Here's Vander Blue's stat line from his freshman season
mpg: 19
fg: 1.9
fga: 4.7
fgp: 39.4
ftp: 60.8
rb: 2.8
ast: 1.6
stl: .9
blk: .2
to: 1.4
pts: 5.1
Now here's Burton's stats so far through his freshman season.
mpg: 13.3
fg: 2.6
fga: 5.7
fgp: 45.5
ftp: 63.6
rb: 2.3
ast: .6
stl: 1.2
blk: .6
to: .9
pts: 6.5
I think the only difference is that Vander had more talent around him his freshman year. On a team like ours that has trouble filling up the basket I think Burton needs to continue taking shots. He's the only guy on the team that can catch the ball up top and break his man down 1 on 1 every time. Now if he could just see the better shot via the pass our offense would improve exponentially. The only way that's going to happen is with playing time. He's a rotational nightmare for opposing defenses as he gets guys out of rotation with his penetration.
He's the only guy who THINKS he can take his guy every time. I love his fearlessness, but he does need to learn the difference between a good and bad shot.
IMO, Burton is much better as a freshman than Vander was. Vander started every game, which I believe was the fulfillment of a recruiting promise.
Quote from: tower912 on February 05, 2014, 11:46:30 AM
He's the only guy who THINKS he can take his guy every time. I love his fearlessness, but he does need to learn the difference between a good and bad shot.
I think it's a catch 22 considering their statlines indicate similar success at this point in their careers. Did Vander log more minutes because his team had DJO, Crowder, Cadougan and Byucks who were a better team and could bail out the freshman? Does Burton's obvious offensive contributions on a team who struggles to score for long stretches mean more minutes would benefit the team or hurt the team with his liabilities because he's not surrounded by the talent Blue had as a freshman?
I can't tell. But I think his future is much brighter than Blue moving forward.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 05, 2014, 11:51:37 AM
IMO, Burton is much better as a freshman than Vander was. Vander started every game, which I believe was the fulfillment of a recruiting promise.
Blue started 12 of 37 games as a frosh.
Quote from: tower912 on February 05, 2014, 11:46:30 AM
He's the only guy who THINKS he can take his guy every time. I love his fearlessness, but he does need to learn the difference between a good and bad shot.
And, also, that he does not have to shoot every time he gets the ball... ;)
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on February 05, 2014, 11:55:24 AM
Blue started 12 of 37 games as a frosh.
Buzz: "If you come to Marquette, I promise you Vander that you will start in over 30% of our games as a freshman."
I understand Buzz's criticism of him. He seems to think any shot he can possibly get off is by definition a good shot. He needs to learn to use his right hand better and play better defense. If he doesn't get the steal, he is getting beat.
Quote from: tower912 on February 05, 2014, 11:46:30 AM
He's the only guy who THINKS he can take his guy every time. I love his fearlessness, but he does need to learn the difference between a good and bad shot.
Between struggling with what seem to be simple defense rotations, to trying to do everything offensively, I think you are seeing a guy who was poorly coached on a bad high school team.
But he had made strides and is going to be very good. As this season moves on, the freshmen all look better and better to me.
A better comparison, which I already brought up in another thread, is McNeal's sophomore year. Check out the efficiency #'s
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=jerel-mcneal&i=1&jerel-mcneal=2006-2007&p1=2-deonte-burton
Category: Burton, McNeal
I bolded the categories that jumped out the most to me in their similarity
ORtg: 98.0, 94.3
Points/40: 19.5, 19.45
EFG%: 45.8, 45.7
TS%: 48.7, 49.5
Shot%: 31.0, 29.5
OR%: 10.3, 6.4
DR%: 9.8, 11.7
A%: 10.1, 27.9
TO%: 15.0, 25.8
Steal%: 5.5, 5.1 (both ranked #8 in the nation)
Block%: 5.2, 2.0
Very similar in terms of their love of shooting (both lead/led the team easily in shot %) and EFG% (nearly identical). Also freaky similar in thier team-leading steal% stat. McNeal was a much better assist man, but also turned it over at a much higher rate. McNeal was also more of a threat from three. Although he didn't make a much higher %, from deep, he shot a lot more threes than Deonte (Burton stands at 4 for the season). Burton is a slightly better rebounder (would like to see his DR% higher than McNeal's) and better shot blocker. I think it's a much better comparison.
