Before I word my question I'd like to establish my thoughts so I don't get slaughtered by the board.
1. Derrick Wilson is our best PG on the team this year.
2. He is playing roughly the minutes he deserves.
That said, here's my honest question. In previous seasons we've had guards that have forced opponents to guard them relentlessly. I'm curious if being required to bring 100% effort on a defensive assignment has a direct effect on a player's offensive productivity. Do opponent's guards this year have it easier on the offensive end because they're not constantly being forced to guard our PG? Could this possibly the reason it seems we allow opposing guards to have stellar performances against this team this year? Does the lack of effort necessary needed to guard Wilson on the perimeter keep them fresher on offense?
I'd appreciate this topic not devolving into a player bashing topic or calling for a freshman backup as the answer. I'm just curious as to the thoughts of the posters here on this issue as it's something I've wondered for some time beyond just this season.
Yes. Our point guard play encourages the play of opposing players. Dawson has more upside that D. Wilson without question. Would like to see both share the time. It's too bad Duane Wilson is out. It would have been really interesting to see him play PG.
Quote from: Stretchdeltsig on March 01, 2014, 03:57:39 PM
Yes. Our point guard play encourages the play of opposing players. Dawson has more upside that D. Wilson without question. Would like to see both share the time. It's too bad Duane Wilson is out. It would have been really interesting to see him play PG.
You failed to address the question without bringing up John Dawson who is a far less efficient player at this stage in his career and all the advanced stats prove that.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 01, 2014, 03:48:06 PM
Before I word my question I'd like to establish my thoughts so I don't get slaughtered by the board.
1. Derrick Wilson is our best PG on the team this year.
2. He is playing roughly the minutes he deserves.
That said, here's my honest question. In previous seasons we've had guards that have forced opponents to guard them relentlessly. I'm curious if being required to bring 100% effort on a defensive assignment has a direct effect on a player's offensive productivity. Do opponent's guards this year have it easier on the offensive end because they're not constantly being forced to guard our PG? Could this possibly the reason it seems we allow opposing guards to have stellar performances against this team this year? Does the lack of effort necessary needed to guard Wilson on the perimeter keep them fresher on offense?
I'd appreciate this topic not devolving into a player bashing topic or calling for a freshman backup as the answer. I'm just curious as to the thoughts of the posters here on this issue as it's something I've wondered for some time beyond just this season.
Its an interesting thought. I believe there is something to this. For example, I still don't understand why, when we play Creighton, we don't force Wragge especially, but McDermott also, to play defense every postion. I realize defensively, it is difficult for Davante to guard Wragge on the perimeter, but our main goal should be, if we play them again, to get Wragge in foul trouble as early as possible. It is tough for shooters to be successful if they lose their legs. If we play them again, in the conference tournament, I hope we use a strategy similar to what we used against Georgetown. Slow down the pace and pound it to Gardner and Otule. The key to this is for Jake to hit a couple early shots and for Todd to be able to beat his man off the dribble (like they both were able to do against GTown). I won't touch Derrick's impact positively or negatively, because it leads to a $hit storm every time.
I'm not picking on him with this question, but I think everyone here agrees he's not near the top of opposing team's scouting reports as a 'must account for at all times' scoring threat.
It's an interesting theory, that basically you hope to get 100% exertion from each player, and the obvious first way to split is down the middle is offense/defense. So if someone has to give 30% exertion on defense, it leaves 70% for offense instead of 50%. If it remains 50%/50% with one-one-one defense, it's a waste of effort to focus on a player who doesn't need to be guarded as intensely. Or it could be 50%/50% by using the defensive effort to double other players, i.e. force a post player to now exert 60% of his effort on offense because he is now seeing double teams, which makes him more of a defensive liability. Not sure coaches think like this, not sure what if any advanced statistics could support it, but it's an interesting theory to think about - and applies to every position in every game, not specific to one position on our team.
I think the Creighton/McDermott reference would be a great example of the opposite of my question.
Does guarding a guy like McDermott directly impact that player's offensive game with the amount of exertion needed to guard a player of his offensive capability?
The question works both ways.
Quote from: chapman on March 01, 2014, 04:44:34 PM
It's an interesting theory, that basically you hope to get 100% exertion from each player, and the obvious first way to split is down the middle is offense/defense. So if someone has to give 30% exertion on defense, it leaves 70% for offense instead of 50%. If it remains 50%/50% with one-one-one defense, it's a waste of effort to focus on a player who doesn't need to be guarded as intensely. Or it could be 50%/50% by using the defensive effort to double other players, i.e. force a post player to now exert 60% of his effort on offense because he is now seeing double teams, which makes him more of a defensive liability. Not sure coaches think like this, not sure what if any advanced statistics could support it, but it's an interesting theory to think about - and applies to every position in every game, not specific to one position on our team.
I was just thinking about this extrapolation myself. Is Davante's defense "suspect" due to his exertion on the offensive end? Could be a scenario applied to tons of players/teams.
Of course it does. Think of the energy saved sitting in the lane on defense and not having to fight through screens and challenge shots. Derrick Wilson is pretty bad, but unfortunately the best PG on the team.
This is actually a really good question and I think youre right. Guys don't have to waste as much effort on defense with Derrick as they would with a guy like Mayo who will constantly try and drive or Jake whose at least always moving to try and get open.
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 01, 2014, 05:38:47 PM
Of course it does. Think of the energy saved sitting in the lane on defense and not having to fight through screens and challenge shots. Derrick Wilson is pretty bad, but unfortunately the best PG on the team.
Good point, something I've never considered.
