I don't think this board realizes how good of a season our big man is having. Here's a few key things that stood out at me while perusing the Big East conference leaders this morning.
1. For your usual stats Gardner is 10th in made FGs, 5th in made 2pt FGs, 5th in 2pt FG%, 5th in FTs, 4th in FT attempts, 10th in FT%, 5th in Off RB, and 9th in points.
2. For your advanced stats (which I heavily favor) here's where he really shines.
Gardner is 2nd in the league in player efficiency rating at 26.7 trailing only McDermott at 31.6.
Gardner is 5th in true shooting% at .602.
Gardner is 8th in Off Reb% grabbing 10.1% of all available offensive rebounds when he's on the court and 10th in Tot Reb% grabbing 13% of all available rebounds when he's on the court.
Gardner is 9th in points produced, (a stat dominated by guards) due to his ability as an effective passer.
Gardner has the HIGHEST ORtg of anyone in conference at 128.6 pts/100 possessions he's on the court. McDermott is 2nd at 125.9.
Gardner is 4th in offensive win shares at 3.4 and 4th in total win shares at 4.5 trailing only McDermott, Cotton and Smith-Rivera in both categories.
Gardner is 2nd in win shares per 40 minutes with .227/game trailing only McDermott at .260.
The kid is having a huge season and without him I don't think Marquette is even a .500 ball club.
Nice work Matty....Yet we still don't max his minutes consistently....he can play 30-32' per game without a point of diminishing returns..
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 06, 2014, 01:54:31 PM
I don't think this board realizes how good of a season our big man is having. Here's a few key things that stood out at me while perusing the Big East conference leaders this morning.
1. For your usual stats Gardner is 10th in made FGs, 5th in made 2pt FGs, 5th in 2pt FG%, 5th in FTs, 4th in FT attempts, 10th in FT%, 5th in Off RB, and 9th in points.
2. For your advanced stats (which I heavily favor) here's where he really shines.
Gardner is 2nd in the league in player efficiency rating at 26.7 trailing only McDermott at 31.6.
Gardner is 5th in true shooting% at .602.
Gardner is 8th in Off Reb% grabbing 10.1% of all available offensive rebounds when he's on the court and 10th in Tot Reb% grabbing 13% of all available rebounds when he's on the court.
Gardner is 9th in points produced, (a stat dominated by guards) due to his ability as an effective passer.
Gardner has the HIGHEST ORtg of anyone in conference at 128.6 pts/100 possessions he's on the court. McDermott is 2nd at 125.9.
Gardner is 4th in offensive win shares at 3.4 and 4th in total win shares at 4.5 trailing only McDermott, Cotton and Smith-Rivera in both categories.
Gardner is 2nd in win shares per 40 minutes with .227/game trailing only McDermott at .260.
The kid is having a huge season and without him I don't think Marquette is even a .500 ball club.
Now, can someone tell me why he doesn't start and get 32-35 mins. per game?
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2014, 01:58:34 PM
Nice work Matty....Yet we still don't max his minutes consistently....he can play 30-32' per game without a point of diminishing returns..
Source?
He doesn't start because Otule has a higher tip winning percentage than any other player in the BEast...and starting him at the 4 has proven to be terrible.
I would like to max his minutes out. Buzz likes him being a little more fresh. In the end we are talking about a difference of 3-5 minutes
Quote from: jesmu84 on March 06, 2014, 02:12:40 PM
Source?
Watch the Providence game, he was fine playing over 30 minutes. The same guys said he couldn't play over 20 minutes last year, yet he's having his best year playing 26. You can try to defend Buzz all you want, but not playing Mayo and Gardner 30 minutes a game is a joke. Below are the games, past 2 seasons, where Gardner played 28 minutes or more and is offensive efficiency. Is that enough data for you?
Date MIN ORat
Mon Nov 25 Arizona St. L, 79-77 33 144
Fri Nov 29 GW W, 76-60 35 131
Sat Dec 21 New Mexico L, 75-68 29 94
Sat Jan 4 DePaul W, 66-56 • 35 150
Thu Jan 9 Xavier L, 86-79 • 37 120
Sat Jan 11 Seton Hall W, 67-66 • 34 82
Sat Jan 18 Butler L, 69-57 • 42 112
Mon Jan 20 G"town W, 80-72 • 40 138
Sat Jan 25 Villanova L, 94-85 • 39 144
Tue Mar 4 Providence L, 81-80 31 112
Tue Jan 1 UConn W, 82-76 28 168
Sat Jan 12 Pittsburgh W, 74-67 29 146
Sat Feb 16 Pittsburgh W, 79-69 30 126
Mon Feb 25 Syracuse W, 74-71 33 184
Sat Mar 30 Syracuse L, 55-39 30 133
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
In the end we are talking about a difference of 3-5 minutes
That has been the difference between wins and losses in about 10 games this season.