McNeal was able to increase his ORtg (bascially an amalgamation of all offensive efficiency stats) every year: 87.7, 93.7, 104.4, 108.6. If Deonte follows a similar trajectory in that respect as his usage rate inevitably goes up, considering he's starting at a much higher baseline level as a frosh (98.0 vs. 87.7), he will be a great GREAT player for us.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on February 05, 2014, 11:44:48 AM
Here's Vander Blue's stat line from his freshman season
mpg: 19
fg: 1.9
fga: 4.7
fgp: 39.4
ftp: 60.8
rb: 2.8
ast: 1.6
stl: .9
blk: .2
to: 1.4
pts: 5.1
Now here's Burton's stats so far through his freshman season.
mpg: 13.3
fg: 2.6
fga: 5.7
fgp: 45.5
ftp: 63.6
rb: 2.3
ast: .6
stl: 1.2
blk: .6
to: .9
pts: 6.5
I think the only difference is that Vander had more talent around him his freshman year. On a team like ours that has trouble filling up the basket I think Burton needs to continue taking shots. He's the only guy on the team that can catch the ball up top and break his man down 1 on 1 every time. Now if he could just see the better shot via the pass our offense would improve exponentially. The only way that's going to happen is with playing time. He's a rotational nightmare for opposing defenses as he gets guys out of rotation with his penetration.
Another difference that I can think of is Vander came out of HS (and USA Basketball) with a reputation as a very good defender.
I love Deonte, and of the three frosh, expect him to get the most minutes going forward. Error prone, but confident and explosive.
I think the biggest difference between Vander and Deonte as frosh is their defense. Deonte gets a huge number of steals per minute, but he often gets them by taking chances...and getting burned when he misses the steal. Vander's defense had a ways to go, but my recollection is that he was better at staying in front of his man and didn't get burned as often.
In any event, very excited to be seeing more of Deonte lately....
Quote from: GooooMarquette on February 05, 2014, 12:21:22 PM
I love Deonte, and of the three frosh, expect him to get the most minutes going forward. Error prone, but confident and explosive.
I think the biggest difference between Vander and Deonte as frosh is their defense. Deonte gets a huge number of steals per minute, but he often gets them by taking chances...and getting burned when he misses the steal. Vander's defense had a ways to go, but my recollection is that he was better at staying in front of his man and didn't get burned as often.
In any event, very excited to be seeing more of Deonte lately....
Vander understood much better what Buzz wanted from a team defensive perspective than Deonte does.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on February 05, 2014, 12:21:22 PM
I love Deonte, and of the three frosh, expect him to get the most minutes going forward. Error prone, but confident and explosive.
I think the biggest difference between Vander and Deonte as frosh is their defense. Deonte gets a huge number of steals per minute, but he often gets them by taking chances...and getting burned when he misses the steal. Vander's defense had a ways to go, but my recollection is that he was better at staying in front of his man and didn't get burned as often.
In any event, very excited to be seeing more of Deonte lately....
I think the lineup last night worked defensively with Burton because you had the other 4 players on the court as some of our best defenders on the team. They helped make up for Burton's lapses. While he helped make up for their offensive shortcomings.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on February 05, 2014, 12:22:18 PM
Vander understood much better what Buzz wanted from a team defensive perspective than Deonte does.
Ding ding ding
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on February 05, 2014, 12:22:18 PM
Vander understood much better what Buzz wanted from a team defensive perspective than Deonte does.
Agree with that. As I recall, Vander was considered pretty skilled as a defender on the 17 and under team he played on. So at this point he was ahead of Burton defensively. Now offensively, believe that Burton is several strides ahead
Vander could not finish at the rim his first 2 years, Burton can. And Burton will be a Beast down low over his career. Really, two different type players.
I have very high hopes for what Burton will become. Needs to be reigned in a bit, but I think he's going to be a very, very good one.
Quote from: tower912 on February 05, 2014, 11:46:30 AM
He's the only guy who THINKS he can take his guy every time. I love his fearlessness, but he does need to learn the difference between a good and bad shot.
I think he will learn, but he certainly brings the right attitude. He, Mayo and Gardner are the only guys who want to score on this team. Jamil just takes what they give him.
And you can't be a scorer unless you "want" to score. Sounds obvious, but from a lot of the comments here, I don't think a lot of people get it.
Love his aggressiveness and he will be a 16-18 point scorer for this team - maybe even by next year
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on February 05, 2014, 11:57:16 AM
Buzz: "If you come to Marquette, I promise you Vander that you will start in over 30% of our games as a freshman."
Because nobody makes starting promises, particularly after a previous commitment to another school.