It is a good point and it has all kinds of ripple effects. For instance since our point guard in general (both of them) are no threat what so ever to drive you don't pile up fouls on the team. Aside from Devante who is a foul creating machine this team is very un-Buzz like in getting fouls on the other team. Its got to be killing Buzz but as you point out he has no choice.
This year has shown that you can much better support a center who is a defense only guy (which is what we've had at times in the past) than a PG who is defense only.
Interesting question.
Here's a related one. If we assume the answer to the original question is "yes," do players also have more offensive energy when playing zone than man to man. Not saying zone is "easy," but you aren't forced to chase your guy from one side of the court to the other. And that's essentially what Derrick's guy is doing - playing a zone a few feet from Derrick (usually at the edge of the lane), so he can help out with our inside guys when they get to that area.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on March 01, 2014, 06:21:02 PM
Interesting question.
Here's a related one. If we assume the answer to the original question is "yes," do players also have more offensive energy when playing zone than man to man. Not saying zone is "easy," but you aren't forced to chase your guy from one side of the court to the other. And that's essentially what Derrick's guy is doing - playing a zone a few feet from Derrick (usually at the edge of the lane), so he can help out with our inside guys when they get to that area.
I would say yes with a big exception, as Syracuse playing their patented 2-3 requires a great deal of effort compared to most zones teams throw out there from time to time to give other teams different looks.
I think Pitino's relentless pressure D he coaches/recruits for is the most difficult from a physical exertion standpoint although ultimately I think it poses the most problems for opponents. A team that can play full court pressure defense with discipline all game is a nightmare for most teams to match up against. I'd prefer if Marquette was more up tempo myself.
It's obvious. Opposing guards don't have to play D on Derrick so they sag and relax. As a result they have their legs late in games and make big shots. Derrick at least needs to be more mobile on offense so his defender is forced to occasionally move.
You have to remember the new rules this year, which really do not benefit Derrick. I think he has adjusted well to them, but the new rules strongly favor the offensive player. Frankly, I am sick of watching an offensive player run into a defensive player that has no chance to get out of the way and then the defensive player gets called for the foul. It is very hard to stop quick guards with the current rules. It is especially bad, if the quick guard is a really good free throw shooter. On offense the rule is of little benefit to Derrick, because he is not super quick and is not a good free throw shooter. On defense the rules do not allow him to use his hands or his strength. Given the rule change Derrick has done really well.
Quote from: GooooMarquette on March 01, 2014, 06:21:02 PM
Interesting question.
Here's a related one. If we assume the answer to the original question is "yes," do players also have more offensive energy when playing zone than man to man. Not saying zone is "easy," but you aren't forced to chase your guy from one side of the court to the other. And that's essentially what Derrick's guy is doing - playing a zone a few feet from Derrick (usually at the edge of the lane), so he can help out with our inside guys when they get to that area.
You can't compare zone defense to playing derrick wilson 1-on-1. It's a common misconception that zone is easy to play. Note, I did not play at the collegiate level. But, I always gave the bigs a hard time, they don't work as hard with zones...the top 2 (in a 2-3) bust their @$$ in zones, it's exhausting. Guarding D Wilson would be a breeze compared to rotating in a zone. Maybe some higher level guys on this board could comment, but I think they'd agree.
What concerns me is DWil and Jake have accounted for 1645 minutes so far.
If you do not factor Todd's 590 minutes, the returning MU guards (Deonte/JJJ/Dawson) have a combined 827 minutes. Which is almost equal to the minutes of DW.
Todd is going to be CRUCIAL next year since he will be the only one with significant experience in the backcourt.
In your scenario Derrick is only giving 20% on offense as well so he has 80% to give on defense.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on March 02, 2014, 02:49:39 AM
What concerns me is DWil and Jake have accounted for 1645 minutes so far.
If you do not factor Todd's 590 minutes, the returning MU guards (Deonte/JJJ/Dawson) have a combined 827 minutes. Which is almost equal to the minutes of DW.
Todd is going to be CRUCIAL next year since he will be the only one with significant experience in the backcourt.
While I agree that Todd will be crucial next year, to hang one's hat on that is dubious, due to his inconsistency. I shudder to think where we will get scoring next year. Best case for projected starters:
Mayo: 13-14ppg
De. Wilson 6ppg
Anderson: 6ppg
Taylor: 8 ppg
Burton: 10 ppg
That comes to 44 per game, if they can maintain that for the whole year. A lot wil have to come from the rest of the rotation.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 01, 2014, 03:48:06 PM
That said, here's my honest question. In previous seasons we've had guards that have forced opponents to guard them relentlessly. I'm curious if being required to bring 100% effort on a defensive assignment has a direct effect on a player's offensive productivity. Do opponent's guards this year have it easier on the offensive end because they're not constantly being forced to guard our PG? Could this possibly the reason it seems we allow opposing guards to have stellar performances against this team this year? Does the lack of effort necessary needed to guard Wilson on the perimeter keep them fresher on offense?
Well, I am not sure that Junior Cadougan forced defenses to guard him "relentlessly," but I think your overall point is a good one.
Which is why Buzz could be asking Derrick to attack off the dribble more.
Well, both Villanova and Providence saw great success from their guards. Derrick Wilson had two of his worst games of the season.
I think even though my question is hard to quantify it certainly is relevant and possibly true.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 05, 2014, 12:23:22 AM
Well, both Villanova and Providence saw great success from their guards. Derrick Wilson had two of his worst games of the season.
I think even though my question is hard to quantify it certainly is relevant and possibly true.
Your question is true? A question can't be true. If it were true it would be a statement. And to answer your question, you're kicking around the obvious with a question like this.