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 06, 2014, 02:50:43 PM
Watch the Providence game, he was fine playing over 30 minutes. The same guys said he couldn't play over 20 minutes last year, yet he's having his best year playing 26. You can try to defend Buzz all you want, but not playing Mayo and Gardner 30 minutes a game is a joke. Below are the games, past 2 season, where Gardner played 28 minutes or more and is offensive officiency. Is that enough data for you?
Date MIN ORat
Mon Nov 25 Arizona St. L, 79-77 33 144
Fri Nov 29 GW W, 76-60 35 131
Sat Dec 21 New Mexico L, 75-68 29 94
Sat Jan 4 DePaul W, 66-56 • 35 150
Thu Jan 9 Xavier L, 86-79 • 37 120
Sat Jan 11 Seton Hall W, 67-66 • 34 82
Sat Jan 18 Butler L, 69-57 • 42 112
Mon Jan 20 G"town W, 80-72 • 40 138
Sat Jan 25 Villanova L, 94-85 • 39 144
Tue Mar 4 Providence L, 81-80 31 112
Tue Jan 1 UConn W, 82-76 28 168
Sat Jan 12 Pittsburgh W, 74-67 29 146
Sat Feb 16 Pittsburgh W, 79-69 30 126
Mon Feb 25 Syracuse W, 74-71 33 184
Sat Mar 30 Syracuse L, 55-39 30 133
May or may no mean anything, in fact none of the above may really mean anything, but the bolded area kind of leapt off the page at me. Could he maintain his efficiency if playing that many minutes over the course of an entire season?
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 06, 2014, 03:02:54 PM
That has been the difference between wins and losses in about 10 games this season.
Evidence?
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 06, 2014, 03:03:54 PM
May or may no mean anything, in fact none of the above may really mean anything, but the bolded area kind of leapt off the page at me. Could he maintain his efficiency if playing that many minutes over the course of an entire season?
Funny you pick that 3 game stretch and not this one:
Sat Jan 18 Butler L, 69-57 • 42 112
Mon Jan 20 G"town W, 80-72 • 40 138
Sat Jan 25 Villanova L, 94-85 • 39 144
Playing 40 minutes a game and his efficiency improves. May not mean anything? It's not a small sample size. Good Grief.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 06, 2014, 03:05:18 PM
Evidence?
My point is, 3-5 minutes have been the diffence in many of Marquette's losses. Evidence provided above. Using reason along with those stats, I think it's safe to say Marquette would have been more successful.
He's also highly efficient at drawing fouls and offensive rebounding. For a player like this to only go 26 minutes is absurd. Again, plenty on this board said he couldn't go over 20 last year.
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 06, 2014, 02:50:43 PM
Watch the Providence game, he was fine playing over 30 minutes. The same guys said he couldn't play over 20 minutes last year, yet he's having his best year playing 26. You can try to defend Buzz all you want, but not playing Mayo and Gardner 30 minutes a game is a joke. Below are the games, past 2 seasons, where Gardner played 28 minutes or more and is offensive efficiency. Is that enough data for you?
Date MIN ORat
Mon Nov 25 Arizona St. L, 79-77 33 144
Fri Nov 29 GW W, 76-60 35 131
Sat Dec 21 New Mexico L, 75-68 29 94
Sat Jan 4 DePaul W, 66-56 • 35 150
Thu Jan 9 Xavier L, 86-79 • 37 120
Sat Jan 11 Seton Hall W, 67-66 • 34 82
Sat Jan 18 Butler L, 69-57 • 42 112
Mon Jan 20 G"town W, 80-72 • 40 138
Sat Jan 25 Villanova L, 94-85 • 39 144
Tue Mar 4 Providence L, 81-80 31 112
Tue Jan 1 UConn W, 82-76 28 168
Sat Jan 12 Pittsburgh W, 74-67 29 146
Sat Feb 16 Pittsburgh W, 79-69 30 126
Mon Feb 25 Syracuse W, 74-71 33 184
Sat Mar 30 Syracuse L, 55-39 30 133
Nice work esoteric....plenty large enough sample size....it's as though some want to insist there haven't been any miscalculations by Buzz in allocation of playing time. I too recall the same "some" posters here saying Gardner couldn't go more than 20 minutes last year or he'd play worse due to stamina. Mayo's playing time has also been disputed as far as that if he'd play more his efficiency would take a hit - just the opposite is true. And then of course Dawson.
Buzz missed the boat big time this year not maxing Mayo and Gardner's minutes from the start...combined with maxing the minutes (more than any other player on the team), of the least efficient player we have.
Gardner far and away the focal point of the opposition's scouting report..he's a nightmare for the opposition to deal with...having him on the floor benefits the other 4 guys on court. And his offensive excellence, far outweighs his limitations defensively..
Trust me, I want me some more Davante Gardner. But looking at minutes alone doesn't work. Pace of the game matters. If Davante is playing a slow team where he gets to walk up and down the court, he could play all 40 minutes! But he could end up in a game where possession is going back and forth and he has to sprint up and down. Not only that, but it matters how Davante is feeling that day. Maybe he didn't sleep well. Maybe he ate a heavy meal. Maybe he's stressing about a test.