IMO, as a freshman Vander had no business starting ANY games with Buycks and DJO on the roster. He was awful as a freshman.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on February 05, 2014, 12:22:18 PM
Vander understood much better what Buzz wanted from a team defensive perspective than Deonte does.
+1
I don't think Deonte will ever be as good of an on ball defender as Vander, but he has that same knack as Jae for getting in the passing lanes.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 05, 2014, 02:48:09 PM
Because nobody makes starting promises, particularly after a previous commitment to another school.
IMO, as a freshman Vander had no business starting ANY games with Buycks and DJO on the roster. He was awful as a freshman.
Doesn't really matter since by the end of the year both Buycks and DJO played significantly more than Blue did.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 05, 2014, 02:48:09 PM
Because nobody makes starting promises, particularly after a previous commitment to another school.
IMO, as a freshman Vander had no business starting ANY games with Buycks and DJO on the roster. He was awful as a freshman.
DJO started 35 games and played 30 min/game. Buycks started 29 games and played 28 min/per. It wasn't like they were buried on the bench behind Vander, who oh by the way, wasn't "awful" as a frosh. Sure, he struggled offensively but his defense and hustle made him a very valuable contributor as a role player.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on February 05, 2014, 03:12:27 PM
DJO started 35 games and played 30 min/game. Buycks started 29 games and played 28 min/per. It wasn't like they were buried on the bench behind Vander, who oh by the way, wasn't "awful" as a frosh. Sure, he struggled offensively but his defense and hustle made him a very valuable contributor as a role player.
+1. I never knew he was awful either. Glad we have people here to let me know ;D
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on February 05, 2014, 03:12:27 PM
DJO started 35 games and played 30 min/game. Buycks started 29 games and played 28 min/per. It wasn't like they were buried on the bench behind Vander, who oh by the way, wasn't "awful" as a frosh. Sure, he struggled offensively but his defense and hustle made him a very valuable contributor as a role player.
Were you a role player on your team Merritt? Get the feeling you must have been. Or were you in the band?
Quote from: brandx on February 05, 2014, 03:24:04 PM
+1. I never knew he was awful either. Glad we have people here to let me know ;D
In February I had a bet with a fellow MU Grad for a game that if Vander so much as touched the ball on a possession, we would not score. I gave him 2-1 odds. After one game he would never do it again. Vander was beyond awful the end of his freshman year. He was so much better by the end of his junior year it easy to forget the growing pains.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on February 05, 2014, 11:59:44 AM
Between struggling with what seem to be simple defense rotations, to trying to do everything offensively, I think you are seeing a guy who was poorly coached on a bad high school team.
But he had made strides and is going to be very good. As this season moves on, the freshmen all look better and better to me.
Definitely. He is used to doing it all every game. I never watched him in person in HS, but I bet it was something to see.
Quote from: Ners on February 05, 2014, 03:29:48 PM
Were you a role player on your team Merritt? Get the feeling you must have been. Or were you in the band?
I was in the band. Was on the pep band trading card in 2009 and 2010. What you trying to say?
Quote from: Ners on February 05, 2014, 03:29:48 PM
Were you a role player on your team Merritt? Get the feeling you must have been. Or were you in the band?
Well gee Ners, why don't you grace us with your significant HS basketball accomplishments? Must have been a STAR. ::)
Quote from: Ners on February 05, 2014, 03:29:48 PM
Were you a role player on your team Merritt? Get the feeling you must have been. Or were you in the band?
Actually, Ners, I was a 2-year starter on my varsity basketball team and was the team's leading scorer and rebounder as a senior and also set the school record for blocked shots in a season, while making 1st Team All-Conference. Although, I did mostly grunt work in the paint to get points so maybe that's why I have a soft spot for role players. In addition, I was a percussionist in the concert band.
Thanks for asking.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on February 06, 2014, 09:45:21 AM
Actually, Ners, I was a 2-year starter on my varsity basketball team and was the team's leading scorer and rebounder as a senior and also set the school record for blocked shots in a season, while making 1st Team All-Conference. Although, I did mostly grunt work in the paint to get points so maybe that's why I have a soft spot for role players. In addition, I was a percussionist in the concert band.
Thanks for asking.
Glad you can acknowledge that your continued support of Derrick stems from your personal bias of having a soft spot for role players. I agree, Derrick is a role player, and a good one as a backup PG.
Congrats on your accomplishments in hoops. We should get together for a game of one on one...though at 40 I'm not quite the player I was at 25....still feel pretty confident about my game! I'm always up for a game against a good player. You live in the MKE area? Sounds like we could have a good game - even though I suspect you are 10 years younger...I'll bring my guitar too...and then we can have a jam session after the one on one game.
