decent competition - last night and George Washington being the 2 times he's been good.
Regarding having 9 different guys rotated into your time running the point in just 3:32 - that's just wacky. Most anyone who has played basketball at even just the high school level understands the value of consistent minutes, and playing with a consistent group of teammates. Sure, you can sub a guy, two, or three in over the course of a 10 minute run of action....but 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's crazy. It's not playing with 9 different guys over the course of 30-40 minutes....its playing with 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's just totally disjointed and allows for no flow to be gotten into by a team.
You are aware that most coaches shorten their bench/rotation to 8-9 guys in both college and pro, even though they have as many as 12-13 guys sitting on their bench. I suspect there is a reason for that...
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:37:23 AM
You are aware that most coaches shorten their bench/rotation to 8-9 guys in both college and pro, even though they have as many as 12-13 guys sitting on their bench. I suspect there is a reason for that...
Is it because the guys on the end of the bench usually aren't as good?
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on January 31, 2014, 09:42:57 AM
Is it because the guys on the end of the bench usually aren't as good?
Yes...and I'd say you can park Juan, Otule, Jake, and Derrick there....because Deonte, Gardner, JJJ/Todd, and Dawson are all better than those guys.
It's insane when you have what should be two end of the bench players getting the most and 3rd most minutes on the team.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:47:09 AM
Yes...and I'd say you can park Juan, Otule, Jake, and Derrick there....because Deonte, Gardner, JJJ/Todd, and Dawson are all better than those guys.
It's insane when you have what should be two end of the bench players getting the most and 3rd most minutes on the team.
By saying they are end of bench players you are completely ignoring any concept of a depth chart. Some of the lesser talented guys play more than more talented guys out of necessity of the skills that they are able to bring to the basketball court.
You've gone from saying Dawson should get majority minutes to Dawson should be getting all the minutes... This is hitting a critical point.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:37:23 AM
Regarding having 9 different guys rotated into your time running the point in just 3:32 - that's just wacky. Most anyone who has played basketball at even just the high school level understands the value of consistent minutes, and playing with a consistent group of teammates. Sure, you can sub a guy, two, or three in over the course of a 10 minute run of action....but 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's crazy. It's not playing with 9 different guys over the course of 30-40 minutes....its playing with 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's just totally disjointed and allows for no flow to be gotten into by a team.
First of all, Dawson played with 8 other players, not 9. Buzz subbed out 4 for 4. It's not like there were 8 different substitutions throughout the 3 minutes.
Second, Derrick started the second half and played with 7 different guys in 3:35. Didn't seem to have much of an effect on him.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:47:09 AM
Yes...and I'd say you can park Juan, Otule, Jake, and Derrick there....because Deonte, Gardner, JJJ/Todd, and Dawson are all better than those guys.
It's insane when you have what should be two end of the bench players getting the most and 3rd most minutes on the team.
I'm not talking about MU specifically, I'm just talking about your assertion on why rotations are shortened in the NBA and college.
I assume it's because the guys on the end of the bench aren't as good.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 31, 2014, 09:57:49 AM
By saying they are end of bench players you are completely ignoring any concept of a depth chart. Some of the lesser talented guys play more than more talented guys out of necessity of the skills that they are able to bring to the basketball court.
You've gone from saying Dawson should get majority minutes to Dawson should be getting all the minutes... This is hitting a critical point.
Sorry - Derrick should get 10-15 minutes and Dawson 25-30...
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 10:02:44 AM
Sorry - Derrick should get 10-15 minutes and Dawson 25-30...
Ok a 15/25 split I can handle one way or another. "Parking on the bench" read a lot more extreme to me than that. How many minutes should Jake/Juan/Otule be getting in your opinion?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 09:58:39 AM
First of all, Dawson played with 8 other players, not 9. Buzz subbed out 4 for 4. It's not like there were 8 different substitutions throughout the 3 minutes.
Second, Derrick started the second half and played with 7 different guys in 3:35. Didn't seem to have much of an effect on him.
Sorry...Dawson played with 9 guys in his 3:32 - - Juan, Steve, Deonte, JJJ, Otule, Todd, Jake, Gardner, Jamil.