Now these things affect all players. My point is, Buzz has all the data. I guarantee you that he has seen every piece of data under the sun about his team and of all of his team's opponents. Buzz knows all the things we know...but he also knows a million more things than we do. We don't have all the data. Buzz does. I trust Buzz to make the decisions that are best for our team.
Not saying that Buzz is infallible. I love debating his decisions. But people here act as if they know everything there is to know when in reality we know less than 7% of what Buzz knows.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 06, 2014, 03:03:54 PM
May or may no mean anything, in fact none of the above may really mean anything, but the bolded area kind of leapt off the page at me. Could he maintain his efficiency if playing that many minutes over the course of an entire season?
Do you just argue to argue? I mean its absurd. Same guy who goes to bat for Derrick, tries to diminish Davante. Unreal.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2014, 03:35:28 PM
Do you just argue to argue? I mean its absurd. Same guy who goes to bat for Derrick, tries to diminish Davante. Unreal.
He asked a question. He didn't diminish Davante. Questions do not equal dissent.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 03:34:46 PM
Trust me, I want me some more Davante Gardner. But looking at minutes alone doesn't work. Pace of the game matters. If Davante is playing a slow team where he gets to walk up and down the court, he could play all 40 minutes! But he could end up in a game where possession is going back and forth and he has to sprint up and down. Not only that, but it matters how Davante is feeling that day. Maybe he didn't sleep well. Maybe he ate a heavy meal. Maybe he's stressing about a test.
Now these things affect all players. My point is, Buzz has all the data. I guarantee you that he has seen every piece of data under the sun about his team and of all of his team's opponents. Buzz knows all the things we know...but he also knows a million more things than we do. We don't have all the data. Buzz does. I trust Buzz to make the decisions that are best for our team.
Come on TAMU...I mean at what point do you just not concede this hasn't been Buzz's best year? In my opinion, he's totally and completely ignored the most obvious of data - Mayo and Gardner are two best players on team - and Derrick is severely limited - yet he still can't concede more minutes to Dawson, and just play Davante a consistent 32'. He's at least come around on Mayo FINALLY..and the results are obvious.
He's given more minutes to Derrick than any other player on the team....when all data and stats show he's extremely limited. Buzz has given Dawson ONE game of 30 minutes at GTown...and he sure didn't lay an egg. It is ludicrous....and other than Seton Hall - Dawson has not looked overmatched in any game. Not quite the defender Derrick is...but my God...he can shoot the basketball, and is willing. An 81% FT shooter has a good stroke. His midrange game is there...and I have all the confidence he'll be a 35+% 3 point shooter in his MU career.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 03:38:35 PM
He asked a question. He didn't diminish Davante. Questions do not equal dissent.
To Ners they do, particularly when asked to consider something beyond his simplistic strawman theories.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 06, 2014, 03:42:45 PM
To Ners they do, particularly when asked to consider something beyond his simplistic strawman theories.
LOL - You've represented yourself as quite the basketball genius this year. Care to answer esoteric's rebuttal to try to get out of your strawman??
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 06, 2014, 03:06:40 PM
Funny you pick that 3 game stretch and not this one:
Sat Jan 18 Butler L, 69-57 • 42 112
Mon Jan 20 G"town W, 80-72 • 40 138
Sat Jan 25 Villanova L, 94-85 • 39 144
Playing 40 minutes a game and his efficiency improves. May not mean anything? It's not a small sample size. Good Grief.
So on two days rest...Gardner went from a 112 after playing 42 minutes to a 138 playing 40 minutes....but nope..let's question if he could maintain it for a full season when given a 15 game sample size...and focus on the one true outlier (Seton Hall), to try to build a strawman argument!
Pot meet kettle. You got owned by esoteric. Own it.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2014, 03:40:24 PM
Come on TAMU...I mean at what point do you just not concede this hasn't been Buzz's best year? In my opinion, he's totally and completely ignored the most obvious of data - Mayo and Gardner are two best players on team - and Derrick is severely limited - yet he still can't concede more minutes to Dawson, and just play Davante a consistent 32'. He's at least come around on Mayo FINALLY..and the results are obvious.
He's given more minutes to Derrick than any other player on the team....when all data and stats show he's extremely limited. Buzz has given Dawson ONE game of 30 minutes at GTown...and he sure didn't lay an egg. It is ludicrous....and other than Seton Hall - Dawson has not looked overmatched in any game. Not quite the defender Derrick is...but my God...he can shoot the basketball, and is willing. An 81% FT shooter has a good stroke. His midrange game is there...and I have all the confidence he'll be a 35+% 3 point shooter in his MU career.
An argument was presented. It was backed by data. I pointed out a flaw with the data.
