We all know it... Our best players don't play enough. Our starters don't contribute enough. Hard to win when the best players don't play enough. Our bench scored over 2/3 of our pts. Wouldn't surprise me if Buzz leaves soon. I'd hate to see him leave, but he's a hot commodity given recent success and after talking to some close to the program, he is for once under pressure... Doesn't take a genius to see what he has done isn't working and the big names will see this as a chance to poach him. Hope I am wrong!
If he wants to leave, so be it. Marquette is the biggest spending program in the country. The program is bigger than the coach.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:27:09 PM
We all know it... Our best players don't play enough. Our starters don't contribute enough. Hard to win when the best players don't play enough. Our bench scored over 2/3 of our pts. Wouldn't surprise me if Buzz leaves soon. I'd hate to see him leave, but he's a hot commodity given recent success and after talking to some close to the program, he is for once under pressure... Doesn't take a genius to see what he has done isn't working and the big names will see this as a chance to poach him. Hope I am wrong!
Pressure from who? The guy has had a winning season every year he has been HC at Marquette. Sounds like horse sh## to me.
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:27:09 PM
We all know it... Our best players don't play enough. Our starters don't contribute enough. Hard to win when the best players don't play enough. Our bench scored over 2/3 of our pts. Wouldn't surprise me if Buzz leaves soon. I'd hate to see him leave, but he's a hot commodity given recent success and after talking to some close to the program, he is for once under pressure... Doesn't take a genius to see what he has done isn't working and the big names will see this as a chance to poach him. Hope I am wrong!
I would be shocked if he left just because he is under a little pressure - that would be the exact opposite action that he preaches to his players all of the time. and make no mistake, Buzz is a man of integrity. This is the first time he has had to face something like this season has been and I expect him to learn from his mistakes and come out of it a better coach..
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:54:58 PM
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
I don't believe a word of it. I am shocked that you (or any fan of MU) look at Buzz as a quitter.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:54:58 PM
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
I'm sure Buzz is really stressed out with the team's performance this year...as well as the criticism being leveled by our passionate fanbase. First time he's had to deal with that, as he's been brilliant every year he's been at MU...other than this year.
Do think he got caught up in trying to prove point that he could win with his chosen starting lineup, and stuck with it too long...while not giving the freshman more opportunity in non-conference games so they'd be more ready for Big East.
This year I would give Buzz a C- or possibly lower.
That said I don't think hes leaving, I don't want him to leave and I think this is his only bad year out of 6 so far.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:54:58 PM
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
Considering Vander's departure, McKay's transfer,
and Duane's injury, I'd give him a C-.
Why? Though he managed some close games with an inferior guard set, his blinding love for his guards has stifled the development of the frosh guards who actually have been somewhat productive compared to their starting counterparts.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on March 04, 2014, 11:58:44 PM
Considering Vander's departure, McKay's transfer,
and Duane's injury, I'd give him a C-.
Why? Though he managed some close games with an inferior guard set, his blinding love for his guards has stifled the development of the frosh guards who actually have been somewhat productive compared to their starting counterparts.
What about TJ taylor? or reggie smith? or jamail jones? etc. etc. we've lost a lot of guys that should have been upper classmen this season. some of them may not have worked out or whatever. but they were supposed to be leading the team this season. not derrick, jake, etc.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:27:09 PM
Hard to win when the best players don't play enough.
Well, Jamil played 45 minutes, Mayo played 43 and Gardner played 31, which is about the upper limit for the big guy. Of course, Derrick and Jake played too much, but Burton and Dawson got more run than usual. As far as playing his better players the most minutes, this was one of Buzz's better examples.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:54:58 PM
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
What grade? How about an A for his first Five years and a C for this year. What frigging Moron in the school would even hint at being unhappy with Coach.
The AD? Wait, we don't have one.
Fr Wild? bill Cords? Shoot, they hired him.
I call Bullsh##!
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:27:09 PM
We all know it... Our best players don't play enough. Our starters don't contribute enough. Hard to win when the best players don't play enough. Our bench scored over 2/3 of our pts. Wouldn't surprise me if Buzz leaves soon. I'd hate to see him leave, but he's a hot commodity given recent success and after talking to some close to the program, he is for once under pressure... Doesn't take a genius to see what he has done isn't working and the big names will see this as a chance to poach him. Hope I am wrong!
Why would you hate to see a guy leave who doesn't know as much as you and the rest of whoever is part of your "we all" about coaching basketball? Why would "big names" want to poach a guy like that?
Quote from: jesmu84 on March 05, 2014, 12:01:09 AM
What about TJ taylor? or reggie smith? or jamail jones? etc. etc. we've lost a lot of guys that should have been upper classmen this season. some of them may not have worked out or whatever. but they were supposed to be leading the team this season. not derrick, jake, etc.
No. I don't include them. They weren't here last year so I ignore them.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on March 05, 2014, 12:09:53 AM
No. I don't include them. They weren't here last year so I ignore them.
Fair enough.
Gardner playing 31 is not his upper limit. He's played at least that much in six games in regulation and they've been his most productive as a whole this year.
There's no reason Gardner shouldn't have got 40.
There's no reason Burton shouldn't have hardly seen the second half.
There's no reason our ineffective starting lineup should see 15-20% of regulation together as a unit (3-4 minutes to start each half).
These results at this point are on Buzz. Every single advanced metric from multiple sources suggest different players should be playing more yet he is content to ignore all of the evidence and trod out this pathetic lineup game in and game out.
We're 17-13 and it's squarely on our coach this year.
Quote from: Ners on March 04, 2014, 11:58:15 PM
I'm sure Buzz is really stressed out with the team's performance this year...as well as the criticism being leveled by our passionate fanbase. First time he's had to deal with that, as he's been brilliant every year he's been at MU...other than this year.
Do think he got caught up in trying to prove point that he could win with his chosen starting lineup, and stuck with it too long...while not giving the freshman more opportunity in non-conference games so they'd be more ready for Big East.
This.
It was abundantly clear we were not a tourney team after the Butler loss. A bad team should take risks. We had nothing to lose by letting Dawson (Burton and JJJ to a lesser extent) develop. Practice is not perfect. It is not a perfect simulator of the game. Dawson showed potential early (Davante acknowledged as much on BE media day) and Buzz failed to realize that potential. Now, unfortunately, we may have the same problem next season as DuWilson is fresh, DWil has likely hit his ceiling and Dawson has had very limited minutes this year.
IMO, Buzz gets a D, perhaps a D+ for this year. I respect his willingness to schedule a strong OOC. However, he didn't take enough risks and put being principled over being pragmatic.
Apparently, at the BBQ, he tried to create a safety net for himself ("we aren't going to be good this year"), but I don't buy it. We spend, what, the 2nd most in the country on bball? We don't have talent? Please. Brad Stevens would have this team atop the BE, I'd bet on that.
I will say that I think Buzz will learn from this season. And he certainly has earned the right to have some wiggle room.
The grade for this year would be a D.
The team hasn't improved at all over the course of the season.
And I'm not in the know, but know someone who is, and Buzz isn't in any trouble. But some eyes are starting to pay closer attention. Crean worked people. Buzz could not care less what anyone thinks of him, outside of his players.
Think buzz has been under a ton of stress the last two years or so. This has nothing to do with wins and losses. I think this year, despite the poor season buzz has finally gotten a breath of fresh air. People who post on this board are in the extreme minority and many fail to realize that. Most MU fans wouldn't know what the heck you were talking about if you brought up many of hot topics on this board. I find it really refreshing talking to friends about MU hoops who have never heard of this board.
Quote from: ElDonBDon on March 05, 2014, 12:15:30 AM
This.
It was abundantly clear we were not a tourney team after the Butler loss. A bad team should take risks. We had nothing to lose by letting Dawson (Burton and JJJ to a lesser extent) develop. Practice is not perfect. It is not a perfect simulator of the game. Dawson showed potential early (Davante acknowledged as much on BE media day) and Buzz failed to realize that potential. Now, unfortunately, we may have the same problem next season as DuWilson is fresh, DWil has likely hit his ceiling and Dawson has had very limited minutes this year.
IMO, Buzz gets a D, perhaps a D+ for this year. I respect his willingness to schedule a strong OOC. However, he didn't take enough risks and put being principled over being pragmatic.
Apparently, at the BBQ, he tried to create a safety net for himself ("we aren't going to be good this year"), but I don't buy it. We spend, what, the 2nd most in the country on bball? We don't have talent? Please. Brad Stevens would have this team atop the BE, I'd bet on that.
I will say that I think Buzz will learn from this season. And he certainly has earned the right to have some wiggle room.
Will he learn? Will he really? Has he learned? What evidence do you see of that?
Quote from: WarriorGreg1965 on March 05, 2014, 12:17:47 AM
The grade for this year would be a D.
The team hasn't improved at all over the course of the season.
And I'm not in the know, but know someone who is, and Buzz isn't in any trouble. But some eyes are starting to pay closer attention. Crean worked people. Buzz could not care less what anyone thinks of him, outside of his players.
+100.
The concern for me is player development. Buzz has done a great job with JUCOs and transfers, but the recruits from HS have been underwhelming.
Looking at the guys who came here from HS... how many have turned into impact players? Vander. Davante. A case can be made for Junior. The rest have either left, or haven't been much more than role players.
I sure hope Steve can get past this season, and the freshmen develop. MU will desperately need some help going forward.
(http://www.louielouie.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/louie-NYer-Kanin-cartoon.jpg)
Quote from: MARQ_13 on March 05, 2014, 12:18:27 AM
Think buzz has been under a ton of stress the last two years or so. This has nothing to do with wins and losses. I think this year, despite the poor season buzz has finally gotten a breath of fresh air. People who post on this board are in the extreme minority and many fail to realize that. Most MU fans wouldn't know what the heck you were talking about if you brought up many of hot topics on this board. I find it really refreshing talking to friends about MU hoops who have never heard of this board.
I told my wife on Saturday during the Nova game that Buzz looked severely stressed out....just could see it in his face. She laughed a bit and said he looks like you at times. Not good for the soul or the heart. This has been a tough year on him I am sure because he is wearing it for many to see.
Quote from: ATWizJr on March 05, 2014, 12:20:45 AM
Will he learn? Will he really? Has he learned? What evidence do you see of that?
Will he learn? My hunch is yes. What evidence do I have of that? Well, just knowing that Buzz is goal-driven, very meticulous, and an ambitious young coach.
Has he learned? Over the span of this season? I would say, overall no. I mean he has played Burton and Dawson slightly more. He also learned that Oxtule was a bad idea. But IMO he also hasn't really had time to reflect and strategize to the extent that he should, partly because he "always be recruiting" or whatever the phrase is.
Hopefully our assistant coaches also learn. And more importantly, I hope they are not yes-men and point out Buzz's faults.
The guy definitely puts everything into this program. He sweats so much he has to change clothes during games and his voice is destroyed during post-game as well. Gross, sure, but he shows he means business on the court. Stressed? I would be greatly surprised if he wasn't.
Of course this year is probably his worst so far, but arguably the toughest situation in terms of personnel as well.
I liken the situation to that of the Packers. Fans have grown used to the notion of going to the post season and making a run for the past decade. They are spoiled enough that there is overreaction if there is an off year.
If this team struggles like this the next two years, then we can have a legit conversation about Buzz moving on. But until that happens, if ever, I am not going to consider abandoning ship.
Haven't given up hope on the big dance but sometimes things just don't go your way. That's life.
Quote from: keefe on March 05, 2014, 12:35:34 AM
(http://www.louielouie.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/louie-NYer-Kanin-cartoon.jpg)
I like you. You're alright by me.
Quote from: HaywardsHeroes32 on March 04, 2014, 11:58:39 PM
This year I would give Buzz a C- or possibly lower.
That said I don't think hes leaving, I don't want him to leave and I think this is his only bad year out of 6 so far.