And Derrick's stint was 4:58 seconds...with 7 different guys....and....he was -3 in that time. Contrast that with the last 11:03 of the game when Derrick, Jake, Todd, Gardner and Jamil essentially got ALL the minutes - all of them were +6-8. The consistency of playing time helps...yet what the consistent lineup/depth chart should be for 25-30 minutes:
Dawson/Derrick
Mayo/JJJ/Jake
Burton/Steve T
Jamil/Steve T
Gardner/Otule
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 10:02:44 AM
Sorry - Derrick should get 10-15 minutes and Dawson 25-30...
I think Buzz is just going to ride the hot hand, so it's going to vary from game to game.
It's going to be like Otule/Gardner in previous years.
With this said, I have to give Dawson a lot of credit. He's gone from a DNP guy, to a guy who is getting regular minutes. I wasn't expecting that kind of growth in 1 season.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:37:23 AM
The point as I've said 1000 times is that we've had 18 of 21 games with Derrick getting 30 and very similar results. Essentially, he's failed 8 of 10 times against decent competition - last night and George Washington being the 2 times he's been good.
Regarding having 9 different guys rotated into your time running the point in just 3:32 - that's just wacky. Most anyone who has played basketball at even just the high school level understands the value of consistent minutes, and playing with a consistent group of teammates. Sure, you can sub a guy, two, or three in over the course of a 10 minute run of action....but 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's crazy. It's not playing with 9 different guys over the course of 30-40 minutes....its playing with 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's just totally disjointed and allows for no flow to be gotten into by a team.
You are aware that most coaches shorten their bench/rotation to 8-9 guys in both college and pro, even though they have as many as 12-13 guys sitting on their bench. I suspect there is a reason for that...
Do you have any clue what Buzz was trying to do yesterday?
Buzz started a longer, more athletic line up to completely f*ck with Cotton and disrupt the flow of Providence's offense. And it worked. Marquette went out to a huge lead...ran guys on and off the floor...kept up the pressure...and built a huge lead.
And that is someone a negative in your mind? Seriously you just disparaged one of the main reasons Marquette won that game!
Buzz has often done this during his time here. He apparently doesn't agree with your "extended run" theory.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:37:23 AM
The point as I've said 1000 times is that we've had 18 of 21 games with Derrick getting 30 and very similar results. Essentially, he's failed 8 of 10 times against decent competition - last night and George Washington being the 2 times he's been good.
Regarding having 9 different guys rotated into your time running the point in just 3:32 - that's just wacky. Most anyone who has played basketball at even just the high school level understands the value of consistent minutes, and playing with a consistent group of teammates. Sure, you can sub a guy, two, or three in over the course of a 10 minute run of action....but 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's crazy. It's not playing with 9 different guys over the course of 30-40 minutes....its playing with 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's just totally disjointed and allows for no flow to be gotten into by a team.
You are aware that most coaches shorten their bench/rotation to 8-9 guys in both college and pro, even though they have as many as 12-13 guys sitting on their bench. I suspect there is a reason for that...
I really, really hate it when anyone says something like this about any individual player. It's a fucking team game.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 10:09:43 AM
Sorry...Dawson played with 9 guys in his 3:32 - - Juan, Steve, Deonte, JJJ, Otule, Todd, Jake, Gardner, Jamil.
And Derrick's stint was 4:58 seconds...with 7 different guys....and....he was -3 in that time. Contrast that with the last 11:03 of the game when Derrick, Jake, Todd, Gardner and Jamil essentially got ALL the minutes - all of them were +6-8. The consistency of playing time helps...yet what the consistent lineup/depth chart should be for 25-30 minutes:
Dawson/Derrick
Mayo/JJJ/Jake
Burton/Steve T
Jamil/Steve T
Gardner/Otule
Actually, Taylor came out when Dawson came in for that stretch. Regardless, it doesn't really matter.
You've proven over and over and over and over and over and over again that you're going to discount everything positive that Derrick Wilson does and spin everything that Dawson does into something positive and/or have an excuse for why he played poorly or made a mistake. What's the point? What are you hoping to accomplish? Can't you just enjoy that Derrick played a really good game and Marquette won? Or is your desire to be right so great that you can't admit that a player you hope fails helped lead MU to a victory?
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:37:23 AM
The point as I've said 1000 times is that we've had 18 of 21 games with Derrick getting 30 and very similar results. Essentially, he's failed 8 of 10 times against decent competition - last night and George Washington being the 2 times he's been good.