My point, as it ever is, is that Buzz has all the data. We have maybe 7% of the data. We can argue all we want about how to interpret it. For example, offensive efficiency, defensive efficiency, and projected points per game actually favor Derrick over Dawson for point guard. But as you've pointed out, Dawson may be hindered by the short stints on the court that he gets. I don't accuse you of ignoring data, I just disagree with you interpretation.
But to state the Buzz IGNORES data is absurd. Buzz is one of the biggest statheads in the nation. He knows them better than any of us do. He also has access to more data than we do. You were an athlete, you know things that happen outside of the court can affect your performance on the court. Buzz knows what happens off the court.
As it happens, I agree on Davante. I want more of him. I think he's a mismatch nightmare and can only help us win.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2014, 03:51:12 PM
LOL - You've represented yourself as quite the basketball genius this year. Care to answer esoteric's rebuttal to try to get out of your strawman??
So on two days rest...Gardner went from a 112 after playing 42 minutes to a 138 playing 40 minutes....but nope..let's question if he could maintain it for a full season when given a 15 game sample size...and focus on the one true outlier (Seton Hall), to try to build a strawman argument!
Pot meet kettle. You got owned by esoteric. Own it.
Butler and Georgetown are 2 of the bottom 4 teams in the BEast in pace per KenPom. Still want more Davante. But just showing that there are more factors. You can't pick one stat, throw it in someone's face, and say owned. Too much data out there.
Easy tough guys. One poster made a rather large claim. I simply asked for a source (if he had researched it himself, or seen the evidence somewhere). There was no statistics or evidence provided, initially. No need to get all worked up. I wasn't defending or attacking anyone for anything. Simply asked for the evidence.
Also, shouldn't the evidence be presented include his ORating after 30-32 minutes as compared to the first 30-32? I think, for me, that'd be more proof that there wouldn't be diminishing returns within a game itself, as opposed to multiple games.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 03:56:26 PM
Butler and Georgetown are 2 of the bottom 4 teams in the BEast in pace per KenPom. Still want more Davante. But just showing that there are more factors. You can't pick one stat, throw it in someone's face, and say owned. Too much data out there.
Like 15 games of Gardner getting 28+ and in 13 of the 15 putting up ORatings of 112+...and a 138 on two days rest against GTown? Where does Seton Hall rank on pace in Big East - as that was the game Navin tried to point to, to suggest that because of 1 outlier game...it could be a narrative that he wouldn't perform as well for a whole season.
Don't know about you, but if 13 of 15 games over 28 games all point toward Gardner playing at a high efficiency rating...I'd roll the dice, and certainly would think Buzz would too.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 03:34:46 PM
Trust me, I want me some more Davante Gardner. But looking at minutes alone doesn't work. Pace of the game matters. If Davante is playing a slow team where he gets to walk up and down the court, he could play all 40 minutes! But he could end up in a game where possession is going back and forth and he has to sprint up and down. Not only that, but it matters how Davante is feeling that day. Maybe he didn't sleep well. Maybe he ate a heavy meal. Maybe he's stressing about a test.
Now these things affect all players. My point is, Buzz has all the data. I guarantee you that he has seen every piece of data under the sun about his team and of all of his team's opponents. Buzz knows all the things we know...but he also knows a million more things than we do. We don't have all the data. Buzz does. I trust Buzz to make the decisions that are best for our team.
Not saying that Buzz is infallible. I love debating his decisions. But people here act as if they know everything there is to know when in reality we know less than 7% of what Buzz knows.
TAMU - offensive efficiency doesn't take into account pace as it's based on per possession basis. The fact that he's putting up huge OReg numbers against multiple opponents playing multiple tempos suggests he's plenty capable of playing those minutes without his numbers dropping.
Ok, here's the best way to have it make sense to the posters questioning Gardner getting more minutes being a detriment.
The difference between Gardner and Otule on a 40 minute basis is nearly 10 points/game better offensively for Gardner and roughly 1 point/game worse defensively for Gardner. If you doubt those numbers simply look at both their Offensive and Defensive ratings and do the calculations yourselves.
Even if the difference between Otule and Gardner's offensive efficiency was cut in half from Gardner's 30th minute on, he'd still be nearly 5 points/game better than Otule.
This is simply a topic that shouldn't even be debated at this point as the numbers are so far in Gardner's favor it's willful ignorance to discount them.
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 06, 2014, 04:16:38 PM
TAMU - offensive efficiency doesn't take into account pace as it's based on per possession basis. The fact that he's putting up huge OReg numbers against multiple opponents playing multiple tempos suggests he's plenty capable of playing those minutes without his numbers dropping.
I know that. My point was that a slower pace game will not fatigue Gardner as much as a faster paced game. Ergo, Buzz may feel more comfortable playing him for longer minutes.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
He doesn't start because Otule has a higher tip winning percentage than any other player in the BEast...and starting him at the 4 has proven to be terrible.