If Buzz leaves it will be for a job that pays him half of what he is making now.
I think Buzz is the best thing to happen to MU basketball since Al McGuire. He's got a team full of incomplete players and the right combination of guys have just eluded him this year. That may be because the right combination of guys on this team does not exist. It could be that the right combination of guys varies from night to night so much that it takes 25 game minutes to figure out what that combination is. It could be that the best players are not the best at grasping the game plan or something.
Last night was a great example of the rotation problems. Starters got 144 minutes and scored 23 points on 25.8% shooting. Our bench played 106 minutes, and scored 57 points on 41% shooting. Bench guys also had more rebounds and assists/minute than the starters. Jockey those minutes around a little better and we win in regulation.
Our bench outscored theirs 57-3 and we lost. Yikes.
Sigh.
I'm not sure what you all wanted different from Buzz last night. I thought the playing time was distributed just fine.
Derrick: I'll get this one out of the way first. I know you all think that Derrick is all that is wrong with MU basketball. You are wrong. He is a lot of what is wrong with it. But we DON'T have a better option. I know you all love what you see from Dawson, but to quote a famous anti-slurper, Derrick eats Dawson's lunch every day in practice. You all want to see more of Dawson to see what he can do. Buzz already has seen months of what he can do. How often do you hear of a player being exponentially better in game than he is in practice? The only time you do is when guys don't put in effort in practice. And I really don't think Dawson is that kind of player.
Jake can't be off the floor for long, period. Last night wasn't his best game but I did love the hustle he brought, not to mention the blocks. But Jake is our ONLY true 3 point threat. Without him on the floor, the defense would collapse all 5 defenders into the paint and make even more difficult for our frontcourt and slashers to operate. So unfortunately, we have no better options at this point.
Juan: Only got 5 minutes last night. I think this was a welcome change from Buzz.
Burton: I would have given him another chance late in the game, but I understand why he didn't sniff the end of the second half. He played 6 minutes in the 2nd and those 6 minutes were when Providence extended the lead to 11 or 12 (can't remember). Buzz took him out and the new lineup battled us all the way back to OT. I would have given him another chance but understand why he was left out.
Davante/Chris: I would have given Ox a little more time but I trust Buzz to know his player's limits better than I do. It is possible that 31 minutes is all Ox had after a 48 hour turnaround.
Johnson: I don't what the deal here is. Thought this kid was a talent but now he can't even crack the rotation. Hopefully he realizes his potential next season.
In the end, I think Buzz actually coached one of his better games last night. Fought back from a 12 point 2nd half deficit to get to 2 OTs. On the road on senior night MU wasn't going to get a lot of calls and they didn't. Our boys battled and our coach led well. The way it ended just left a bad taste in all of our mouths.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 07:53:39 AM
I know you all love what you see from Dawson, but to quote a famous anti-slurper, Derrick eats Dawson's lunch every day in practice.
I find this impossible to believe unless unrealistic scenarios like Dawson actually guarding Derrick all over the floor happens in practice. I agree that all things considered Derrick is probably the better of the two right now, though. Buzz, was actually trying the Otule/Gardner offense/defense switch with them last night.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 07:53:39 AM
Sigh.
I'm not sure what you all wanted different from Buzz last night. I thought the playing time was distributed just fine.
Derrick: I'll get this one out of the way first. I know you all think that Derrick is all that is wrong with MU basketball. You are wrong. He is a lot of what is wrong with it. But we DON'T have a better option. I know you all love what you see from Dawson, but to quote a famous anti-slurper, Derrick eats Dawson's lunch every day in practice. You all want to see more of Dawson to see what he can do. Buzz already has seen months of what he can do. How often do you hear of a player being exponentially better in game than he is in practice? The only time you do is when guys don't put in effort in practice. And I really don't think Dawson is that kind of player.
Which anti-slurper has been in practices that posts here to support your claim? And if Derrick is eating Dawson's lunch in practice....then why does Dawson look every bit as good and better than him in games? And if Dawson is able to hit mid-range shots off the dribble as we saw last night against other teams...how then is Derrick not totally and completely eating the opposition guards alive defensively? Cotton? Thames? Carson? Christon? And about 5 others that elude me that went off for season highs against us?
If you don't think Dawson is a better option, you my friend are delusional.
This is where it gets ridiculous.....when you come on the board after a performance like last night from D-Will and try to suggest we don't have a better option??? How could it have gotten ANY worse??
Quote from: Ners on March 05, 2014, 08:11:43 AM
Which anti-slurper has been in practices that posts here to support your claim? And if Derrick is eating Dawson's lunch in practice....then why does Dawson look every bit as good and better than him in games? And if Dawson is able to hit mid-range shots off the dribble as we saw last night against other teams...how then is Derrick not totally and completely eating the opposition guards alive defensively? Cotton? Thames? Carson? Christon? And about 5 others that elude me that went off for season highs against us?
If you don't think Dawson is a better option, you my friend are delusional.
This is where it gets ridiculous.....when you come on the board after a performance like last night from D-Will and try to suggest we don't have a better option??? How could it have gotten ANY worse??
I have several friends within the administration who have access to practices. They all say the same thing and Buzz's distribution of the minutes confirm it for me. What's the other option? Buzz is tanking the season on purpose?
Not to mention that Matty, a self admitted non-Derrick fan, supplied us with some lovely stats that show that the offense actually works better with Derrick. Love your stuff Matty, even when I don't agree, please keep posting.
Look, I get that Dawson passes the eye test over Derrick. I am equally frustrated at times. Last night, Derrick's offense couldn't have been worse. But his defense was great. Cotton may have gotten 25, but that's barely above his season average and he had 10 extra minutes. Cotton shot 10% less from the floor than usual. Maybe if Buzz gives it to Dawson, Cotton burns us and we lose in regulation. We will never know.
In the end, we took a good team to 2 OT, on the road, on senior night, with no help from the refs, after being down 12 in the second half. I'm proud of how our boys played. I think we all should be. There were some dumb mistakes that cost us and I hate how we lost. Trust me, I screamed, threw my remote at the wall, and woke my girlfriend who was sleeping two rooms away. But in the end it was one of our better games.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 07:53:39 AM
Sigh.
I'm not sure what you all wanted different from Buzz last night. I thought the playing time was distributed just fine.
Derrick: I'll get this one out of the way first. I know you all think that Derrick is all that is wrong with MU basketball. You are wrong. He is a lot of what is wrong with it. But we DON'T have a better option. I know you all love what you see from Dawson, but to quote a famous anti-slurper, Derrick eats Dawson's lunch every day in practice. You all want to see more of Dawson to see what he can do. Buzz already has seen months of what he can do. How often do you hear of a player being exponentially better in game than he is in practice? The only time you do is when guys don't put in effort in practice. And I really don't think Dawson is that kind of player.
Jake can't be off the floor for long, period. Last night wasn't his best game but I did love the hustle he brought, not to mention the blocks. But Jake is our ONLY true 3 point threat. Without him on the floor, the defense would collapse all 5 defenders into the paint and make even more difficult for our frontcourt and slashers to operate. So unfortunately, we have no better options at this point.
Juan: Only got 5 minutes last night. I think this was a welcome change from Buzz.
Burton: I would have given him another chance late in the game, but I understand why he didn't sniff the end of the second half. He played 6 minutes in the 2nd and those 6 minutes were when Providence extended the lead to 11 or 12 (can't remember). Buzz took him out and the new lineup battled us all the way back to OT. I would have given him another chance but understand why he was left out.
Davante/Chris: I would have given Ox a little more time but I trust Buzz to know his player's limits better than I do. It is possible that 31 minutes is all Ox had after a 48 hour turnaround.
Johnson: I don't what the deal here is. Thought this kid was a talent but now he can't even crack the rotation. Hopefully he realizes his potential next season.
In the end, I think Buzz actually coached one of his better games last night. Fought back from a 12 point 2nd half deficit to get to 2 OTs. On the road on senior night MU wasn't going to get a lot of calls and they didn't. Our boys battled and our coach led well. The way it ended just left a bad taste in all of our mouths.
All good points except DW should not have been in the game on the inbounds play. He doesn't see the floor well enough to start with, but it also left Jake helpless because he could not pass the ball back quickly to Derrick because he can't be trusted at the foul line. That was the major decision by Buzz that cost the game.
And what team uses its PG to inbounds the ball rather than to be the recipient of the pass? That alone screams that he is playing too many minutes.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 08:36:49 AM
I have several friends within the administration who have access to practices. They all say the same thing and Buzz's distribution of the minutes confirm it for me. What's the other option? Buzz is tanking the season on purpose?
Not to mention that Matty, a self admitted non-Derrick fan, supplied us with some lovely stats that show that the offense actually works better with Derrick. Love your stuff Matty, even when I don't agree, please keep posting.
Look, I get that Dawson passes the eye test over Derrick. I am equally frustrated at times. Last night, Derrick's offense couldn't have been worse. But his defense was great. Cotton may have gotten 25, but that's barely above his season average and he had 10 extra minutes. Cotton shot 10% less from the floor than usual. Maybe if Buzz gives it to Dawson, Cotton burns us and we lose in regulation. We will never know.
In the end, we took a good team to 2 OT, on the road, on senior night, with no help from the refs, after being down 12 in the second half. I'm proud of how our boys played. I think we all should be. There were some dumb mistakes that cost us and I hate how we lost. Trust me, I screamed, threw my remote at the wall, and woke my girlfriend who was sleeping two rooms away. But in the end it was one of our better games.
First, I agre that in the end it was probably the best game of the year...hard fought..entertaining. As for Derrick/Dawson - I'd imagine if you are doing 1 on 1 ball handling drills against each other...he would give Dawson a good challenge and win those types of battles...but the game is so much more than being a 1 on 1 defender.
Dawson's 2 mid-range jumpers last night were an illustration of 2 plays we simply don't, and won't get from D-Will...and even though Dawson missed a 3..he launched it...he has to be respected and defended.
Nothing is a better teacher than game experience, and other than the one home game against Seton Hall where Dawson was awful...he's never looked overmatched....and he shows some really good potential/talent out there...ceiling is higher....eventually felt Buzz should have cultivated that more, and tapped into about 20 games ago...it was evident 5 games in this season was going to be a struggle if we didn't address PG issue..
Quote from: brandx on March 05, 2014, 09:18:05 AM
All good points except DW should not have been in the game on the inbounds play. He doesn't see the floor well enough to start with, but it also left Jake helpless because he could not pass the ball back quickly to Derrick because he can't be trusted at the foul line. That was the major decision by Buzz that cost the game.
And what team uses its PG to inbounds the ball rather than to be the recipient of the pass? That alone screams that he is playing too many minutes.
You are correct. They tried initially to get the ball to mayo, they should have brought up gardner and inbounded to him, game over. but you can point to any number of things that cost them the game or kept them in it as well.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:54:58 PM
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
This is such crap. Wouldn't Buzz be more likely poached after a good year? Now, we have to worry about him being poached in a somewhat down year? Give me a break. And for a guy in the know, I like how you post a few times early on in this thread and then just go silent when there are doubters.
What would be the optimal season to retain Buzz. (1) Barely make the NCAA tournament, (2) lose on a last second shot in the second round, then (3) call out a player in the post-game presser. I mean, come on. If you're going to post, be a little more specific. This just reaks of careless sensationalism.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 08:36:49 AM
I have several friends within the administration who have access to practices. They all say the same thing and Buzz's distribution of the minutes confirm it for me. What's the other option? Buzz is tanking the season on purpose?
Not to mention that Matty, a self admitted non-Derrick fan, supplied us with some lovely stats that show that the offense actually works better with Derrick. Love your stuff Matty, even when I don't agree, please keep posting.
Look, I get that Dawson passes the eye test over Derrick. I am equally frustrated at times. Last night, Derrick's offense couldn't have been worse. But his defense was great. Cotton may have gotten 25, but that's barely above his season average and he had 10 extra minutes. Cotton shot 10% less from the floor than usual. Maybe if Buzz gives it to Dawson, Cotton burns us and we lose in regulation. We will never know.