Regarding having 9 different guys rotated into your time running the point in just 3:32 - that's just wacky. Most anyone who has played basketball at even just the high school level understands the value of consistent minutes, and playing with a consistent group of teammates. Sure, you can sub a guy, two, or three in over the course of a 10 minute run of action....but 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's crazy. It's not playing with 9 different guys over the course of 30-40 minutes....its playing with 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's just totally disjointed and allows for no flow to be gotten into by a team.
You are aware that most coaches shorten their bench/rotation to 8-9 guys in both college and pro, even though they have as many as 12-13 guys sitting on their bench. I suspect there is a reason for that...
I planned basketball at the high school level and continue to play in rec leagues and pick up leagues. Depending on the team, consistency makes sense. However, the style of play Buzz was going for last night, especially in the first half was a slight slower version of 40 minutes of hell. He was running fresh legs out there and forcing Providence(with a very short bench) to adjust every time to the various line-ups...IT WAS PART OF THE STRATEGY. So Buzz was rolling Dawson into the fold, and for consistency sake it was only 2 line-up iterations, 4 players for 4 players.
Missouri and UAB and Louisville to a certain extent when playing the pressure defense and offense can go 10-11 deep.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 10:48:15 AM
Actually, Taylor came out when Dawson came in for that stretch. Regardless, it doesn't really matter.
You've proven over and over and over and over and over and over again that you're going to discount everything positive that Derrick Wilson does and spin everything that Dawson does into something positive and/or have an excuse for why he played poorly or made a mistake. What's the point? What are you hoping to accomplish? Can't you just enjoy that Derrick played a really good game and Marquette won? Or is your desire to be right so great that you can't admit that a player you hope fails helped lead MU to a victory?
+ 10 gazillion
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 10:48:15 AM
Actually, Taylor came out when Dawson came in for that stretch. Regardless, it doesn't really matter.
You've proven over and over and over and over and over and over again that you're going to discount everything positive that Derrick Wilson does and spin everything that Dawson does into something positive and/or have an excuse for why he played poorly or made a mistake. What's the point? What are you hoping to accomplish? Can't you just enjoy that Derrick played a really good game and Marquette won? Or is your desire to be right so great that you can't admit that a player you hope fails helped lead MU to a victory?
What part of me giving my vote to Derrick for SOTG indicates I didn't feel he helped lead us to victory last night?? I'm glad we won. Having said that, thought Cooley was an idiot for trying to press a team that is gonna be 4-5 in the halfcourt...and all the while only having 6 guys to play!!
What annoys me about you and some of the other hardcore Derrick backers are how you ignore the overall data of 21 games, with Derrick having been given amply opportunity, more opportunity than any other player on the team...and you defend the guy to death....yet Dawson gets limited, very fragmented run...and you draw all kinds of negative conclusions about his ability to help the team be better - even though the kid can make free throws and 3 point shots. :)
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 11:23:30 AM
What part of me giving my vote to Derrick for SOTG indicates I didn't feel he helped lead us to victory last night?? I'm glad we won. Having said that, thought Cooley was an idiot for trying to press a team that is gonna be 4-5 in the halfcourt...and all the while only having 6 guys to play!!
What annoys me about you and some of the other hardcore Derrick backers are how you ignore the overall data of 21 games, with Derrick having been given amply opportunity, more opportunity than any other player on the team...and you defend the guy to death....yet Dawson gets limited, very fragmented run...and you draw all kinds of negative conclusions about his ability to help the team be better - even though the kid can make free throws and 3 point shots. :)
You're learning very well from Chicos.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 11:23:30 AM
What annoys me about you and some of the other hardcore Derrick backers are how you ignore the overall data of 21 games, with Derrick having been given amply opportunity, more opportunity than any other player on the team...and you defend the guy to death....yet Dawson gets limited, very fragmented run...and you draw all kinds of negative conclusions about his ability to help the team be better - even though the kid can make free throws and 3 point shots. :)
Ugh...seriously?
No one is drawing "negative conclusions about (Dawson's) ability to help the team." The people you label "hardcore Derrick backers" for the most part have acknowledged his shortcomings, AND suggested that Buzz should (and will) go with the hot hand, BUT don't think Dawson should be "given the keys" and play 30+ minutes a game.
That's all.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 31, 2014, 11:30:29 AM
Ugh...seriously?