Quote from: Ners on February 06, 2014, 09:57:13 AM
Glad you can acknowledge that your continued support of Derrick stems from your personal bias of having a soft spot for role players. I agree, Derrick is a role player, and a good one as a backup PG.
Jaaayzus, seriously? Challenging a guy over his HS playing time and then turning that into a chance to bash Derrick? You've become an embarrassing parody.
Thank you, Mods, for the ignore button. The site just "flows better" now.
Quote from: Ners on February 06, 2014, 09:57:13 AM
Glad you can acknowledge that your continued support of Derrick stems from your personal bias of having a soft spot for role players.
I can't speak for MM, but you do know that most of us think Derrick is average at best, and below average for a high major program right? We defend him because you and others have gone so far in your mantra that you flat out make up things about Derrick to prove your point. You discredit everything that a hardworking kid brings to this team. Derrick scores in double digits: "He can only hit layups." Derrick hits a jumper at the buzzer: "Lucky last second shot." Derrick gets 8 assists: "they are easy assists that any 8th grader could get." Derrick has one of the best +/- stats in a game: "It's a flawed stat, doesn't matter."
Give Derrick credit when it is due to him and try to not make everything about our PG situation and you wouldn't get the same reactions. Every single member of the board gives your favorites Dawson and Mayo the same treatment.
Quote from: TSmith34 on February 06, 2014, 10:16:59 AM
Jaaayzus, seriously? Challenging a guy over his HS playing time and then turning that into a chance to bash Derrick? You've become an embarrassing parody.
Thank you, Mods, for the ignore button. The site just "flows better" now.
My reading became much more pleasurable when I did the same. Next, Ners may start insulting people's mothers if they say something positive about Derrick.
Quote from: TSmith34 on February 06, 2014, 10:16:59 AM
Jaaayzus, seriously? Challenging a guy over his HS playing time and then turning that into a chance to bash Derrick? You've become an embarrassing parody.
Thank you, Mods, for the ignore button. The site just "flows better" now.
Yup. My limit has been reached.
Quote from: Ners on February 06, 2014, 09:57:13 AM
Glad you can acknowledge that your continued support of Derrick stems from your personal bias of having a soft spot for role players. I agree, Derrick is a role player, and a good one as a backup PG.
Congrats on your accomplishments in hoops. We should get together for a game of one on one...though at 40 I'm not quite the player I was at 25....still feel pretty confident about my game! I'm always up for a game against a good player. You live in the MKE area? Sounds like we could have a good game - even though I suspect you are 10 years younger...I'll bring my guitar too...and then we can have a jam session after the one on one game.
So, Ners. What are your significant accomplishments in hoops that make you such an expert on all things MU basketball? You keep throwing it out there as a challenge to others that have different opinions, but have never backed it up. Now that someone you challenged has actually responded, it's put up or shut up time.
What you got? I'm guessing not much. And I'm also guessing we will never hear it from you.
Quote from: Ners on February 06, 2014, 09:57:13 AM
Glad you can acknowledge that your continued support of Derrick stems from your personal bias of having a soft spot for role players. I agree, Derrick is a role player, and a good one as a backup PG.
Congrats on your accomplishments in hoops. We should get together for a game of one on one...though at 40 I'm not quite the player I was at 25....still feel pretty confident about my game! I'm always up for a game against a good player. You live in the MKE area? Sounds like we could have a good game - even though I suspect you are 10 years younger...I'll bring my guitar too...and then we can have a jam session after the one on one game.
Do you practice foul shooting? (Either way - now or way back when you were 25)
Are you "a big"?
Can you play Stairway to Heaven?
Vander was not good his freshmen and sophomore year. The majority of his shots were layups and he shot just around 40%.
He finally learned how to make a layup his junior year and then he felt he was ready for the pros.
Quote from: The Sultan of Syncopation on February 05, 2014, 12:22:18 PM
Vander understood much better what Buzz wanted from a team defensive perspective than Deonte does.
Oh god. This "adhering to the gameplan" argument for PT is getting just as old as some others on this board.
Do you not watch the game or listen to Buzz? Defense dictates PT. Vander played defense before he could make much more than a lay up. Ergo, he got early playing time.
Quote from: tower912 on February 06, 2014, 03:42:00 PM
Do you not watch the game or listen to Buzz? Defense dictates PT. Vander played defense before he could make much more than a lay up. Ergo, he got early playing time.
Right. If you can't play defense, you can't be on the court for extended minutes. So hard for some people to understand.