In the end, we took a good team to 2 OT, on the road, on senior night, with no help from the refs, after being down 12 in the second half. I'm proud of how our boys played. I think we all should be. There were some dumb mistakes that cost us and I hate how we lost. Trust me, I screamed, threw my remote at the wall, and woke my girlfriend who was sleeping two rooms away. But in the end it was one of our better games.
I disagree with the great defense comment. Cotton goes for 25 which is above his average...how is someone scoring more than their average equal great defense? I would say solid, great would be 10 pts or less in my opinion. Heck on the basis of that stupid Hail Mary defensive coverage at the end of the game he should be automatically downgraded.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 08:36:49 AM
I have several friends within the administration who have access to practices. They all say the same thing and Buzz's distribution of the minutes confirm it for me. What's the other option? Buzz is tanking the season on purpose?
Not to mention that Matty, a self admitted non-Derrick fan, supplied us with some lovely stats that show that the offense actually works better with Derrick. Love your stuff Matty, even when I don't agree, please keep posting.
Look, I get that Dawson passes the eye test over Derrick. I am equally frustrated at times. Last night, Derrick's offense couldn't have been worse. But his defense was great. Cotton may have gotten 25, but that's barely above his season average and he had 10 extra minutes. Cotton shot 10% less from the floor than usual. Maybe if Buzz gives it to Dawson, Cotton burns us and we lose in regulation. We will never know.
In the end, we took a good team to 2 OT, on the road, on senior night, with no help from the refs, after being down 12 in the second half. I'm proud of how our boys played. I think we all should be. There were some dumb mistakes that cost us and I hate how we lost. Trust me, I screamed, threw my remote at the wall, and woke my girlfriend who was sleeping two rooms away. But in the end it was one of our better games.
TAMU
I don't hate Derrick Wilson. At this point he's our best option at PG, but that doesn't mean I have to make believe he's anything other than an average defender and an offensively absent player. We won't win with him being our best option either for the remainder of this season or next year if someone else cannot take away the majority of his minutes.
Im not afraid of Buzz leaving but this goes for coaches in general. I can easily see coaches leaving after an off year just because the have fans, like some people here, ripping everything they do and all of their players as well. (See: Derrick Wilson) Again, I dont think Buzz is leaving by a long shot but as a coach in general i would get pretty annoyed if couch coaches were questioning everything I did.
Quote from: ecompt on March 05, 2014, 07:25:40 AM
If Buzz leaves it will be for a job that pays him half of what he is making now.
UMMM... No
He is still a very hot name.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 05, 2014, 09:30:21 AM
TAMU
I don't hate Derrick Wilson. At this point he's our best option at PG, but that doesn't mean I have to make believe he's anything other than an average defender and an offensively absent player. We won't win with him being our best option either for the remainder of this season or next year if someone else cannot take away the majority of his minutes.
No. No, NO, NO!!
I used to say "Derrick is our best PG, but Dawson has a higher ceiling. Let's play Dawson ASAP so that that ceiling can be approached come BE tourney time."
But after yesterday's game, I'm confident saying "Dawson is our best option at PG." The fact that people are still saying "DWil is our best option at PG" is mind-boggling. I mean, seriously--these statements literally boggle my mind. At some point in the season, you guys swapped blue and gold glasses for Buzz/Derrick ones.
I'm obviously not privy to what goes on in practice but in second overtime leaving DWil in to inbounds was a strategic error. Firstly,seeing the probably shortest guy on the court inbounding the ball , Buzz should have called a time out and called a better play. Secondly, He can substitute DG and CO limitlessly-Offense for Defense- why not take Derrick out for someone who has a chance to make free throws. Great game and ,like so many this year, we had to overcome big deficits to make it a game.
I mean in all honesty though Buzz always uses this PG to inbound the ball on out of bounds plays. I dont agree with it but he is consistent.
Quote from: esard2011 on March 05, 2014, 10:16:38 AM
I mean in all honesty though Buzz always uses this PG to inbound the ball on out of bounds plays. I dont agree with it but he is consistent.
The problem, is this case, is that the easiest pass to make is right back to the guy who inbounded it. With the game on the line and "the guy" being a 45% FT shooter, that best option is taken away.
The original point is that Buzz is wanted by other programs. This is obviously a down year and when things don't go well, sometimes people leave for greener pastures. Other programs will see this as an opportunity to try and lure Buzz. I did not mean Buzz is under pressure from administration. Buzz is under pressure from us as fans, the media, etc. He is hearing it from all angles. He isn't oblivious to the comments, etc. Heck, he even said he hears it from his family. This creates pressure, like it or not. Buzz is under a lot more stress than previously.
other programs are lurking/ constantly sniffing around and when things aren't going well, it is often a time for coaches to go elsewhere. Now Buzz has said he will stay here as long as we'll have him. He has stayed here through an administration that previously was not supportive. Those people are gone. Our current administration realizes how important he is to the university. I just hope he can get through this storm and learn from this down season.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 05, 2014, 10:44:18 AM
The original point is that Buzz is wanted by other programs. This is obviously a down year and when things don't go well, sometimes people leave for greener pastures. Other programs will see this as an opportunity to try and lure Buzz. I did not mean Buzz is under pressure from administration. Buzz is under pressure from us as fans, the media, etc. He is hearing it from all angles. He isn't oblivious to the comments, etc. Heck, he even said he hears it from his family. This creates pressure, like it or not. Buzz is under a lot more stress than previously.
other programs are lurking/ constantly sniffing around and when things aren't going well, it is often a time for coaches to go elsewhere. Now Buzz has said he will stay here as long as we'll have him. He has stayed here through an administration that previously was not supportive. Those people are gone. Our current administration realizes how important he is to the university. I just hope he can get through this storm and learn from this down season.
The administration is all that counts. Buzz makes fun of us internet trolls and there is zero media pressure on him as there is zero media presence covering the MU program in a local manner.
I think Buzz has failed this season. I don't think he nor his program know how to win when being the target of every other program as they were this season being predicted Champions but that has happened with many guys in Calhoun, K, Roy Boy, Self, etc. who needed transition time from being plucky darkhorses to dominant powerhouses.
All this said, it would seem counter to nearly every word Buzz has said for him to quit at the first hint of any struggle at MU. If he were to leave of his own volition it would make him a liar and I don't see a Christian like him committing sin like that. I'm willing to bet Buzz regroups this summer and exorcises the demons of this travesty of a squad.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 05, 2014, 10:44:18 AM
The original point is that Buzz is wanted by other programs. This is obviously a down year and when things don't go well, sometimes people leave for greener pastures. Other programs will see this as an opportunity to try and lure Buzz. I did not mean Buzz is under pressure from administration. Buzz is under pressure from us as fans, the media, etc. He is hearing it from all angles. He isn't oblivious to the comments, etc. Heck, he even said he hears it from his family. This creates pressure, like it or not. Buzz is under a lot more stress than previously.
other programs are lurking/ constantly sniffing around and when things aren't going well, it is often a time for coaches to go elsewhere. Now Buzz has said he will stay here as long as we'll have him. He has stayed here through an administration that previously was not supportive. Those people are gone. Our current administration realizes how important he is to the university. I just hope he can get through this storm and learn from this down season.
Holy cow, and here I was thinking that the only good thing about this season was that we'd be spared an off-season of rumors about Buzz to <fill in the school here> rumors. I don't even have that to look forward to?
C-. IMO, the single biggest weakness of this team is that the seniors, with the exception of Jake, didn't lead. IMO, Buzz's biggest failure of the year is the same one that many here made, and that is he expected the seniors to take on the mantle of leadership like other had before. Granted, Vander could have been that guy, but he was gone. Buzz said in October that the seniors weren't stepping up. I'm not sure Buzz, for all of the preparation and study he has done on so many details, was ready for an experienced team without leaders. He didn't make the adjustments he needed to. He couldn't find the buttons to push with this senior class to get them to take ownership. I think he was a little blindsided. On the other hand, he knows that he is going to have to do an insane about of teaching next year. He will be ready.
Quote from: mubuzz on March 05, 2014, 09:30:10 AM
I disagree with the great defense comment. Cotton goes for 25 which is above his average...how is someone scoring more than their average equal great defense? I would say solid, great would be 10 pts or less in my opinion. Heck on the basis of that stupid Hail Mary defensive coverage at the end of the game he should be automatically downgraded.
Cotton's avearge is 22 ppg. That is while averaging 40 minutes a game. He got 10 extra minutes last night to get those 3 extra points. He shot 32% from the floor, 10% below his season average. All of that is significant.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 05, 2014, 09:30:21 AM
TAMU
I don't hate Derrick Wilson. At this point he's our best option at PG, but that doesn't mean I have to make believe he's anything other than an average defender and an offensively absent player. We won't win with him being our best option either for the remainder of this season or next year if someone else cannot take away the majority of his minutes.
Didn't mean to label you as a D Wil hater. I was trying to distiguish you from the "slurpers." Things that I and other posters add to the convo are often written off as blind love for Derrick and Buzz.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 05, 2014, 12:36:08 AM
I told my wife on Saturday during the Nova game that Buzz looked severely stressed out....just could see it in his face. She laughed a bit and said he looks like you at times. Not good for the soul or the heart. This has been a tough year on him I am sure because he is wearing it for many to see.
This may be the first year he feels he is underpaid. I just wonder when the "young coach" tag goes away. In three years? Five?
Quote from: tower912 on March 05, 2014, 12:09:33 PM
C-. IMO, the single biggest weakness of this team is that the seniors, with the exception of Jake, didn't lead. IMO, Buzz's biggest failure of the year is the same one that many here made, and that is he expected the seniors to take on the mantle of leadership like other had before. Granted, Vander could have been that guy, but he was gone. Buzz said in October that the seniors weren't stepping up. I'm not sure Buzz, for all of the preparation and study he has done on so many details, was ready for an experienced team without leaders. He didn't make the adjustments he needed to. He couldn't find the buttons to push with this senior class to get them to take ownership. I think he was a little blindsided. On the other hand, he knows that he is going to have to do an insane about of teaching next year. He will be ready.
Tower - Think you are way too caught up in leadership...leadership, can't put the ball in the basket...can't change opposing coaches from defending the team a certain way. You can have great leaders, but if in basketball, the floor general is totally overmatched for his role - it just doesn't matter if Davante or Jamil are being good "leaders." You are still going to lose games.
Buzz had the choice all year to push a button at the PG position, and it is the only button he would not push..and it was painfully obvious to virtually everyone....that if nothing changed, nothing was going to change about our results. Buzz chose to play 4 on 5 on the offensive end, thinking the defensive upside would win games...the strategy failed. Why he's continued to choose to trot out the starting lineup he has in both halves, is beyond explanation - other than sheer stubbornness....or perhaps it isn't that...and it is just Buzz trying to make everyone happy on the team...and give them some minutes/PT...but you just can't play that game at this point/level.
Quote from: MarkusSharkus on March 04, 2014, 11:30:47 PM
If he wants to leave, so be it. Marquette is the biggest spending program in the country. The program is bigger than the coach.
Not a lot of bang for those bucks, eh? Regardless, I dont believe those numbers anyway.
He gets a D- for many reasons: The record, given the pre-season expectations and talent returning; for his supreme stubbornness at continuing to play a PG 30 plus minutes a game that cannot shoot, score or make FT's; for failing to develop frosh during a down year(other than Burton); for making ridiculous and outrageous statements about Derrick and dissing people in public; for a defense that was atrocious at defending the 3; for failure to have a single signature win--hell, even BC has one; etc.
Quote from: ecompt on March 05, 2014, 12:45:27 PM
This may be the first year he feels he is underpaid. I just wonder when the "young coach" tag goes away. In three years? Five?
Underpaid--at 2.5 million per year? He was overpaid this year.