I would like to max his minutes out. Buzz likes him being a little more fresh. In the end we are talking about a difference of 3-5 minutes
I have heard this countless times. If we value the tip so much because of the perceived "extra possession," that Gardner usually doesn't check in until after the 16 minute mark. Why is it that when given the opportunity, Buzz never goes for a 2 for 1 possession at the end of the first half or at the end of games like the NBA does?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
He doesn't start because Otule has a higher tip winning percentage than any other player in the BEast...and starting him at the 4 has proven to be terrible.
I would like to max his minutes out. Buzz likes him being a little more fresh. In the end we are talking about a difference of 3-5 minutes
So he's not starting the first 4 to 6 minutes because of a tip? Wow.
Start DG and let Jamil jump the tip.
7% of what Buzz knows? What else is there to know? Other than things outside of perfoance on game day. He said himself KenPom is the best, the numbers don't lie. Mayo is better than Jaun and Gardner is better that Otule.
The only way to explain it is by listening to what recruits say and what buzz says. Recruits always say how he never talks basketball with the kids and parents, that Preparing kids for life, challenges, etc. are his main objectives. Buzz says after games how he believes in Derrick and admires Otule's resolve. I believe he rewards DWilson, Juan and Otule because of how hard they work and their story. Challenges other players by not playing them as much. Problem for fans like myself is, i just want to see them win. But maybe it is the best approach in the long run...if collegiate sports are really designed for student athletes.
To add a little context on Gardner's overall season Offensive Rating, he checks in at 123.2 - In the 15 games listed where he gets more than 28 minutes, his rating goes to 132.2.
It would seem 15 games is a relevant sample size, and the jump in ORating is absolutely significant and something that would help this team...
Todd Mayo when getting 29+ minutes this season has an O Rating of 113. His rating for the season is 105.5
That's also a significant increase in ORating that would help this team...
John Dawson in games where he plays more than 15 minutes (4 games all year), ORating is 94.25. Season rating is 89.6. (Games where he plays 20+ minutes - just 2 games his ORating is 120 - not a relevant sample size of course - just added for context)
Of note, Pomroy does not even assign an offensive rating for a player, playing less than 10 minutes, as he views it to be statistically irrelevant - and in those games 5 for Dawson...he scored a total of 13 points...that don't count for anything with regard to ORating.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2014, 05:52:52 PM
To add a little context on Gardner's overall season Offensive Rating, he checks in at 123.2 - In the 15 games listed where he gets more than 28 minutes, his rating goes to 132.2.
It would seem 15 games is a relevant sample size, and the jump in ORating is absolutely significant and something that would help this team...
Todd Mayo when getting 29+ minutes this season has an O Rating of 113. His rating for the season is 105.5
That's also a significant increase in ORating that would help this team...
John Dawson in games where he plays more than 15 minutes (4 games all year), ORating is 94.25. Season rating is 89.6. (Games where he plays 20+ minutes - just 2 games his ORating is 120 - not a relevant sample size of course - just added for context)
Of note, Pomroy does not even assign an offensive rating for a player, playing less than 10 minutes, as he views it to be statistically irrelevant - and in those games 5 for Dawson...he scored a total of 13 points...that don't count for anything with regard to ORating.
Basketball is a rhythm sport, so I'm not surprised by that. I don't think you lose much on the defensive end when subbing Devante and Todd for Otule and Juan.
Pomroy does not even assign an offensive rating for a player, playing less than 10 minutes. Crazy because Buzz plays Juan, Taylor, Deonte all 10 minutes a game in conference.
I really believe Buzz will reflect back on this season and realize he made major mistakes. Probably make him a better coach. The good news, he's finally figured it out, maybe a run in New York.
Do advanced stats exist where we can evaluate davante's rating up to 30 minutes and then post 30 minutes?
Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 06, 2014, 04:25:35 PM
Ok, here's the best way to have it make sense to the posters questioning Gardner getting more minutes being a detriment.
The difference between Gardner and Otule on a 40 minute basis is nearly 10 points/game better offensively for Gardner and roughly 1 point/game worse defensively for Gardner. If you doubt those numbers simply look at both their Offensive and Defensive ratings and do the calculations yourselves.
Even if the difference between Otule and Gardner's offensive efficiency was cut in half from Gardner's 30th minute on, he'd still be nearly 5 points/game better than Otule.
This is simply a topic that shouldn't even be debated at this point as the numbers are so far in Gardner's favor it's willful ignorance to discount them.
This is spot on. Buzz must see it but values defense, which is important, but to a fault. We all have bias' IMHO Buzz has a few which in many cases are valid but not this year. I do not believe these general rules hold this year given the skill sets. That is, it is not always true defense should be valued over offense, experience is valued over youthful talent, athleticism over good shooting, good practice players always make good game players, low risk takers are always better than controlled risk takers. Until Coach looks at the whole picture we will have problems if the players do not fit or can not be molded into his perfect player. We need to capitalize on the players existing talents and adjust within the limits of each player. If that does not change my friends it will not be good for the players, the coach or the fans. When the best players do not fit the coaches image of the perfect player we will suffer since they will not be played.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on March 06, 2014, 05:09:11 PM
So he's not starting the first 4 to 6 minutes because of a tip? Wow.