Quote from: MarsupialMadness on February 06, 2014, 03:46:38 PM
Right. If you can't play defense, you can't be on the court for extended minutes. So hard for some people to understand.
Unless you are Davante Gardner. There are exceptions to every rule.
Quote from: tower912 on February 06, 2014, 03:42:00 PM
Do you not watch the game or listen to Buzz? Defense dictates PT. Vander played defense before he could make much more than a lay up. Ergo, he got early playing time.
I have to believe there are other factors that go into PT rather than just playing in the system. Yes, Vander was obviously an above average overall defender and that contributed to PT, but there must have been, there just must have been other factors that contributed to his PT--like a recruitment promise, or Buzz seeing offesnive prowess in practice and waiting to see it in games.
For guys like Sultan who are saying nobody here is in practice with these guys or has as much involvement with them as Buzz so everyone should keep their opinions to themselves, he seems awfully confident that PT is based on following a gameplan. So I'm guessing Sultan is now at practices, traveling with the team, and consulting with Buzz regularly.
Quote from: MarsupialMadness on February 06, 2014, 03:46:38 PM
Right. If you can't play defense, you can't be on the court for extended minutes. So hard for some people to understand.
"Can't" play defense. What does that mean? Everyone can play defense on this team--and don't tell me Thomas is playing great defense or even D Wilson for that matter and that's what's responsible for their PT.
Quote from: windyplayer on February 06, 2014, 03:53:23 PM
"Can't" play defense. What does that mean? Everyone can play defense on this team--and don't tell me Thomas is playing great defense or even D Wilson for that matter and that's what's responsible for their PT.
Both Thomas and Wilson play great defense within the system that Buzz is running. That's actually why they get PT over other options. Buzz has said so himself.
Quote from: MarsupialMadness on February 06, 2014, 03:56:08 PM
Both Thomas and Wilson play great defense within the system that Buzz is running. That's actually why they get PT over other options. Buzz has said so himself.
Fixed.
There are two separate arguments taking shape here: (1) PT is based on adhering to gameplan, and a more drilled down arugment in (2) PT is based on defense within the system.
I think both go into Buzz's decision-making, but are by no way conclusive in determining PT. Fact is, nobody knows, so to come off as if you know that they're determinative of PT is silly.
Quote from: MarsupialMadness on February 06, 2014, 03:56:08 PM
Both Thomas and Wilson play great defense within the system that Buzz is running. That's actually why they get PT over other options. Buzz has said so himself.
Do you have an exerpt of Buzz saying this? I'm curious. Obviously, that's a trump card if you can provide it.
For all you HS hoops stars, I got cut from my Frosh team. Now my thoughts on Derrick/Dawson. ...... ::)
Quote from: windyplayer on February 06, 2014, 03:35:47 PM
Oh god. This "adhering to the gameplan" argument for PT is getting just as old as some others on this board.
When grasping for straws to support an argument...that's all they've got. Since the guys they feel are best suited for max minutes, really struggle to put the ball in the basket (which is clearly identifiable and measurable), you are left with crap like the above...or below..
Quote from: MarsupialMadness on February 06, 2014, 03:56:08 PM
Both Thomas and Wilson play great defense within the system that Buzz is running. That's actually why they get PT over other options. Buzz has said so himself.
And as for Buzz saying so himself....well what the hell else is Buzz going to say? Pretty hard to justify starting and giving max minutes to a PG who has made 2, 3pt shots through 23 games into his junior season....and your starting "shooting guard" who has made 3, 2pt FGs through 23 games!! Buzz hitched his wagon to Derrick and Jake this year, and has been completely reluctant to make changes...so he's going to support the decision and justify it in as obtuse fashion as he can.
Quote from: Ners on February 06, 2014, 05:59:13 PM
When grasping for straws to support an argument...that's all they've got. Since the guys they feel are best suited for max minutes, really struggle to put the ball in the basket (which is clearly identifiable and measurable), you are left with crap like the above...or below..
And as for Buzz saying so himself....well what the hell else is Buzz going to say? Pretty hard to justify starting and giving max minutes to a PG who has made 2, 3pt shots through 23 games into his junior season....and your starting "shooting guard" who has made 3, 2pt FGs through 23 games!! Buzz hitched his wagon to Derrick and Jake this year, and has been completely reluctant to make changes...so he's going to support the decision and justify it in as obtuse fashion as he can.