Quote from: Ners on March 05, 2014, 12:48:07 PM
Why he's continued to choose to trot out the starting lineup he has in both halves, is beyond explanation - other than sheer stubbornness
If they aren't playing starter minutes does it really matter who starts? If Juan gets 5 minutes scattered through out 40 minutes but isn't "starting" does it make a difference?
Quote from: willie warrior on March 05, 2014, 12:56:35 PM
for his supreme stubbornness at continuing to play a PG 30 plus minutes a game that cannot shoot, score or make FT's;
What's your theory behind why Buzz stuck with Derrick when it's obvious to everyone that we should go another direction? I'm looking for a serious, logical answer. I have my conclusion but I want to know why you think a highly paid division 1 record with a proven track record of winning makes this very obviously wrong choice.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 05, 2014, 10:44:18 AM
Buzz is under pressure from us as fans, the media, etc. He is hearing it from all angles. He isn't oblivious to the comments, etc. Heck, he even said he hears it from his family. This creates pressure, like it or not. Buzz is under a lot more stress than previously.
The MU fans, media, etc. are puppy dogs compared to other potential programs where a coach like ours could go. From what I know watching Buzz on and off the court.....he certainly can handle this 'pressure cooker'.
Quote from: Ners on March 05, 2014, 12:48:07 PM
Tower - Think you are way too caught up in leadership...leadership, can't put the ball in the basket...can't change opposing coaches from defending the team a certain way. You can have great leaders, but if in basketball, the floor general is totally overmatched for his role - it just doesn't matter if Davante or Jamil are being good "leaders." You are still going to lose games.
Buzz had the choice all year to push a button at the PG position, and it is the only button he would not push..and it was painfully obvious to virtually everyone....that if nothing changed, nothing was going to change about our results. Buzz chose to play 4 on 5 on the offensive end, thinking the defensive upside would win games...the strategy failed. Why he's continued to choose to trot out the starting lineup he has in both halves, is beyond explanation - other than sheer stubbornness....or perhaps it isn't that...and it is just Buzz trying to make everyone happy on the team...and give them some minutes/PT...but you just can't play that game at this point/level.
Actually, Ners might be correct at this point. If you look at Sports-Reference.com for conference play Derrick Wilson's ORtg is 97.7 to Dawson's 97.0 but they incorrectly have Derrick's stats for the loss @ Nova credited to Duane Wilson. His ORtg in that game was 42.6 and I'd assume that horrendous showing would put him under the 97 mark for the season. He still is the better defender but it's not a huge discrepancy.
For the season he still has the edge in numbers but if you limit the data to strictly conference play our team would be averaging more points/game if Dawson was receiving the minutes.
His last two games have been two of the ugliest games I've ever seen a PG play in my life.
Quote from: mu03eng on March 05, 2014, 01:00:52 PM
What's your theory behind why Buzz stuck with Derrick when it's obvious to everyone that we should go another direction? I'm looking for a serious, logical answer. I have my conclusion but I want to know why you think a highly paid division 1 record with a proven track record of winning makes this very obviously wrong choice.
Stubborness on Buzz's part. He shot his mouth off last year by saying Derrick should start over Cadougan, which IMO is more of the same of the guy making ridiculous statements. Cadougan graduated, so Buzz had to stand by his statement. He had the perfect out for himself when he decided to RedShirt Du. Wilson, because then there was nobody else in the cupboard to compare Derrick's performance to. Unless you want to compare to Dawson. Buzz is not the downhome lonesome cowboy that he pretends to be
Derrick is a better than average defender, but is not elite like Buzz says. Derrick is not a gamechanger like Buzz says, but if he gave significant minutes to somebody else, in Buzz's mind he would look more foolish. There are plenty of people that say that Buzz never meant what he said. It was "motivational technique". I do not believe that for a minute. He stuck his foot in his mouth, and then he had no way to extricate it other than to continue to make Derrick the man, IMO opinion due to stubbornness. And he has the perfect alibi--no other option, which many have bought into. Now the real test will be to see what he does with that position next year. Does anybody really believe that he will see the light? Don't think so, unless Travis Diener Jr. shows up next year.
Buzz controls the process.
Have there been other highly paid coaches that may have occasionally lost their way because of a stubborn streak. Sure, try Bobby Knight for one.
Quote from: Ners on March 05, 2014, 12:48:07 PM
Tower - Think you are way too caught up in leadership...leadership, can't put the ball in the basket...can't change opposing coaches from defending the team a certain way. You can have great leaders, but if in basketball, the floor general is totally overmatched for his role - it just doesn't matter if Davante or Jamil are being good "leaders." You are still going to lose games.
Buzz had the choice all year to push a button at the PG position, and it is the only button he would not push..and it was painfully obvious to virtually everyone....that if nothing changed, nothing was going to change about our results. Buzz chose to play 4 on 5 on the offensive end, thinking the defensive upside would win games...the strategy failed. Why he's continued to choose to trot out the starting lineup he has in both halves, is beyond explanation - other than sheer stubbornness....or perhaps it isn't that...and it is just Buzz trying to make everyone happy on the team...and give them some minutes/PT...but you just can't play that game at this point/level.
Perhaps you should look up the word 'irony' before you accuse someone else of being too caught up in something.
tower I quoted your post incorrectly, my response was meant for TAMU. Sorry
Quote from: willie warrior on March 05, 2014, 02:12:55 PM
Stubborness on Buzz's part. He shot his mouth off last year by saying Derrick should start over Cadougan, which IMO is more of the same of the guy making ridiculous statements. Cadougan graduated, so Buzz had to stand by his statement. He had the perfect out for himself when he decided to RedShirt Du. Wilson, because then there was nobody else in the cupboard to compare Derrick's performance to. Unless you want to compare to Dawson. Buzz is not the downhome lonesome cowboy that he pretends to be
Derrick is a better than average defender, but is not elite like Buzz says. Derrick is not a gamechanger like Buzz says, but if he gave significant minutes to somebody else, in Buzz's mind he would look more foolish. There are plenty of people that say that Buzz never meant what he said. It was "motivational technique". I do not believe that for a minute. He stuck his foot in his mouth, and then he had no way to extricate it other than to continue to make Derrick the man, IMO opinion due to stubbornness. And he has the perfect alibi--no other option, which many have bought into. Now the real test will be to see what he does with that position next year. Does anybody really believe that he will see the light? Don't think so, unless Travis Diener Jr. shows up next year.
Buzz controls the process.
Have there been other highly paid coaches that may have occasionally lost their way because of a stubborn streak. Sure, try Bobby Knight for one.
Let me boil this down to what I think you are saying. Buzz made a mistake in believing the Derrick Wilson was the point guard for this season. When proven that Derrick wasn't, Buzz decided to ignore that evidence. What's more he has actively lied to media and the fanbase in explaining his decisions. He also chose to lose games rather than "admit" an mistake.
Is there anything in accurate in this statement? If not, if you truly believes this, are you not calling for his firing? If I believed this was even remotely true I would call for his immediate dismissal.
Quote from: willie warrior on March 05, 2014, 02:12:55 PM
Have there been other highly paid coaches that may have occasionally lost their way because of a stubborn streak. Sure, try Bobby Knight for one.
Bobby Knight was stubborn, no doubt about that. He never would have let a bunch of know nothings on a message board tell him who to play and who to sit. Al was stubborn, too. Started Bill Neary (a player much worse than Derrick) throughout the 76-77 season while Bernard Toone (a player light years better than John Dawson) languished on the bench.
No doubt Buzz is stubborn too. You don't have the enormous success he's had at such an early age without a very strong belief in what you perceive to be the right way to run a program. He'll continue to award playing time based on those principles and not by polling Scoop members. Some will be okay with that. Some will be okay with that only when we meet or exceed their expectations. Some will be okay with that only if we win every game and look good doing it.
But one thing Buzz isn't is stupid. He knows that the guys who slap him on the back the hardest in good times will often be the ones who bitch the loudest during challenging ones. They bought a pennant or a hat, perhaps a ticket (season tickets even). Maybe they even spent 4 (or more) years on the campus spending Daddy and Mommy's money. They're entitled. Buzz and the players "owe" them. Bullcrap.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on March 05, 2014, 03:11:56 PM
Bobby Knight was stubborn, no doubt about that. He never would have let a bunch of know nothings on a message board tell him who to play and who to sit. Al was stubborn, too. Started Bill Neary (a player much worse than Derrick) throughout the 76-77 season while Bernard Toone (a player light years better than John Dawson) languished on the bench.
No doubt Buzz is stubborn too. You don't have the enormous success he's had at such an early age without a very strong belief in what you perceive to be the right way to run a program. He'll continue to award playing time based on those principles and not by polling Scoop members. Some will be okay with that. Some will be okay with that only when we meet or exceed their expectations. Some will be okay with that only if we win every game and look good doing it.
But one thing Buzz isn't is stupid. He knows that the guys who slap him on the back the hardest in good times will often be the ones who bitch the loudest during challenging ones. They bought a pennant or a hat, perhaps a ticket (season tickets even). Maybe they even spent 4 (or more) years on the campus spending Daddy and Mommy's money. They're entitled. Buzz and the players "owe" them. Bullcrap.
Now there is a comparison--Derrick better than Neary. I will give you that Toone was very talented, but he did play quite a bit. Al's reasoning, as I recall was that Toone was not very coachable. But I do not quite get the leap to comparing Neary to Derrick as a defense for Buzz.
Quote from: mu03eng on March 05, 2014, 12:58:59 PM
If they aren't playing starter minutes does it really matter who starts? If Juan gets 5 minutes scattered through out 40 minutes but isn't "starting" does it make a difference?
As much as Buzz has gone on record stating how valuable every possession is...and how he's been so afraid to let Dawson run 20+ minutes per game when getting so little from Derrick - I'd say yes, it does make a difference if you scatter 5 minutes per half to a player that is not even in the same zip code in ability as Deonte....
I have had the opportunity to speak to Buzz on multiple occasions. He is definitely stubborn. However, he is one of the most genuine and win hungry men I have ever meant. Buzz desires character and winning above all else. I can't believe for a second that Buzz would lose a single game just to prove a point.
Quote from: tower912 on March 05, 2014, 02:14:46 PM
Perhaps you should look up the word 'irony' before you accuse someone else of being too caught up in something.
I appreciate the humor attempt Tower...but...if you want to deny that PG play isn't what is far and away the biggest achilles heel on this team...and attribute the season to lack of leadership - I guess go ahead...but like I said, leadership doesn't put the ball in the basket and can't stop the opposition from packing the paint and making life hell for Davante and Jamil.
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:54:58 PM
This is coming from someone in the know. What grade would you give Buzz this year? Be honest.
I pretty bored with hearing "from someone in the know".
Quote from: Ners on March 05, 2014, 07:08:43 PM
I appreciate the humor attempt Tower...but...if you want to deny that PG play isn't what is far and away the biggest achilles heel on this team...and attribute the season to lack of leadership - I guess go ahead...but like I said, leadership doesn't put the ball in the basket and can't stop the opposition from packing the paint and making life hell for Davante and Jamil.
If there was a Vander Blue/DJO/Jae/JFB/Lazar style leader on this team, we would be celebrating Derrick as a defensive minded, caretaker PG. I've watched the same games you have.
Quote from: tower912 on March 05, 2014, 07:16:54 PM
If there was a Vander Blue/DJO/Jae/JFB/Lazar style leader on this team, we would be celebrating Derrick as a defensive minded, caretaker PG. I've watched the same games you have.
Wow! Agree to disagree. Did Todd Mayo not look like Vander or DJO last night? Think if we had Cadougan's standard 8-10 points against Providence last night we would have won?
Quote from: Lennys Tap on March 05, 2014, 03:11:56 PM
Bobby Knight was stubborn, no doubt about that. He never would have let a bunch of know nothings on a message board tell him who to play and who to sit. Al was stubborn, too. Started Bill Neary (a player much worse than Derrick) throughout the 76-77 season while Bernard Toone (a player light years better than John Dawson) languished on the bench.