Start DG and let Jamil jump the tip.
I think I have seen Gardner check in at he 14 minute mark once this season. And he was standing at the scorers table since before the 16 minute timeout, there was just no stoppage of play.
Jamil would lose most of the tips IMHO. Most BEast centers have 3 inches in height and several inches in wingspan on him
Quote from: BenCat12 on March 06, 2014, 05:07:32 PM
I have heard this countless times. If we value the tip so much because of the perceived "extra possession," that Gardner usually doesn't check in until after the 16 minute mark. Why is it that when given the opportunity, Buzz never goes for a 2 for 1 possession at the end of the first half or at the end of games like the NBA does?
That is a good question. I have wondered it myself. My guess is that because Buzz values defense over offense, he would rather give the opponent the last shot with a shortened shot clock then give them a full shot clock just to have the opportunity to shoot a hurried last second shot (even though we seem to be good at them..lol).
Winning the tip on the other hand comes with no negatives. If you have a chance to win the tip everytime, you go for it. Now I would get Gardner in there at the first stoppage of play. Buzz does this sometimes but more oftenly waits till about the first media timeout. Not sure why.
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 06, 2014, 05:24:08 PM
7% of what Buzz knows? What else is there to know? Other than things outside of perfoance on game day. He said himself KenPom is the best, the numbers don't lie. Mayo is better than Jaun and Gardner is better that Otule.
The only way to explain it is by listening to what recruits say and what buzz says. Recruits always say how he never talks basketball with the kids and parents, that Preparing kids for life, challenges, etc. are his main objectives. Buzz says after games how he believes in Derrick and admires Otule's resolve. I believe he rewards DWilson, Juan and Otule because of how hard they work and their story. Challenges other players by not playing them as much. Problem for fans like myself is, i just want to see them win. But maybe it is the best approach in the long run...if collegiate sports are really designed for student athletes.
I would argue that on the court performance is less than 5% of the data. Buzz knows everything about his kids. From how they do in practice (very important data) to what motivates/drives them (important data) to which fans jersey chasers the players are sweet on (not so relevant).We can speculate and argue all we want about the data we know, I enjoy the debate, but let's not pretend for a second than any of us know more than Buzz does. Even if Doc Rivers is on this site, he doesn't know as much as Buzz does ABOUT THESE PLAYERS. Of course, if Doc Rivers was on this site, I would hang on just about every word he posts.
Quote from: Ners on March 06, 2014, 05:52:52 PM
To add a little context on Gardner's overall season Offensive Rating, he checks in at 123.2 - In the 15 games listed where he gets more than 28 minutes, his rating goes to 132.2.
It would seem 15 games is a relevant sample size, and the jump in ORating is absolutely significant and something that would help this team...
Todd Mayo when getting 29+ minutes this season has an O Rating of 113. His rating for the season is 105.5
That's also a significant increase in ORating that would help this team...
John Dawson in games where he plays more than 15 minutes (4 games all year), ORating is 94.25. Season rating is 89.6. (Games where he plays 20+ minutes - just 2 games his ORating is 120 - not a relevant sample size of course - just added for context)
Of note, Pomroy does not even assign an offensive rating for a player, playing less than 10 minutes, as he views it to be statistically irrelevant - and in those games 5 for Dawson...he scored a total of 13 points...that don't count for anything with regard to ORating.
Good data. Out of curiousity, do you think there is a possible chicken and the egg situation? Do Davante and John play better because they get more minutes? Or do they get more minutes because they are playing better? Not saying that's the case, but wondering what you think.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 07, 2014, 06:15:19 AM
Good data. Out of curiousity, do you think there is a possible chicken and the egg situation? Do Davante and John play better because they get more minutes? Or do they get more minutes because they are playing better? Not saying that's the case, but wondering what you think.
I think talent over time rises to the top. There is no denying Davante is a very talented/skilled player. He's usually good game in, game out...and has shown a great deal of consistency during his entire career at MU - at least on the offensive end. Dawson is a talented player/prospect, and with more time, that talent gets extracted. Todd Mayo - He did not start well at all against Providence - and if Buzz had pulled him like he historically has done prior to the last 7 games - we'd never have seen his brilliance.
Of course all players have "off" games, but talented kids simply cannot be yanked in and out by virtue of making one, two, or three mistakes. I think more than anything, Buzz has "overcoached" it this year, gotten too caught up in the offense/defense lineup mindset, and it just disrupts flow and rhythm for ALL the guys. As I've argued all season, the one area he hasn't been inconsistent with playing time allocation is Derrick - and there is plenty of evidence to suggest he is who he is - a solid, backup caliber PG at this level. Buzz is simply trying to extract something that isn't there in Derrick - a difference making 30+ minute per game PG.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 07, 2014, 06:02:28 AM
I think I have seen Gardner check in at he 14 minute mark once this season. And he was standing at the scorers table since before the 16 minute timeout, there was just no stoppage of play.