//http:////www.youtube.com/v/v3VCl3yBURs?version=3&hl=en_US
Quote from: windyplayer on February 06, 2014, 03:50:16 PM
I have to believe there are other factors that go into PT rather than just playing in the system. Yes, Vander was obviously an above average overall defender and that contributed to PT, but there must have been, there just must have been other factors that contributed to his PT--like a recruitment promise, or Buzz seeing offesnive prowess in practice and waiting to see it in games.
For guys like Sultan who are saying nobody here is in practice with these guys or has as much involvement with them as Buzz so everyone should keep their opinions to themselves, he seems awfully confident that PT is based on following a gameplan. So I'm guessing Sultan is now at practices, traveling with the team, and consulting with Buzz regularly.
Whoa...what?
Buzz's defense is extended and aggressive. Players need to know how and when to rotate. They need to know where help will be and push players accordingly. For a freshman, Vander understood a lot of what Buzz wanted on the defensive end of the floor and that is why he played nearly 20+ mpg. Offensively he was a mess. Defense is why he was there.
This isn't news. It was said as much at the time. I remember reading comments about his defense from his Team USA coaches before he even got to Marquette.
Quote from: The Sultan of Serenity on February 06, 2014, 06:45:34 PM
Whoa...what?
Buzz's defense is extended and aggressive. Players need to know how and when to rotate. They need to know where help will be and push players accordingly. For a freshman, Vander understood a lot of what Buzz wanted on the defensive end of the floor and that is why he played nearly 20+ mpg. Offensively he was a mess. Defense is why he was there.
This isn't news. It was said as much at the time. I remember reading comments about his defense from his Team USA coaches before he even got to Marquette.
Did you enjoy the video enough to make a name change?
Vander should be a Senior at Marquette...
Just got sent back the D-league... but he was re-acquired by the 87ers...
His Post MU Career has been uglier than bowling shoes....
Advice to underclassmen... Unless your a LOCK at the Lottery.... STAY IN SCHOOL
Oh and go MU...
Quote from: jesmu84 on February 06, 2014, 07:28:22 PM
Did you enjoy the video enough to make a name change?
Yes. It describe my more laid back attitude.
Quote from: windyplayer on February 06, 2014, 03:50:16 PM
I have to believe there are other factors that go into PT rather than just playing in the system. Yes, Vander was obviously an above average overall defender and that contributed to PT, but there must have been, there just must have been other factors that contributed to his PT--like a recruitment promise, or Buzz seeing offesnive prowess in practice and waiting to see it in games.
It was a recruitment promise. Dameon Mason was arguably a better player as a freshman than Vander and he vanished after leaving MU. These people claiming there were some nuances to his game than only the sophisticated fan could see are full of sh*t. And sophomore Vander wasn't much better.
People sure do have short memories.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 06, 2014, 08:08:47 PM
It was a recruitment promise. Dameon Mason was arguably a better player as a freshman than Vander and he vanished after leaving MU. These people claiming there were some nuances to his game than only the sophisticated fan could see are full of sh*t. And sophomore Vander wasn't much better.
I wouldn't call good defense a "nuance."
Quote from: windyplayer on February 06, 2014, 03:50:16 PM
I have to believe there are other factors that go into PT rather than just playing in the system. Yes, Vander was obviously an above average overall defender and that contributed to PT, but there must have been, there just must have been other factors that contributed to his PT--like a recruitment promise, or Buzz seeing offesnive prowess in practice and waiting to see it in games.
You're obviously a newbie when it comes to what Buzz is all about. If you actually believe what you wrote, then you have to believe that Buzz is a hustler & a charlatan.
Quote from: brandx on February 06, 2014, 08:55:24 PM
You're obviously a newbie when it comes to what Buzz is all about. If you actually believe what you wrote, then you have to believe that Buzz is a hustler & a charlatan.
Promising playing time isn't a hustle.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 07, 2014, 07:53:04 AM
Because that's what I said.
It certainly is what you implied. Vander Blue played as a freshman because he understood what Buzz wanted on the defensive end of the floor. It wasn't because of "some nuances to his game than only the sophisticated fan could see."
Quote from: windyplayer on February 06, 2014, 04:06:07 PM
Do you have an exerpt of Buzz saying this? I'm curious. Obviously, that's a trump card if you can provide it.
Buzz said in his radio show with Homer on 1/22 that our dilemma is that our best defensive team is our worst offensive team, and that he places a higher emphasis on defense than he does offense, as far as dishing out playing time.
I don't have a link.
Quote from: The Sultan of Serenity on February 07, 2014, 08:35:31 AM
It certainly is what you implied. Vander Blue played as a freshman because he understood what Buzz wanted on the defensive end of the floor. It wasn't because of "some nuances to his game than only the sophisticated fan could see."