No doubt Buzz is stubborn too. You don't have the enormous success he's had at such an early age without a very strong belief in what you perceive to be the right way to run a program. He'll continue to award playing time based on those principles and not by polling Scoop members. Some will be okay with that. Some will be okay with that only when we meet or exceed their expectations. Some will be okay with that only if we win every game and look good doing it.
But one thing Buzz isn't is stupid. He knows that the guys who slap him on the back the hardest in good times will often be the ones who bitch the loudest during challenging ones. They bought a pennant or a hat, perhaps a ticket (season tickets even). Maybe they even spent 4 (or more) years on the campus spending Daddy and Mommy's money. They're entitled. Buzz and the players "owe" them. Bullcrap.
As I recall...1976-1977 turned out pretty well, correct? Now, if we go on an improbable run, make the NCAA and with the National Championship....I will go along with your point. ;D
Quote from: We R Final Four on March 05, 2014, 01:15:53 PM
The MU fans, media, etc. are puppy dogs compared to other potential programs where a coach like ours could go. From what I know watching Buzz on and off the court.....he certainly can handle this 'pressure cooker'.
You beat me to this.
Buzz has it very,
very easy and I assume he is smart and savvy enough to know it. He gets only praise nationally, and locally there is no just about no media paying attention to his program.
So what ... he is going to leave because a couple hundred knuckleheads on fan boards occasionally criticize him? Is there anyplace he could go that would be considered at least a lateral move and where he would face even less scrutiny? (SMU probably would have qualified, actually!)
If Buzz goes anywhere, it won't be because of the half-dozen Scoopers who think he should be fired.
Great point. And to be more specific, in the entire college basketball junkie world, the ONLY people who would even suggest Buzz should be fired are a few Badger board denizens and some knuckleheads on this board. And there are times I suspect there is overlap among those two subsets.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 05, 2014, 07:04:28 PM
I have had the opportunity to speak to Buzz on multiple occasions. He is definitely stubborn. However, he is one of the most genuine and win hungry men I have ever meant. Buzz desires character and winning above all else. I can't believe for a second that Buzz would lose a single game just to prove a point.
Well, start imagining it because it looks like it happened this year. Why the hell was Derrick in the game at the end against Providence? For Defense? Nope, he had 4 fouls and committed the gamechanging loser foul on Cotton? For FT shooting? Nope, he was 1-4 that game and is at 45% for the year. To show that his taveling TO was a mistake? Don't see it. Oh I get it, to inbound the ball to Jake. Several others could have done that--dawson, Otule, JJJ.
Quote from: mu03eng on March 05, 2014, 02:29:16 PM
Let me boil this down to what I think you are saying. Buzz made a mistake in believing the Derrick Wilson was the point guard for this season. When proven that Derrick wasn't, Buzz decided to ignore that evidence. What's more he has actively lied to media and the fanbase in explaining his decisions. He also chose to lose games rather than "admit" an mistake.
Is there anything in accurate in this statement? If not, if you truly believes this, are you not calling for his firing? If I believed this was even remotely true I would call for his immediate dismissal.
No there is nothing accurate in your statement.
OK--your premise states that we have lost games because of Derrick. You should agree to that. So why does he keep playing him in such situations as Providence end of game? Maybe to prove a point that Derrick is his man. Not saying to deliberately lose the game, but hoping that he will finally come through and win one. That is where the stubbornness comes in, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of what Derrick is--a good kid with marginal talent. Sorry if you cannot see this, but the rest of what you said, putting what you think I am saying is just your opinion. No more valuable or less valuable than my opinion. The guy asked me what I believed--I responded. And I have responded to you--nothing accurate in you statement. And by the way, I have posted on numerous occasions of Buzz's misleading and untrue statements, so I am not going over those again. You just do not want to consider any of this because it is contrary to your beliefs. Buzz's stubborn loyalty to Derrick has cost us games this year--not because he deliberately wanted to lose, but because he hoped that Derrick would come through--to defend his position. If you have never met people like that, sorry--they are out there. the stubborn loyalty trumps the objectivity.
And guess what? There are others that believe similarly, and have said so on this board.
Quote from: willie warrior on March 06, 2014, 09:45:06 AM
No there is nothing accurate in your statement.
OK--your premise states that we have lost games because of Derrick. You should agree to that. So why does he keep playing him in such situations as Providence end of game? Maybe to prove a point that Derrick is his man. Not saying to deliberately lose the game, but hoping that he will finally come through and win one. That is where the stubbornness comes in, in spite of the overwhelming evidence of what Derrick is--a good kid with marginal talent. Sorry if you cannot see this, but the rest of what you said, putting what you think I am saying is just your opinion. No more valuable or less valuable than my opinion. The guy asked me what I believed--I responded. And I have responded to you--nothing accurate in you statement. And by the way, I have posted on numerous occasions of Buzz's misleading and untrue statements, so I am not going over those again. You just do not want to consider any of this because it is contrary to your beliefs. Buzz's stubborn loyalty to Derrick has cost us games this year--not because he deliberately wanted to lose, but because he hoped that Derrick would come through--to defend his position. If you have never met people like that, sorry--they are out there. the stubborn loyalty trumps the objectivity.
And guess what? There are others that believe similarly, and have said so on this board.
I've definitely "met" someone who's stubbornness trumps their objectivity......perhaps a mirror would be useful for you.
My post to you was never, ever about defending Wilson. My post was simply about you saying that Buzz has lied about why he plays Derrick. You have also stated that he makes untrue and misleading statements....these are grounds for termination. You don't seem to want to go there, why not?
You have no idea what my beliefs are and what I want to believe. You also assume I am rejecting your premise that Derrick Wilson was an issue for this team, I believe he was an issue. However, I don't believe that Buzz intentionally ran him out there even though he was clearly not the answer. If that was true, at best he was hoping he would play better and was risking an entire season on hope, and at worst he was so insecure as to ignore the evidence to "prove a point".
I really should give up, but I'm bound and determined to get a rational opinion from you on this because your current position is so illogical and incongruant as to defy explanation.
Quote from: mu03eng on March 06, 2014, 10:54:18 AM
I've definitely "met" someone who's stubbornness trumps their objectivity......perhaps a mirror would be useful for you.
My post to you was never, ever about defending Wilson. My post was simply about you saying that Buzz has lied about why he plays Derrick. You have also stated that he makes untrue and misleading statements....these are grounds for termination. You don't seem to want to go there, why not?
You have no idea what my beliefs are and what I want to believe. You also assume I am rejecting your premise that Derrick Wilson was an issue for this team, I believe he was an issue. However, I don't believe that Buzz intentionally ran him out there even though he was clearly not the answer. If that was true, at best he was hoping he would play better and was risking an entire season on hope, and at worst he was so insecure as to ignore the evidence to "prove a point".
I really should give up, but I'm bound and determined to get a rational opinion from you on this because your current position is so illogical and incongruant as to defy explanation.
My position is not illogical just because you think so.Just explained it you, sorry you do not get it. Two examples of Buzz: Derrick is a gamechanger and the best defensive player he has ever coached. Both untrue. Derrick has cost this team losses. Never said Buzz is losing on purpose, he is losing because of his stubborn loyalty to him. That is very logical. In fact, it is obvious. I give up on you so end of discussion.
What I've learned from this thread.
I wish I had the time back it took to read it
Buzz would rather PO a few chuckleheads on an internet board than win ballgames
Got it.
Quote from: mu03eng on March 06, 2014, 10:54:18 AM
I've definitely "met" someone who's stubbornness trumps their objectivity......perhaps a mirror would be useful for you.
My post to you was never, ever about defending Wilson. My post was simply about you saying that Buzz has lied about why he plays Derrick. You have also stated that he makes untrue and misleading statements....these are grounds for termination. You don't seem to want to go there, why not?
You have no idea what my beliefs are and what I want to believe. You also assume I am rejecting your premise that Derrick Wilson was an issue for this team, I believe he was an issue. However, I don't believe that Buzz intentionally ran him out there even though he was clearly not the answer. If that was true, at best he was hoping he would play better and was risking an entire season on hope, and at worst he was so insecure as to ignore the evidence to "prove a point".
I really should give up, but I'm bound and determined to get a rational opinion from you on this because your current position is so illogical and incongruant as to defy explanation.
I've come to the conclusion that willie is just an AI program designed to craft responses as the collective consciousness of the JSonline comments section. Could the mods please direct that account's email to the folks responsible for the Turing prize?
Quote from: akmarq on March 06, 2014, 12:07:25 PM
I've come to the conclusion that willie is just an AI program designed to craft responses as the collective consciousness of the JSonline comments section. Could the mods please direct that account's email to the folks responsible for the Turing prize?
Completely agree, and I've finally gotten to the point where I have someone on ignore....banner day for me :)
Quote from: mubuzz on March 05, 2014, 09:30:10 AM
I disagree with the great defense comment. Cotton goes for 25 which is above his average...how is someone scoring more than their average equal great defense? I would say solid, great would be 10 pts or less in my opinion. Heck on the basis of that stupid Hail Mary defensive coverage at the end of the game he should be automatically downgraded.
These are the comments that I find frustrating.
You, me, every poster on this board and every single fan that watched that game has no idea what the game plan was heading into this game and what the defensive assignment was each time down the floor. Buzz had color coded cards that he used to switch up how he wanted defend screens and he switched them up often.
None of us can determine who was ultimately responsible for any of Cotton's 25 points, other than his last 2 points. So to say that Derrick had a great defensive game, an average defensive game or a horrible defensive game based on Cotton's points is ABSURD. Only Buzz, the coaching staff and the players know and guess who decides playing time based on results. Oh thats right Buzz. I HIGHLY doubt that Buzz is going to play inferior players extended minutes of time because he likes them. He wants to win and will play players who give him the best chance to win. Based on playing time, it is obvious that Buzz believes Derrick running the point gives his team a better chance to win. That does not mean that Dawson doesn't have a higher ceiling and could over take him at some point in time, it just means today, he is not there.
I personally LOVE the potential that Dawson shows. His ability to take and hit a shot is a breath of fresh air when compared to Derrick. He is going to be a very good player but to argue over playing time when none of us know what Buzz wants and demands is beyond silly.
Maybe I am foolish that I will give the benefit of the doubt to a man who has coached SUCCESSFULLY at a high level over my couch potato and junior high school recreational coaching but I will push my chips in on his coaching decisions over ANYONE on this board. That doesn't mean Buzz doesn't make mistakes. It just means that I think he knows his team, his players, his coaching philosophy better than anyone else.
Quote from: mu03eng on March 06, 2014, 12:28:40 PM
Completely agree, and I've finally gotten to the point where I have someone on ignore....banner day for me :)
Bad move! How do you plan on remembering that reading is fundamental!?!
Quote from: mufanatic on March 06, 2014, 12:47:48 PM
These are the comments that I find frustrating.
You, me, every poster on this board and every single fan that watched that game has no idea what the game plan was heading into this game and what the defensive assignment was each time down the floor. Buzz had color coded cards that he used to switch up how he wanted defend screens and he switched them up often.
None of us can determine who was ultimately responsible for any of Cotton's 25 points, other than his last 2 points. So to say that Derrick had a great defensive game, an average defensive game or a horrible defensive game based on Cotton's points is ABSURD. Only Buzz, the coaching staff and the players know and guess who decides playing time based on results. Oh thats right Buzz. I HIGHLY doubt that Buzz is going to play inferior players extended minutes of time because he likes them. He wants to win and will play players who give him the best chance to win. Based on playing time, it is obvious that Buzz believes Derrick running the point gives his team a better chance to win. That does not mean that Dawson doesn't have a higher ceiling and could over take him at some point in time, it just means today, he is not there.