No one is drawing "negative conclusions about (Dawson's) ability to help the team." The people you label "hardcore Derrick backers" for the most part have acknowledged his shortcomings, AND suggested that Buzz should (and will) go with the hot hand, BUT don't think Dawson should be "given the keys" and play 30+ minutes a game.
That's all.
After my rousing applause of this post, I'm done in this thread in particular, with Ners in general, and perhaps a Scoop vacation as well.
This Dawson/Derrick thing is getting old....
Im going with whoever is on the court.....
Quote from: Nevada233 on January 31, 2014, 11:41:26 AM
This Dawson/Derrick thing is getting old....
Im going with whoever is on the court.....
That's where the alleged Derrick side has always been. Welcome.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 09:37:23 AM
The point as I've said 1000 times is that we've had 18 of 21 games with Derrick getting 30 and very similar results. Essentially, he's failed 8 of 10 times against decent competition - last night and George Washington being the 2 times he's been good.
Regarding having 9 different guys rotated into your time running the point in just 3:32 - that's just wacky. Most anyone who has played basketball at even just the high school level understands the value of consistent minutes, and playing with a consistent group of teammates. Sure, you can sub a guy, two, or three in over the course of a 10 minute run of action....but 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's crazy. It's not playing with 9 different guys over the course of 30-40 minutes....its playing with 9 different guys in 3:32 - that's just totally disjointed and allows for no flow to be gotten into by a team.
You are aware that most coaches shorten their bench/rotation to 8-9 guys in both college and pro, even though they have as many as 12-13 guys sitting on their bench. I suspect there is a reason for that...
If you didn't spew out falsities you might gain credibility in your position.
Step 1: Go to any sports website with a box score. Count the games Wilson was 30+ vs the number of games he played. It is 12 games out of 21 that he has played 30+. In those games MU is 6-6. Of the 6 losses 5 where to KenPom top 50. 2 wins were against the Top 50 including number 35 GW and Providence 48). Georgetown is not in the top 50 (68).
Step 2: Why is it that playing with 9 different guys only impacted one of the two players.
I will add MU is 6 and 3 against teams when he didn't play 30+ minutes. Those 6 wins include:
Grambling State
New Hampshire
CS Fullerton
IUPUI
Ball State
Georgetown
The three games we lost include games against
Xavier
Creighton
NMU
Take out the cupcakes and MU is 1 and 3 when Wilson plays < 30+ minutes.
Again MU's team record should not be used as a measure of judgement because this analysis shows that our record regardless of Wilson's amount of play doesn't reflect a better record when Wilson plays less.
All but one of MU's losses are in KenPom's Top 60. Butler being the exception.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on January 31, 2014, 10:09:55 AM
I think Buzz is just going to ride the hot hand, so it's going to vary from game to game.
It's going to be like Otule/Gardner in previous years.
With this said, I have to give Dawson a lot of credit. He's gone from a DNP guy, to a guy who is getting regular minutes. I wasn't expecting that kind of growth in 1 season.
Whose hot hand was Buzz riding in the second half?
Quote from: madtownwarrior on January 31, 2014, 12:30:39 PM
Whose hot hand was Buzz riding in the second half?
Pretty obvious. DW was playing well on both ends of the floor.
Once the upperclassmen came back in the game at the end of the 16-0 run, after the Friars had cut it to 37-34, where did MU get there 24 points from during the rest of the game? (Hint: the ones MU wanted to score. Gardner, Jamil, Todd) Derrick and Jake were out there because, like Buzz has said multiple times, they were playing the scouting report on defense. See Cotton's comparative numbers elsewhere. So, 3 guys to score, two to play good defense, all 5 have earned Buzz's trust in a tight game more than the freshmen. Why is this so unlawful carnal knowledging difficult to understand?
Quote from: BallBoy on January 31, 2014, 12:13:54 PM
If you didn't spew out falsities you might gain credibility in your position.
Step 1: Go to any sports website with a box score. Count the games Wilson was 30+ vs the number of games he played. It is 12 games out of 21 that he has played 30+. In those games MU is 6-6. Of the 6 losses 5 where to KenPom top 50. 2 wins were against the Top 50 including number 35 GW and Providence 48). Georgetown is not in the top 50 (68).
Step 2: Why is it that playing with 9 different guys only impacted one of the two players.
Ahh...my bad...for the SEASON, Derrick averages 29.4 minutes per GAME. As you point out, 12 were over 30..and some well over 30...and there have been 7 games other than the 12 you mention where he was in the high 20s...talk about splitting hairs?