Recruitment promises aside, Buzz never really had to come to a crossroads with Blue and PT because Blue played pretty good defense in the system AND (A BIG "AND") because Buzz had a legitimate offense around Blue to hide that weakness in his game at the time. Blue's PT as a freshman was just as much a product of that offense around him as it was his defense.
Had the 2011 team had a down year offensviely, I highly doubt that a freshman who was struggling mightily with that half of his game, would see the floor as often as he did.
Buzz isn't making these PT decisions in a vacuum based solely on what a player can and can't do (though arguments could be made for this year). There are a ton of variables that go into PT--match-ups, practice (cringe), game flow, weaknesses/strengths of teammates, etc.
Quote from: windyplayer on February 07, 2014, 09:34:32 AM
Recruitment promises aside, Buzz never really had to come to a crossroads with Blue and PT because Blue played pretty good defense in the system AND (A BIG "AND") because Buzz had a legitimate offense around Blue to hide that weakness in his game at the time. Blue's PT as a freshman was just as much a product of that offense around him as it was his defense.
Had the 2011 team had a down year offensviely, I highly doubt that a freshman who was struggling mightily with that half of his game, would see the floor as often as he did.
Buzz isn't making these PT decisions in a vacuum based solely on what a player can and can't do (though arguments could be made for this year). There are a ton of variables that go into PT--match-ups, practice (cringe), game flow, weaknesses/strengths of teammates, etc.
I don't disagree with any of this....so I'm not sure exactly why you called me out twice in this thread.
If Vander didn't play defense like he did, he would not have played. You are right that his offensive deficiencies could be covered up. But that doesn't mean that my initial statement was incorrect.
Quote from: The Sultan of Serenity on February 07, 2014, 09:44:05 AM
I don't disagree with any of this....so I'm not sure exactly why you called me out twice in this thread.
If Vander didn't play defense like he did, he would not have played. You are right that his offensive deficiencies could be covered up. But that doesn't mean that my initial statement was incorrect.
Perhaps, I wrongly implied that you thought Blue played his freshman year solely because of his defense. I'm arguing that Blue would have played a lot less if our offense was down that year, and that PT is based on a lot more than adhering to a game plan or doing a few things well.
Quote from: windyplayer on February 07, 2014, 09:55:32 AM
Perhaps, I wrongly implied that you thought Blue played his freshman year solely because of his defense. I'm arguing that Blue would have played a lot less if our offense was down that year, and that PT is based on a lot more than adhering to a game plan or doing a few things well.
Let me put it this way...if Blue's defense was like Deonte's defense, and without the offensive upside that Deonte has, Blue wouldn't have played 19 mpg as a freshman. I agree with you that the reason he got up to 19 mpg was because you didn't have to rely on him offensively with DJO, JFB and eventually Jae and Davante on the floor.
Quote from: brandx on February 07, 2014, 12:28:41 PM
What would you call it?
A bad idea. But it is not a hustle if a player is promised playing time and gets it. A hustle would be promising someone playing time and then not giving it to them.
Quote from: brandx on February 07, 2014, 12:28:41 PM
What would you call it?
I call it recruiting highly rated players.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on February 07, 2014, 01:01:55 PM
I call it recruiting highly rated players.
So you think Buzz is "promising" a guard playing time as a freshman when he already has Junior, DJO, and Buycks?
And as I said, if you believe Buzz is out there promising playing time to high school kids as freshmen, you do not know Buzz and you believe everything Buzz says publicly is just a hustle.
Quote from: brandx on February 07, 2014, 01:31:11 PM
So you think Buzz is "promising" a guard playing time as a freshman when he already has Junior, DJO, and Buycks?
And as I said, if you believe Buzz is out there promising playing time to high school kids as freshmen, you do not know Buzz and you believe everything Buzz says publicly is just a hustle.
Yes, I absolutely believe that and I don't think anything Buzz says is a hustle.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on February 05, 2014, 04:55:12 PM
Well gee Ners, why don't you grace us with your significant HS basketball accomplishments? Must have been a STAR. ::)
NERS...... We are waiting.
I've grown tired of the debate about "The Promise", which is somehow still being argued despite the fact that Vander only started 12 games his freshman year. (Lol, when you get owned, give it a rest.)
The only reason I am still reading this thread is to hear about Ners' accomplishments on the court.
I think there is a happy medium. I think as the coach of a high-level DI program, Buzz is making promises to highly rated recruits--I don't know what those are, but I can guarantee you that when those promises are not met for one reason or another, and it may not necessarily be Buzz's fault, those players will think about transferring.