I personally LOVE the potential that Dawson shows. His ability to take and hit a shot is a breath of fresh air when compared to Derrick. He is going to be a very good player but to argue over playing time when none of us know what Buzz wants and demands is beyond silly.
Maybe I am foolish that I will give the benefit of the doubt to a man who has coached SUCCESSFULLY at a high level over my couch potato and junior high school recreational coaching but I will push my chips in on his coaching decisions over ANYONE on this board. That doesn't mean Buzz doesn't make mistakes. It just means that I think he knows his team, his players, his coaching philosophy better than anyone else.
You would choose Buzz coaching over the thousands on Scoop? What if Doc Rivers was a member? I'd take that bet.
Also, it's only opinions. We don't need to know the game plan.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on March 05, 2014, 12:36:08 AM
I told my wife on Saturday during the Nova game that Buzz looked severely stressed out....just could see it in his face. She laughed a bit and said he looks like you at times. Not good for the soul or the heart. This has been a tough year on him I am sure because he is wearing it for many to see.
For the time he has been here he has been loyal to his seniors and juniors. Every year he has had that go to guy or guys from those classes who thought if they worked really hard they just might have a chance at the next level. Not this year, which is the reason for all the frustration.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on March 06, 2014, 01:02:28 PM
You would choose Buzz coaching over the thousands on Scoop?
Absolutely. 100% of the time. Wouldn't need a second to think about it.
Quote from: willie warrior on March 06, 2014, 09:28:44 AM
Well, start imagining it because it looks like it happened this year. Why the hell was Derrick in the game at the end against Providence? For Defense? Nope, he had 4 fouls and committed the gamechanging loser foul on Cotton? For FT shooting? Nope, he was 1-4 that game and is at 45% for the year. To show that his taveling TO was a mistake? Don't see it. Oh I get it, to inbound the ball to Jake. Several others could have done that--dawson, Otule, JJJ.
Defense. Maybe he's thinking "Gee, when Derrick is guarding Cotton (one of the best scorers in the country) he is 2-11 from the floor. When John is guarding Cotton he is 3-5 from the floor. Maybe I should play Derrick in case we need defense."
The call ended up not working because Jake got tied up, the ref didn't call the foul, and then Derrick made a dumb foul. None of those are things that Buzz could forsee.
Personally, I would have had Jamil in bound the ball and have Dawson in as another FT shooter. Then sub in Derrick after the free throws that probably would have been coming. But Buzz saw it differently. Either call could have worked great or terribly. As a coach you do the best with the information you have. Sometimes you will be wrong. But the doesn't mean you made a bad decision.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 02:38:12 PM
Either call could have worked great or terribly. As a coach you do the best with the information you have. Sometimes you will be wrong. But the doesn't mean you made a bad decision.
Well, coaching is a bottom-line business. If your call works, you made the right decision. If it doesn't, you made the wrong decision. The buck has to stop at the coach, and he gets paid handsomely to have the buck stop at him.
I'm a huge Buzz fan, but he's not flawless. He makes plenty of bad decisions -- as do Coach K, Roy Williams and Bill Self. Thankfully, he makes far more good decisions; if he didn't, he never would have gotten this far in coaching. Only a total drooling moron would look at Buzz's body of work and say he should be fired for what has happened this season.
Still, as fans, we do have the right to criticize his poor decisions, especially when the right decisions were fairly obvious. It's not second-guessing when you see them line up and you turn to your friend and say, "Derrick shouldn't be in this game!" And then the ball goes to Jake and the defense is swarming him and you're screaming at the TV:
"You have 2 time outs. Use one!"And I know I'm not the only one who "first-guessed" like that.
Buzz had two decisions to make there (personnel; time-out management), and he messed up both. As much as I love the guy, I have the right to say that.
Had it worked out fine and MU won, the decisions wouldn't have been wrong ... and that's life as a coach.
Quote from: MU82 on March 06, 2014, 03:05:27 PM
Well, coaching is a bottom-line business. If your call works, you made the right decision. If it doesn't, you made the wrong decision. The buck has to stop at the coach, and he gets paid handsomely to have the buck stop at him.
I'm a huge Buzz fan, but he's not flawless. He makes plenty of bad decisions -- as do Coach K, Roy Williams and Bill Self. Thankfully, he makes far more good decisions; if he didn't, he never would have gotten this far in coaching. Only a total drooling moron would look at Buzz's body of work and say he should be fired for what has happened this season.
Still, as fans, we do have the right to criticize his poor decisions, especially when the right decisions were fairly obvious. It's not second-guessing when you see them line up and you turn to your friend and say, "Derrick shouldn't be in this game!" And then the ball goes to Jake and the defense is swarming him and you're screaming at the TV: "You have 2 time outs. Use one!"
And I know I'm not the only one who "first-guessed" like that.
Buzz had two decisions to make there (personnel; time-out management), and he messed up both. As much as I love the guy, I have the right to say that.
Had it worked out fine and MU won, the decisions wouldn't have been wrong ... and that's life as a coach.
You are right. He made the wrong decision because it didn't work out. That's the nature of the business. The point I was trying to make is that at the time, with the information he had, he had two options at PG. Both options had their strengths, both had their weaknesses. He made a call that was completely legitimate. If we win, it is the right call. Because we lost, it was the wrong call.
The time out was another thing entirely. You get tied up in that situation, you call a time out. Does anyone know if he attempted to call time out and the ref just didn't give it to him?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 03:24:35 PM
The time out was another thing entirely. You get tied up in that situation, you call a time out. Does anyone know if he attempted to call time out and the ref just didn't give it to him?
The tie up happened so fast there was no chance of getting a timeout called or granted.
You inbound the ball, knowing that the defenders are going to swarm towards the ball and you anticipate a foul is going to be called as most of the time it is. By the time anyone realized that Cotton had his hands on the ball it was too late to call a timeout, and a tie up was called. So I find it hard to believe anyone was screaming at the tv begging for a timeout to be called before it was already too late.
As far as personnel on the in-bounds play. We could argue the merits of who and why should be in there but Buzz put in his players who have had the most overall experience and minutes of action on the season. Those that have gone through countless of in-bounds plays. To put in a player with limited experience in a pressure situation doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I am going to guess, because I don't know for sure, that Derrick has in-bounded the ball on countless occasions this season and Buzz felt comfortable with Derrick in bounding the ball as he wanted him in the game but didn't want him on the floor getting fouled. It didn't work so we criticize his thinking but frankly that is hindsight 20/20 bs. I will say that I am not a fan of Buzz's in bounds plays. Its seems like its always an adventure.
Quote from: mufanatic on March 06, 2014, 04:30:16 PM
As far as personnel on the in-bounds play. We could argue the merits of who and why should be in there but Buzz put in his players who have had the most overall experience and minutes of action on the season. Those that have gone through countless of in-bounds plays. To put in a player with limited experience in a pressure situation doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I am going to guess, because I don't know for sure, that Derrick has in-bounded the ball on countless occasions this season and Buzz felt comfortable with Derrick in bounding the ball as he wanted him in the game but didn't want him on the floor getting fouled. It didn't work so we criticize his thinking but frankly that is hindsight 20/20 bs. I will say that I am not a fan of Buzz's in bounds plays. Its seems like its always an adventure.
And putting in the players with the most experience has worked out how well this season?
And it is not hindsight to say that Derrick should not be on the floor anytime there is an offensive possession with a game on the line. It has been stated many times this year on this forum. Maybe we can call it foresight rather than hindsight.
Quote from: brandx on March 06, 2014, 04:43:33 PM
And putting in the players with the most experience has worked out how well this season?
And it is not hindsight to say that Derrick should not be on the floor anytime there is an offensive possession with a game on the line. It has been stated many times this year on this forum. Maybe we can call it foresight rather than hindsight.
I think that is the exact reason Derrick inbounded the ball. Didn't want to let the Friars play hack a Derrick.
It's not the call I would have made. I would have put Dawson, Mayo, Thomas, Jamil, and Gardner. Jamil is the worst FT shooter in that group but also a good inbounder. Give him them inbounds and he has 4 FT shooters to throw to.
Buzz made a different call. It wasn't a bad one. He thought having Derrick inbound would neutralize the hack a Derrick, keep more experience on the floor, and have a defensive player out there in case things went wrong. I just didn't work out this time.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 05:02:00 PM
I think that is the exact reason Derrick inbounded the ball. Didn't want to let the Friars play hack a Derrick.
It's not the call I would have made. I would have put Dawson, Mayo, Thomas, Jamil, and Gardner. Jamil is the worst FT shooter in that group but also a good inbounder. Give him them inbounds and he has 4 FT shooters to throw to.
Buzz made a different call. It wasn't a bad one. He thought having Derrick inbound would neutralize the hack a Derrick, keep more experience on the floor, and have a defensive player out there in case things went wrong. I just didn't work out this time.
TAMU, I think the correct five on the floor for that situation should have been as follows:
INBOUNDER: Juan Anderson - he's long enough if you put a defender on him to still get a pass off and he's a 71% FT shooter on the season.
REMAINING PLAYERS: Mayo, Thomas, J Wilson and Gardner with my initial look trying to get Todd the ball as he's our best ball handler in those situations. If Mayo catches the inbounds pass there's virtually no way he doesn't get fouled. I'd have a Jamil scree for him and be an outlet with Gardner as your secondary read around half court towards the sideline with Thomas opposite him on the court to successfully cross half court with a good pass to beat the press/foul attempts.
Help me out. If an offensive oriented player with good shot selection scores considerably more than a defensive player why is the defensive player held in such high esteem and not the offensive player? It seems like a simple concept that it is the sum of both offensive and defensive skills that should be considered but on this team we it appears we only value defense. Remember how long it took for Devonte to get playing minutes? Agreed he will never be a great defender but when you look at the whole picture it is a different story. In contrast Vander played good defense and got minutes early on even though he had to develop an outside shot and the ability to drive without losing the ball. With different players this story has been played many times and this year it caught up with us given the disparity in skill sets. Seriously I agree the coaching staff knows a lot more than me so what am I missing? I am not frustrated with the Team because I think they all are contributors and are playing their hearts out. I also still think they can win the tourney but only eith the right mix of offense/defense and risk taking. I also think if you want consistent play you need play for extended minutes. Has any coach been successful when substituting every minute or two? I assume some of the experts here can highlight some examples where this has worked. If we pull someone out after every mistake or when we go from O to D what happens to their confidence? I think playing Mayo in the second half after a weak 1st was a risk but a risk that must be taken with high energy game changers. We need to "seize the day" and not take the safe road IHMO. What do we have to lose?
Buzz is a young coach who does have a lot to learn. It's really hard to understand how he could coach so poorly throughout this season after the success he had previously. What happened to him? Where was his mind? Some of his mistakes are so obvious that it's hard to understand his logic. It seemed that he failed to coach the players up this year and that goes for the whole team including the freshmen. Perhaps Buzz needs better assistant coaches.
Quote from: Class71 on March 06, 2014, 08:20:29 PM
Help me out. If an offensive oriented player with good shot selection scores considerably more than a defensive player why is the defensive player held in such high esteem and not the offensive player? It seems like a simple concept that it is the sum of both offensive and defensive skills that should be considered but on this team we it appears we only value defense. Remember how long it took for Devonte to get playing minutes? Agreed he will never be a great defender but when you look at the whole picture it is a different story. In contrast Vander played good defense and got minutes early on even though he had to develop an outside shot and the ability to drive without losing the ball. With different players this story has been played many times and this year it caught up with us given the disparity in skill sets. Seriously I agree the coaching staff knows a lot more than me so what am I missing? I am not frustrated with the Team because I think they all are contributors and are playing their hearts out. I also still think they can win the tourney but only eith the right mix of offense/defense and risk taking. I also think if you want consistent play you need play for extended minutes. Has any coach been successful when substituting every minute or two? I assume some of the experts here can highlight some examples where this has worked. If we pull someone out after every mistake or when we go from O to D what happens to their confidence? I think playing Mayo in the second half after a weak 1st was a risk but a risk that must be taken with high energy game changers. We need to "seize the day" and not take the safe road IHMO. What do we have to lose?