Playing with 9 different guys isn't the problem over the course of 30 minutes of action. If you could read...wouldn't have to reiterate the point - the point was playing with 9 different guys in the span of 3:32 seconds...is quite different, and pretty ludicrous actually. Derrick had a stretch to start the second half where Merrit pointed out he played with 7 different guys....over a 5 minute stretch...and he was -3 in that time...
Bottom line. Your boy is shooting 8% from 3, 46% from the FT line, 38% from the field for the season. Sorry I'm not impressed with those percentages in 29.4 minutes of play to "produce" 5.0ppg, 4apg, 4rpg, and 1.5 turnovers per game.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on January 31, 2014, 12:32:10 PM
Pretty obvious. DW was playing well on both ends of the floor.
Let's condense this into one post and save everyone the trouble...
Derrick was playing well? Really? He only scored 4 points but his man scored 20! Yeah, real hot hand ::)
Look at the splits. Most of Cotton's damage came with Derrick on the bench.
Well, if Buzz gave Dawson as much as help on Cotton as he gave Derrick, I guarantee he wouldn't have scored at all.
How can you guarantee that? Besides, Mayo was on Cotton a lot of the time.
Dawson had to play with 9 different guys in a span of 3:32. I played ball at the Rec Center so I know that it's tough to get into a rhythm like that. Besides, Derrick only scored 4 points! Dawson scored more than that in OT against world-beater Gtown. Think of what he could have done with 30 minutes against also-ran Providence!
Dawson played well in the Gtown game which is why Buzz gave him extended minutes. He wasn't playing well last night and Derrick was, so Derrick got more minutes.
Just like Derrick has gotten 30 minutes a game all season and all season MU keeps losing to top 50 teams. Give Dawson those minutes and MU's record would be much better. Just look at what he did against Gtown!
Derrick played 30 minutes against an RPI top 50 team last night and MU won.
Yeah, because Cooley pressed and Dawson played with 9 different guys. Besides, you can't use small samples sizes to judge the PGs. Dawson has "it," I mean look at the Georgetown game!
Aren't you using small sample sizes to judge Dawson since you keep coming back to the Gtown game?
Derrick's shooting 8% on 3s!
(repeat on different thread)
OK, to end the argument of Derrick/Dawson, the split should be about 25 to 15 minutes for Derrick, except in close games where we are ahead, derrick cannot be in the game on offense, because of his FT problems. You cannot have a 46-50% PG in at crunch time when the fouls are flying.
Quote from: madtownwarrior on January 31, 2014, 12:30:39 PM
Whose hot hand was Buzz riding in the second half?
He got off of John after after a 0-11 run and put in Derrick. Never got closer than a 3 point game after that (what it was when Derrick entered), stayed mostly in the 7-11 range. He rode Derrick, Todd, Jamil and Davante pretty much the rest of the way.
Quote from: Ners on January 31, 2014, 12:40:44 PM
Playing with 9 different guys isn't the problem over the course of 30 minutes of action. If you could read...wouldn't have to reiterate the point - the point was playing with 9 different guys in the span of 3:32 seconds...is quite different, and pretty ludicrous actually.
You make it sound as if these guys were constantly coming in and out.
Dawson came in for Derrick and played 1:53 with Todd, Jamil, Jake and Davante...and went -6.
Those four went out and JJJ, Otule, Burton and Anderson came in for about 1:30 and went -5.
Is that really ludicrous?
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on January 31, 2014, 08:08:02 AM
You have absolutely zero clue as to what happened in that game last night. Did you even watch it or did you just look at the box score this morning?
That's a serious question.
As for Hack a Derrick, we have played in a LOT of close games this year...haven't seen that brilliant strategy once that I can recall.
Yeah, I watched the game. I already said derrick had a good game, but Cotton get 20, and Derrick got tons of help on Cotton, including from OX who everybody says he can't play D. And by the way, it is a brilliant strategy, glad you agree. Seriously!!
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 12:50:35 PM
Let's condense this into one post and save everyone the trouble...
Derrick was playing well? Really? He only scored 4 points but his man scored 20! Yeah, real hot hand ::)
Look at the splits. Most of Cotton's damage came with Derrick on the bench.
Well, if Buzz gave Dawson as much as help on Cotton as he gave Derrick, I guarantee he wouldn't have scored at all.