Jamil would lose most of the tips IMHO. Most BEast centers have 3 inches in height and several inches in wingspan on him
I don't think winning the tip is that important when:
For
1. We get the ball first in the second half.
2. Davonte ability/opportunity to produce 4-6 more points of offense or more.
3. Davonte ability to create quick fouls on opponent's big men.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 06, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
I would like to max his minutes out. Buzz likes him being a little more fresh. In the end we are talking about a difference of 3-5 minutes
But with his ultrahigh efficiency, how many points are being left? Hard to quantify but not nothing.
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on March 07, 2014, 08:01:53 AM
I don't think winning the tip is that important when:
For
1. We get the ball first in the second half.
2. Davonte ability/opportunity to produce 4-6 more points of offense or more.
3. Davonte ability to create quick fouls on opponent's big men.
1. No we don't. The loser of the jump ball gets the first possession arrow. Who starts with the ball in the second half is determined by the possession arrow. So essentially winning the jump either gives you an equal number of possessions as your opponent, or one extra one.
2. If Davante started, I don't think his minutes will necessarily go up. They just change when in the game the minutes are coming. I'd rather have him at the end of the game, then the beginning.
3. This I agree with.
In the end, I like winning the tip, it is essentially an extra possession. So I would start Chris. But get Davante in at the first break. Starting Juan with Chris is the more questionable call to me.
They don't call him "No D" Gardner...or...Avante for no reason.
His Off #s are great but defensively, he's just a lump on the block who has difficulty moving his feet.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 07, 2014, 11:06:37 PM
1. No we don't. The loser of the jump ball gets the first possession arrow. Who starts with the ball in the second half is determined by the possession arrow. So essentially winning the jump either gives you an equal number of possessions as your opponent, or one extra one.
2. If Davante started, I don't think his minutes will necessarily go up. They just change when in the game the minutes are coming. I'd rather have him at the end of the game, then the beginning.
3. This I agree with.
In the end, I like winning the tip, it is essentially an extra possession. So I would start Chris. But get Davante in at the first break. Starting Juan with Chris is the more questionable call to me.
Winning the tip s mythical hog wash and this year proves it. We have won the tip about 25 of 30 games and look where we are; 17-13 with at least 6 or 7 ass kickings. Means absolutely squat.
Quote from: willie warrior on March 08, 2014, 06:42:49 AM
Winning the tip s mythical hog wash and this year proves it. We have won the tip about 25 of 30 games and look where we are; 17-13 with at least 6 or 7 ass kickings. Means absolutely squat.
Haha. I don't think anyone is arguing that winning the opening tip=winning the game. But with as bad as we are, don't we need every advantage that we can get?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 08, 2014, 08:55:20 AM
Haha. I don't think anyone is arguing that winning the opening tip=winning the game. But with as bad as we are, don't we need every advantage that we can get?
Absolutely, so why start an inferior starting lineup each half?? Why continue to give max minutes to the most ineffective PG in high major basketball? Why let a talent like Burton sit on the bench 25-20 minutes a game?
I don't care if they can't play to "scouting report" as well - those who can "play to the scouting report" haven't gotten the job done, nor do they have the talent necessary to get the job done. Burton does. Dawson does. Mayo does. Gardner does. Max their f'in minutes Buzz!!
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 08, 2014, 08:55:20 AM
Haha. I don't think anyone is arguing that winning the opening tip=winning the game. But with as bad as we are, don't we need every advantage that we can get?
Why? How many times have we won the opening tip and after 8 minutes we are down 10 points. Happened a lot.
And winning the opening tip is not an advantage as the other team wins the next decision possession. It is a wash.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 07, 2014, 06:13:15 AM
I would argue that on the court performance is less than 5% of the data. Buzz knows everything about his kids. From how they do in practice (very important data) to what motivates/drives them (important data) to which fans jersey chasers the players are sweet on (not so relevant).We can speculate and argue all we want about the data we know, I enjoy the debate, but let's not pretend for a second than any of us know more than Buzz does. Even if Doc Rivers is on this site, he doesn't know as much as Buzz does ABOUT THESE PLAYERS. Of course, if Doc Rivers was on this site, I would hang on just about every word he posts.
So now it's down 2% of what we know. As you would say, evidence? Jersey chasing? Are you serious? Just stop, you're embarrassing yourself. Again, that's my problem with buzz, he coaches with his heart way to much. In the past his favorites were always the best players, that's not the case this year. He said it himself, he believes in the underdog, well I believe in winning games.