Here's the hypothesis I'm working with:
Buzz prefers consistency (even consistently low output) over inconsistency. He prefers "safe" over risk. And he prefers the known over the unknown. He also believes he and the players have a lot more control over the defensive end than the offensive end. And, so, that's why he's playing the "better" defensive players more.
Quote from: Stretchdeltsig on March 07, 2014, 07:51:11 AM
Buzz is a young coach who does have a lot to learn. It's really hard to understand how he could coach so poorly throughout this season after the success he had previously. What happened to him? Where was his mind? Some of his mistakes are so obvious that it's hard to understand his logic. It seemed that he failed to coach the players up this year and that goes for the whole team including the freshmen. Perhaps Buzz needs better assistant coaches.
What happened to Mike Brey this year? What happened to John Calipari last year? What happened to Roy Williams in 2009-10? What happened to Jim Calhoun in 2006-07? What happened to Bobby Knight in 2005-06? What happened to Jim Boeheim in 1996-97? Shall I go on?
Quote from: jesmu84 on March 07, 2014, 08:12:14 AM
Here's the hypothesis I'm working with:
Buzz prefers consistency (even consistently low output) over inconsistency. He prefers "safe" over risk. And he prefers the known over the unknown. He also believes he and the players have a lot more control over the defensive end than the offensive end. And, so, that's why he's playing the "better" defensive players more.
Logical. Hope he tests alternatives more in the future.
Quote from: MU82 on March 07, 2014, 08:14:54 AM
What happened to Mike Brey this year? What happened to John Calipari last year? What happened to Roy Williams in 2009-10? What happened to Jim Calhoun in 2006-07? What happened to Bobby Knight in 2005-06? What happened to Jim Boeheim in 1996-97? Shall I go on?
Maybe you are right but I am more optimistic that some coach adjustments could be the difference for what is left of this year and next. Without testing those waters we may never know the results if we explored all the options. At this point I suggest let's take a risk since we really have nothing to lose and just possibly something to gain. At least we may have a better idea as to what the young bucks and Todd can do consistently.
Quote from: Class71 on March 07, 2014, 08:58:36 AM
Maybe you are right but I am more optimistic that some coach adjustments could be the difference for what is left of this year and next. Without testing those waters we may never know the results if we explored all the options. At this point I suggest let's take a risk since we really have nothing to lose and just possibly something to gain. At least we may have a better idea as to what the young bucks and Todd can do consistently.
So it is your hypothesis that every time a highly successful coach has a one-year downward blip on his record, there must be changes to his staff to avoid future calamity?
What is there to lose? I don't know ... maybe trust? Confidence? Credibility? Decency? Fairness?
Sorry if I sound dismissive because I'm not dismissing your suggestion out of hand. I just need more reason to fire people than "we really have nothing to lose."
Hopefully, Buzz learned to tell his assistants to not monitor scoop.
Quote from: tower912 on March 07, 2014, 09:24:22 AM
Hopefully, Buzz learned to tell his assistants to not monitor scoop.
That JS-Todd Mayo article startled me-it has given me the impression that the assistants are yes-men, which, if true, is very bad, IMO.
Quote from: jesmu84 on March 07, 2014, 08:12:14 AM
Here's the hypothesis I'm working with:
Buzz prefers consistency (even consistently low output) over inconsistency. He prefers "safe" over risk. And he prefers the known over the unknown. He also believes he and the players have a lot more control over the defensive end than the offensive end. And, so, that's why he's playing the "better" defensive players more.
I put forth the Buzz-is-extremely-risk-averse theory awhile back (bodes well with his seeming control-freak nature) and I was flayed. If I remember correctly, the counterargument at the time was that Buzz indeed takes risks, as evidenced by his recruitment of unheard of players, eg, Gardner, Jimmy Butler, etc.
Quote from: MU82 on March 07, 2014, 09:08:16 AM
So it is your hypothesis that every time a highly successful coach has a one-year downward blip on his record, there must be changes to his staff to avoid future calamity?
What is there to lose? I don't know ... maybe trust? Confidence? Credibility? Decency? Fairness?
Sorry if I sound dismissive because I'm not dismissing your suggestion out of hand. I just need more reason to fire people than "we really have nothing to lose."
No you misunderstood the comments. Adjustments by the coach not removing him or the staff. That is change the line up etc.
Quote from: ElDonBDon on March 07, 2014, 11:39:28 AM
I put forth the Buzz-is-extremely-risk-averse theory awhile back (bodes well with his seeming control-freak nature) and I was flayed. If I remember correctly, the counterargument at the time was that Buzz indeed takes risks, as evidenced by his recruitment of unheard of players, eg, Gardner, Jimmy Butler, etc.
I agree except in this game control freak nature is a positive attribute.I think Buzz and staff do a great job recruiting among many other areas but at the time of Gardner and Butler we were not drawing 5 star folks. Gardner has natural offensive talent offset partially by weaker defense. Butler is a special case that reflects pure Buzz perfection. Taking someone and changing his life through hard work and motivation. This is something that Buzz can be particularly proud of. Having said that I do think he can become a better coach who has a higher upside as does this team. Like all of us Buzz has some bias and some fears. Sometimes they are valid but other times, like this year, we need to test line up options with more consistency and take greater risk. I am not in favor of changing the staff. I am in favor of changing some coaching assumptions and tactics. Buzz is very good but this year showed some weaknesses that can easily be corrected in IMHO.
I believe he will adjust in time. If he won't he needs to recruit those who fit his mold otherwise we will have talented offensive bench warmers for at least the first year or more.
I for one will be terribly disappointed if Buzz doesn't play with the starting lineup and minutes tomorrow.
Buzz is going to start all 4 seniors on senior day.
Quote from: tower912 on March 07, 2014, 03:42:21 PM
Buzz is going to start all 4 seniors on senior day.
I can understand that.
Quote from: Class71 on March 07, 2014, 02:08:58 PM
No you misunderstood the comments. Adjustments by the coach not removing him or the staff. That is change the line up etc.
OK.
Quote from: brandx on March 06, 2014, 04:43:33 PM
And putting in the players with the most experience has worked out how well this season?
And it is not hindsight to say that Derrick should not be on the floor anytime there is an offensive possession with a game on the line. It has been stated many times this year on this forum. Maybe we can call it foresight rather than hindsight.
The bolded comment means less than nothing. Who cares what the people on Scoop say?
I still don't get the comments about Buzz not changing lineups. He has rolled out a starting lineup other than the Derrick, Jake, Juan, Jamil, Chris in about half of the games. Most coaches don't change their lineup at all. He's tried giving different players extended minutes at different times. It was only after the SJU game that he shortened the lineup. And we've been playing better since then (-Villanova)
The only change that he has been unwilling to make is giving Dawson more minutes than Derrick. Which I don't think is unreasonable.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 08, 2014, 09:47:03 AM
I still don't get the comments about Buzz not changing lineups. He has rolled out a starting lineup other than the Derrick, Jake, Juan, Jamil, Chris in about half of the games. Most coaches don't change their lineup at all. He's tried giving different players extended minutes at different times. It was only after the SJU game that he shortened the lineup. And we've been playing better since then (-Villanova)
The only change that he has been unwilling to make is giving Dawson more minutes than Derrick. Which I don't think is unreasonable.
There is no rhyme or reason to some of those lunatic lineups. You don't go from starting JJJ to several DNP's, or playing Juan Anderson for 3 minutes a half--same with Reggie Smith and Erik Williams. Hell Buzz did stuff like this with Crowder his Jr. year, and people ridiculously defended Buzz by saying this was done to prevent Crowder from getting early fouls which is hogwash, as he does not have the foul prone Ja. Wilson coming off the bench. This is just Buzz being irrational.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 08, 2014, 09:47:03 AM
I still don't get the comments about Buzz not changing lineups. He has rolled out a starting lineup other than the Derrick, Jake, Juan, Jamil, Chris in about half of the games. Most coaches don't change their lineup at all. He's tried giving different players extended minutes at different times. It was only after the SJU game that he shortened the lineup. And we've been playing better since then (-Villanova)
The only change that he has been unwilling to make is giving Dawson more minutes than Derrick. Which I don't think is unreasonable.
Why? Every other change has been tried, and they ultimately haven't worked well...so why not try the change at the most critical position on a basketball team? Do you genuinely believe things would be worse if Buzz flipped Derrick and Dawson's minutes?
Quote from: Ners on March 08, 2014, 10:28:58 AM
Why? Every other change has been tried, and they ultimately haven't worked well...so why not try the change at the most critical position on a basketball team? Do you genuinely believe things would be worse if Buzz flipped Derrick and Dawson's minutes?
You got it.
I think it's safe to say that we know Dawson would have made some mistakes but what he brings offensively, explosively would be more of what MU used to do: push the ball, shoot the three.
Buzz did not coach to win this year. He knew he had a long leash from the success of the previous five years. Next year will be a different story.
Quote from: Stretchdeltsig on March 08, 2014, 05:50:49 PM
Buzz did not coach to win this year. He knew he had a long leash from the success of the previous five years. Next year will be a different story.
What--will the leash be shorter, or the year more successful?
Quote from: Stretchdeltsig on March 08, 2014, 05:50:49 PM
Buzz did not coach to win this year. He knew he had a long leash from the success of the previous five years. Next year will be a different story.
Of course he coached to win.
He wasn't playing for a high draft pick and he certainly wasn't coaching to develop his young players.
He's a college coach. They all coach to win every single game.
Tell Buzz that!
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on March 08, 2014, 07:51:54 AM
The bolded comment means less than nothing. Who cares what the people on Scoop say?
That was your response to this: "And putting in the players with the most experience has worked out how well this season?
And it is not hindsight to say that Derrick should not be on the floor anytime there is an offensive possession with a game on the line.
It has been stated many times this year on this forum. Maybe we can call it foresight rather than hindsight."
Your comment is absolutely right. Maybe I wasn't clear or maybe you didn't understand what I said. My comment was simply a reply to another poster and I was explaining that what I was saying was not 20/20 hindsight on my part, but had been stated here before.
Quote from: Stretchdeltsig on March 08, 2014, 05:50:49 PM
Buzz did not coach to win this year. He knew he had a long leash from the success of the previous five years. Next year will be a different story.
?
Quote from: MU82 on March 08, 2014, 10:16:04 PM
Of course he coached to win.
He wasn't playing for a high draft pick and he certainly wasn't coaching to develop his young players.
He's a college coach. They all coach to win every single game.
+1.
I think coaches get like politicians when they are under fire. They close in their circle and then, only see what is inside their own bubble.
Buzz had a bad year, but I also think he is an outstanding coach. After he steps away from this season and looks back from outside the bubble, he will take away some lessons that will make him a better coach next year.
Quote from: Ners on March 08, 2014, 10:28:58 AM
Why? Every other change has been tried, and they ultimately haven't worked well...so why not try the change at the most critical position on a basketball team? Do you genuinely believe things would be worse if Buzz flipped Derrick and Dawson's minutes?
If they had flipped them? Yes, I think we would have 1-2 more losses this season.
If they gave Dawson about 15 minutes per game, I think we have 1-2 more wins this season.
If Duane Wilson doesn't get hurt. I think we have 4-6 more wins this season
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 09, 2014, 04:16:18 AM
If they had flipped them? Yes, I think we would have 1-2 more losses this season.
If they gave Dawson about 15 minutes per game, I think we have 1-2 more wins this season.
If Duane Wilson doesn't get hurt. I think we have 4-6 more wins this season
They could have kept Derrick's minutes the same and simply played Gardner and Mayo more consistently and had 4-6 more wins this year. EVERY statistical measure bears it out and yet we're 17-14.