How can you guarantee that? Besides, Mayo was on Cotton a lot of the time.
Dawson had to play with 9 different guys in a span of 3:32. I played ball at the Rec Center so I know that it's tough to get into a rhythm like that. Besides, Derrick only scored 4 points! Dawson scored more than that in OT against world-beater Gtown. Think of what he could have done with 30 minutes against also-ran Providence!
Dawson played well in the Gtown game which is why Buzz gave him extended minutes. He wasn't playing well last night and Derrick was, so Derrick got more minutes.
Just like Derrick has gotten 30 minutes a game all season and all season MU keeps losing to top 50 teams. Give Dawson those minutes and MU's record would be much better. Just look at what he did against Gtown!
Derrick played 30 minutes against an RPI top 50 team last night and MU won.
Yeah, because Cooley pressed and Dawson played with 9 different guys. Besides, you can't use small samples sizes to judge the PGs. Dawson has "it," I mean look at the Georgetown game!
Aren't you using small sample sizes to judge Dawson since you keep coming back to the Gtown game?
Derrick's shooting 8% on 3s!
(repeat on different thread)
Perfection
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 12:50:35 PM
Let's condense this into one post and save everyone the trouble...
Derrick was playing well? Really? He only scored 4 points but his man scored 20! Yeah, real hot hand ::)
Look at the splits. Most of Cotton's damage came with Derrick on the bench.
Well, if Buzz gave Dawson as much as help on Cotton as he gave Derrick, I guarantee he wouldn't have scored at all.
How can you guarantee that? Besides, Mayo was on Cotton a lot of the time.
Dawson had to play with 9 different guys in a span of 3:32. I played ball at the Rec Center so I know that it's tough to get into a rhythm like that. Besides, Derrick only scored 4 points! Dawson scored more than that in OT against world-beater Gtown. Think of what he could have done with 30 minutes against also-ran Providence!
Dawson played well in the Gtown game which is why Buzz gave him extended minutes. He wasn't playing well last night and Derrick was, so Derrick got more minutes.
Just like Derrick has gotten 30 minutes a game all season and all season MU keeps losing to top 50 teams. Give Dawson those minutes and MU's record would be much better. Just look at what he did against Gtown!
Derrick played 30 minutes against an RPI top 50 team last night and MU won.
Yeah, because Cooley pressed and Dawson played with 9 different guys. Besides, you can't use small samples sizes to judge the PGs. Dawson has "it," I mean look at the Georgetown game!
Aren't you using small sample sizes to judge Dawson since you keep coming back to the Gtown game?
Derrick's shooting 8% on 3s!
(repeat on different thread)
That strawman you built is beautiful, not sure why you went ahead and tore it down.
Plus minus for last night......Derrick and Burton lead the way....
http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/2014/01/30/providence-50-marquette-61
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 31, 2014, 12:50:35 PM
Let's condense this into one post and save everyone the trouble...
Derrick was playing well? Really? He only scored 4 points but his man scored 20! Yeah, real hot hand ::)
Look at the splits. Most of Cotton's damage came with Derrick on the bench.
Well, if Buzz gave Dawson as much as help on Cotton as he gave Derrick, I guarantee he wouldn't have scored at all.
How can you guarantee that? Besides, Mayo was on Cotton a lot of the time.
Dawson had to play with 9 different guys in a span of 3:32. I played ball at the Rec Center so I know that it's tough to get into a rhythm like that. Besides, Derrick only scored 4 points! Dawson scored more than that in OT against world-beater Gtown. Think of what he could have done with 30 minutes against also-ran Providence!
Dawson played well in the Gtown game which is why Buzz gave him extended minutes. He wasn't playing well last night and Derrick was, so Derrick got more minutes.
Just like Derrick has gotten 30 minutes a game all season and all season MU keeps losing to top 50 teams. Give Dawson those minutes and MU's record would be much better. Just look at what he did against Gtown!
Derrick played 30 minutes against an RPI top 50 team last night and MU won.
Yeah, because Cooley pressed and Dawson played with 9 different guys. Besides, you can't use small samples sizes to judge the PGs. Dawson has "it," I mean look at the Georgetown game!
Aren't you using small sample sizes to judge Dawson since you keep coming back to the Gtown game?
Derrick's shooting 8% on 3s!
(repeat on different thread)
Fun stuff!
And alarmingly accurate.