Recruiting is not a bunch of feel-good speeches about building character and turning boys into men. At some point, the rubber meets the road, and these recruits need to be assured that they'll get PT by a certain time or some other school will give it to them. I know everyone wants to think of Buzz as a monolith in morality and integrity, and he is as far as I know, and making a few promises to recruits doesn't undermine that. That's just how sh*t works in the world of big college basketball programs, at least anecdotally--you have to talk to the level of 17 and 18 year olds and tell them what they want to hear. Buzz does it and there's no shame in it.
I'm sure Buzz protects himself by conditioning promises on the kid's attitude, work ethic, etc., therby giving himself an out.
Quote from: windyplayer on February 07, 2014, 03:15:45 PM
I think there is a happy medium. I think as the coach of a high-level DI program, Buzz is making promises to highly rated recruits--I don't know what those are, but I can guarantee you that when those promises are not met for one reason or another, and it may not necessarily be Buzz's fault, those players will think about transferring.
Recruiting is not a bunch of feel-good speeches about building character and turning boys into men. At some point, the rubber meets the road, and these recruits need to be assured that they'll get PT by a certain time or some other school will give it to them. I know everyone wants to think of Buzz as a monolith in morality and integrity, and he is as far as I know, and making a few promises to recruits doesn't undermine that. That's just how sh*t works in the world of big college basketball programs, at least anecdotally--you have to talk to the level of 17 and 18 year olds and tell them what they want to hear. Buzz does it and there's no shame in it.
I'm sure Buzz protects himself by conditioning promises on the kid's attitude, work ethic, etc., therby giving himself an out.
So you feel that Buzz thinks that playing time in college should be based on high school play?
How on earth you deduced that from my post, I'll never know? In fact, I'm basically saying the exact opposite. It's not about what Buzz thinks, it's about what the system demands.
Quote from: windyplayer on February 07, 2014, 03:46:28 PM
How on earth you deduced that from my post, I'll never know? In fact, I'm basically saying the exact opposite. It's not about what Buzz thinks, it's about what the system demands.
I'm only disagreeing when you say that Buzz is making promises about playing time to recruits. He has said specifically in the past that he doesn't do that. He has said that playing time is earned - not given.
Quote from: 94Warrior on February 07, 2014, 02:33:35 PM
NERS...... We are waiting.
I've grown tired of the debate about "The Promise", which is somehow still being argued despite the fact that Vander only started 12 games his freshman year. (Lol, when you get owned, give it a rest.)
The only reason I am still reading this thread is to hear about Ners' accomplishments on the court.
2 Year Letter winner...6th man as junior, starter, All Conference as senior, for Sectional Finalist junior and senior years (lost to eventual state champion Senior Year) in largest public school league...schools 1500+ 17ppg, 5rpg, 3apg. 75% FT. 37" vertical. 6'2" Guard. D-3, D-2 offers. Can still dunk basketball at 40 years old...
Back in '82, I could throw a pigskin a quarter mile
Quote from: Ners on February 07, 2014, 05:03:05 PM
2 Year Letter winner...6th man as junior, starter, All Conference as senior, for Sectional Finalist junior and senior years (lost to eventual state champion Senior Year) in largest public school league...schools 1500+ 17ppg, 5rpg, 3apg. 75% FT. 37" vertical. 6'2" Guard. D-3, D-2 offers. Can still dunk basketball at 40 years old...
Impressive...but can you throw a football over dem mountains?
EDIT: Sterling example of why you heed the red warning that there has been another post. But two references to Uncle Rico is not a bad thing.
Quote from: Ners on February 07, 2014, 05:03:05 PM
2 Year Letter winner...6th man as junior, starter, All Conference as senior, for Sectional Finalist junior and senior years (lost to eventual state champion Senior Year) in largest public school league...schools 1500+ 17ppg, 5rpg, 3apg. 75% FT. 37" vertical. 6'2" Guard. D-3, D-2 offers. Can still dunk basketball at 40 years old...
Do you still have any eligibility left? If so, can you hit the 3? If so, can you create your own shot or do you need 3 screens to get open?
Would you shut out Derrick in a game of 1-on-1 or would he score a couple buckets against you on the way to a 15-2 loss?
40? Isn't that a little old for a basketball? Don't they need to be replaced more often than that?
Why don't you already have a job on Buzz's staff? Or, better yet, why isn't Buzz working for you?
Isn't this fun? Can I go on all day?