I hope Buzz truly believes what he says about making these kids better men because if he continues to ignore the concrete evidence regarding the real talent on this team he'll be making sure his highschool players are becoming better men rather than coaching at the Division 1 level in college. He doesn't get paid 2.5M/year to make sure his guys are slightly better people before they got here. You can rationalize that thought if you wish but he's getting paid to win first, foremost and only for that matter.
I really dislike the buzz bashing on this thread. Hope it goes away.
Having said that, and without bashing, I'd like to suggest that Buzz might have missed the emergence of Todd Mayo as a responsible defender and still gives minutes to Derrick when in fact a line up without Derrick and with Todd would be no compromise defensively and much more potent offensively.
The bashers among you are going to reference 2 4 point plays caused by Todd. I personally thought he was trying to send a message, and that if he got there early enough he would have prevented the make, gave a good foul, and possibly made the opposition think twice about a 3 on his watch in the future. It backfired. Darn. But it was a good, aggressive thought process. So, more Todd, less Derrick - especially in crunch time - because Todd has proven he's ready.
Let's leave it, that Buzz simply coached poorly this year.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 09, 2014, 04:34:57 AM
They could have kept Derrick's minutes the same and simply played Gardner and Mayo more consistently and had 4-6 more wins this year. EVERY statistical measure bears it out and yet we're 17-14.
I hope Buzz truly believes what he says about making these kids better men because if he continues to ignore the concrete evidence regarding the real talent on this team he'll be making sure his highschool players are becoming better men rather than coaching at the Division 1 level in college. He doesn't get paid 2.5M/year to make sure his guys are slightly better people before they got here. You can rationalize that thought if you wish but he's getting paid to win first, foremost and only for that matter.
And 17-14 deserves a pay cut.
True.
Quote from: willie warrior on March 09, 2014, 09:39:20 AM
And 17-14 deserves a pay cut.
Only if we gave him a pay raise for the Elite 8
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 09, 2014, 01:39:00 PM
Only if we gave him a pay raise for the Elite 8
Of course he got a pay rise. It's the only way MU can fend off the vultures.
There's no concern after this season. Maybe he will volunteer for a pay cut. We need him to up his coaching next year.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 09, 2014, 04:34:57 AM
They could have kept Derrick's minutes the same and simply played Gardner and Mayo more consistently and had 4-6 more wins this year. EVERY statistical measure bears it out and yet we're 17-14.
I hope Buzz truly believes what he says about making these kids better men because if he continues to ignore the concrete evidence regarding the real talent on this team he'll be making sure his highschool players are becoming better men rather than coaching at the Division 1 level in college. He doesn't get paid 2.5M/year to make sure his guys are slightly better people before they got here. You can rationalize that thought if you wish but he's getting paid to win first, foremost and only for that matter.
Matty, I agree with you on Mayo. His game demands more PT. But he has been academically ineligible for a semester and suspended for his behavior twice. He got the most minutes Buzz has ever given a freshmen and then screwed himself and his teammates with his performance in the classroom and off the court. I think for the long range good of the program (and for Todd) it's only right that he earned his way back to big minutes.
Regarding Davante's minutes, assuming 30 "offensive" minutes and all the offense/defense switching Buzz does with he and Chris (who is statistically slightly better on D) what % of "O" minutes does Gardner actually play. Aren't his total minutes somewhat dececeptive?
Thanks.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on March 09, 2014, 02:30:31 PM
Matty, I agree with you on Mayo. His game demands more PT. But he has been academically ineligible for a semester and suspended for his behavior twice. He got the most minutes Buzz has ever given a freshmen and then screwed himself and his teammates with his performance in the classroom and off the court. I think for the long range good of the program (and for Todd) it's only right that he earned his way back to big minutes.
Regarding Davante's minutes, assuming 30 "offensive" minutes and all the offense/defense switching Buzz does with he and Chris (who is statistically slightly better on D) what % of "O" minutes does Gardner actually play. Aren't his total minutes somewhat dececeptive?
Thanks.
Great question with regards to Gardner. I guess the answer requires a couple of follow up questions and this is only speculation so please don't take this as factual.
How many offensive possessions does Gardner miss with the offensive defensive substitutions with Otule? I'd venture to say he probably misses 8-12 offensive possessions due to game flow that doesn't result in a stoppage. Let's say it's 1/7th of of our entire offensive possessions (68.6 average). That's roughly 1.4-1.7 points/game. That may seem small, but it's a significant number especially how close our ppg compared to our opponent's ppg have been.
My suggestion all along would not be so much to switch the substitution strategy late in games. I would recommend starting Gardner both halves where he can pick up those 'lost' offensive possessions that occur from the substitution strategy. An extra 2.5 minutes each half before the end of game substitution strategy would be around a net 2.5 ppg increase for our team, which this season would be about another 5 wins.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 09, 2014, 03:07:17 PM
Great question with regards to Gardner. I guess the answer requires a couple of follow up questions and this is only speculation so please don't take this as factual.
How many offensive possessions does Gardner miss with the offensive defensive substitutions with Otule? I'd venture to say he probably misses 8-12 offensive possessions due to game flow that doesn't result in a stoppage. Let's say it's 1/7th of of our entire offensive possessions (68.6 average). That's roughly 1.4-1.7 points/game. That may seem small, but it's a significant number especially how close our ppg compared to our opponent's ppg have been.
My suggestion all along would not be so much to switch the substitution strategy late in games. I would recommend starting Gardner both halves where he can pick up those 'lost' offensive possessions that occur from the substitution strategy. An extra 2.5 minutes each half before the end of game substitution strategy would be around a net 2.5 ppg increase for our team, which this season would be about another 5 wins.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 09, 2014, 03:07:17 PM
Great question with regards to Gardner. I guess the answer requires a couple of follow up questions and this is only speculation so please don't take this as factual.
How many offensive possessions does Gardner miss with the offensive defensive substitutions with Otule? I'd venture to say he probably misses 8-12 offensive possessions due to game flow that doesn't result in a stoppage. Let's say it's 1/7th of of our entire offensive possessions (68.6 average). That's roughly 1.4-1.7 points/game. That may seem small, but it's a significant number especially how close our ppg compared to our opponent's ppg have been.
My suggestion all along would not be so much to switch the substitution strategy late in games. I would recommend starting Gardner both halves where he can pick up those 'lost' offensive possessions that occur from the substitution strategy. An extra 2.5 minutes each half before the end of game substitution strategy would be around a net 2.5 ppg increase for our team, which this season would be about another 5 wins.
I would be interested with what the real stats show. Gardner plays two thirds of the total minutes. All things being equal that would be (in a 66 possession game) 44 for Davante and 22 for Chris. If Buzz switches them 8 times in a game (is that about right?) it's 52 offensive possessions for Gardner and 14 for Otule. All of a sudden, Davante is a 31 minute a game player instead of a 26 minute guy. Again, I don't know if my guesses are accurate but it seems to me we should identify what % of offensive possessions Gardner actually plays and then argue whether it's enough rather than use flawed numbers.
Six minutes of playing time is equal to 10.29 possessions ((68.6/40)x6).
Leave the late game substitutions alone as I think it is the right decision from Buzz.
Garner getting the extra six minutes to start the game and the second half equates to the team scoring 13.11 points with him in those 10.29 possessions instead of 11.25 points the team would score with Otule.
That's almost two extra points a game, close to my estimate and would still add an additional 4-5 wins for this year's team.
Any more brain buster's ;)
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 09, 2014, 04:17:14 PM
Six minutes of playing time is equal to 10.29 possessions ((68.6/40)x6).
Leave the late game substitutions alone as I think it is the right decision from Buzz.
Garner getting the extra six minutes to start the game and the second half equates to the team scoring 13.11 points with him in those 10.29 possessions instead of 11.25 points the team would score with Otule.
That's almost two extra points a game, close to my estimate and would still add an additional 4-5 wins for this year's team.
Any more brain buster's ;)
Do the stats allow for how many more points Marquette gives up when it uses a poor defensive post player vs. one who can block or alter shots? Not trying to be a wise-ass -- I genuinely don't know.
In general, I've been pleased with the Gardner-Otule split of minutes. As a combination, they are averaging 21 points, 10 rebs and 1.5 blocks per game, and that's pretty darn productive from the center position.
Otule and Gardner provide very different looks to an opponent and each has a fairly defined role, with definite strengths and weaknesses. Logically, using both would figure to keep each fresher and less likely to be in foul trouble.
Could Davante play a few more minutes? Sure. Should he? Perhaps. But of all the things to complain about with Buzz's allocation of minutes, this seems more of a minor quibble compared to, say, Buzz choosing to make Derrick and Jake our two highest-minute guys.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 09, 2014, 04:17:14 PM
Six minutes of playing time is equal to 10.29 possessions ((68.6/40)x6).
Leave the late game substitutions alone as I think it is the right decision from Buzz.
Garner getting the extra six minutes to start the game and the second half equates to the team scoring 13.11 points with him in those 10.29 possessions instead of 11.25 points the team would score with Otule.
That's almost two extra points a game, close to my estimate and would still add an additional 4-5 wins for this year's team.
Any more brain buster's ;)
Thanks, Matt
LOL....now what does Buzz have to "learn?"
You all tickle me...Buzz knows what he is doing. What's wrong now...? Is there no pleasing you? Man have we gotten spoiled rotten around here?
I won't even read a single post of this thread because I know it is a rant fest and I will be in here all day on some nonsense. I am just commenting on the title and getting out of dodge..
Just stop. Good day, fan assistant coaches. :D
Quote from: MU82 on March 09, 2014, 04:33:17 PM
Do the stats allow for how many more points Marquette gives up when it uses a poor defensive post player vs. one who can block or alter shots? Not trying to be a wise-ass -- I genuinely don't know.
In general, I've been pleased with the Gardner-Otule split of minutes. As a combination, they are averaging 21 points, 10 rebs and 1.5 blocks per game, and that's pretty darn productive from the center position.
I think the minutes for those two have been about where they should be - although your averages are slightly misleading because of the times they were on the floor together. Without doing any math, I would guess it would be closer to 18 & 8 from the actual center position - but your point is well taken.
Quote from: willie warrior on March 08, 2014, 10:23:44 AM
There is no rhyme or reason to some of those lunatic lineups. You don't go from starting JJJ to several DNP's, or playing Juan Anderson for 3 minutes a half--same with Reggie Smith and Erik Williams. Hell Buzz did stuff like this with Crowder his Jr. year, and people ridiculously defended Buzz by saying this was done to prevent Crowder from getting early fouls which is hogwash, as he does not have the foul prone Ja. Wilson coming off the bench. This is just Buzz being irrational.
Agreed. IMHO Buzz could have benefited earlier on with more minutes for Todd, Deonte an to a lesser degree John and JJJ. Buzz tried alot of options but too fragmented and sporatic. What he used was a defensive oriented line-up that could not set up a play or hit a shot. Safe but no chance to be a winner IMHO.
Quote from: Class71 on March 09, 2014, 08:37:26 PM
Buzz tried alot of options but too fragmented and sporatic. What he used was a defensive oriented line-up that could not set up a play or hit a shot. Safe but no chance to be a winner IMHO.
Indeed, in all sports at all levels, coaches who play not to lose instead of to win often lose a lot. It's a cruel irony.
Quote from: MU82 on March 09, 2014, 10:45:00 PM
Indeed, in all sports at all levels, coaches who play not to lose instead of to win often lose a lot. It's a cruel irony.
Well said...and much like you se what happens when teams go into a stall offense/bleed clock approach when up 10 points with 3-4 minutes left...
Quote from: Hold the Mayo on March 04, 2014, 11:27:09 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if Buzz leaves soon. I'd hate to see him leave, but he's a hot commodity given recent success and after talking to some close to the program, he is for once under pressure... Doesn't take a genius to see what he has done isn't working and the big names will see this as a chance to poach him. Hope I am wrong!
Gulp. some in the administration saw this coming. I guess they were right.