One of the most efficient offensive players in Marquette history just played his last game at the Bradley Center....and he averaged 23 minutes a game as an upperclassman. Ridiculous.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 07, 2014, 06:13:15 AM
I would argue that on the court performance is less than 5% of the data. Buzz knows everything about his kids. From how they do in practice (very important data) to what motivates/drives them (important data) to which fans jersey chasers the players are sweet on (not so relevant).We can speculate and argue all we want about the data we know, I enjoy the debate, but let's not pretend for a second than any of us know more than Buzz does. Even if Doc Rivers is on this site, he doesn't know as much as Buzz does ABOUT THESE PLAYERS. Of course, if Doc Rivers was on this site, I would hang on just about every word he posts.
This couldn't be more wrong and if Buzz is truly using 5% of on-court performance to determine playing time he should have been fired yesterday. This is about winning basketball games, not running a charity. While the feel good stories are great, he gets paid millions of dollars a year to win. It is comments like these from you and other posters that make me wonder if you ever played organized sports.
You give Buzz entirely too much credit. I don't think Bulls or Lakers fans look at Phil Jackson in the same glowing light, as a Zen master, that you and some of the other Buzz-fanatics do. Buzz is a great recruiter, a great motivator and an average basketball coach.
Quote from: esotericmindguy on March 09, 2014, 10:09:31 AM
So now it's down 2% of what we know. As you would say, evidence? Jersey chasing? Are you serious? Just stop, you're embarrassing yourself. Again, that's my problem with buzz, he coaches with his heart way to much. In the past his favorites were always the best players, that's not the case this year. He said it himself, he believes in the underdog, well I believe in winning games.
One of the most efficient offensive players in Marquette history just played his last game at the Bradley Center....and he averaged 23 minutes a game as an upperclassman. Ridiculous.
Jersey chasing was thrown out there as a joke. But it's still information about our players that Buzz knows that we don't.
If Buzz is playing his favorite players over the ones who give us a better chance to win (and the only reason is that they are his favorites), I want him fired this very second. And I love the guy. "Buzz is loyal to his favorites" is a lazy argument that posters use to hide the fact that our backups are not as good as we think they are.
What Senior are you talking about? Jake averaged 29.7 minutes per game, Jamil averaged 28.9 mpg, Davante average 26.5 mpg, and Chris averaged 18.1 mpg. No one was 23 mpg.
Quote from: BenCat12 on March 09, 2014, 01:22:01 PM
This couldn't be more wrong and if Buzz is truly using 5% of on-court performance to determine playing time he should have been fired yesterday. This is about winning basketball games, not running a charity. While the feel good stories are great, he gets paid millions of dollars a year to win. It is comments like these from you and other posters that make me wonder if you ever played organized sports.
You give Buzz entirely too much credit. I don't think Bulls or Lakers fans look at Phil Jackson in the same glowing light, as a Zen master, that you and some of the other Buzz-fanatics do. Buzz is a great recruiter, a great motivator and an average basketball coach.
Please read what I said again. I never said Buzz uses less the 5% of on court performance. I said all of on the court performance accounts for less than 5% of the available data about our players. Buzz has has literally months worth of practice hours to judge on. Not too mention all the off court data.
I'm not saying Buzz is a zen master or whatever it is you said. All I have said, all I have ever said, is that Buzz has 100% of the available data. We probably have about 7%. We can debate all we want, but Buzz will always know more than we do. I'm not even saying that Buzz has more basketball IQ than us (he does), I'm just saying he has access to more data than any of us do.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 09, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
Please read what I said again. I never said Buzz uses less the 5% of on court performance. I said all of on the court performance accounts for less than 5% of the available data about our players. Buzz has has literally months worth of practice hours to judge on. Not too mention all the off court data.
I'm not saying Buzz is a zen master or whatever it is you said. All I have said, all I have ever said, is that Buzz has 100% of the available data. We probably have about 7%. We can debate all we want, but Buzz will always know more than we do. I'm not even saying that Buzz has more basketball IQ than us (he does), I'm just saying he has access to more data than any of us do.
So basically nobody has a right to question anything Buzz does because he has all the information and we don't. Than why should anyone ever post on a message board? Strictly to blow sunshine about how great the program is? I am guessing you would be defending Oliver Purnell if this was a DePaul board. Despite his recruiting classes, his data, his strategy, all of his past accomplishments, the team is 17-14. Whether you like it or not Buzz failed this season.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 09, 2014, 03:17:24 PM
Please read what I said again. I never said Buzz uses less the 5% of on court performance. I said all of on the court performance accounts for less than 5% of the available data about our players. Buzz has has literally months worth of practice hours to judge on. Not too mention all the off court data.
I'm not saying Buzz is a zen master or whatever it is you said. All I have said, all I have ever said, is that Buzz has 100% of the available data. We probably have about 7%. We can debate all we want, but Buzz will always know more than we do. I'm not even saying that Buzz has more basketball IQ than us (he does), I'm just saying he has access to more data than any of us do.
....
Seriously I could care less if someone is LIGHTS OUT IN PRACTICE....as you are inferring....and can't perform when the BRIGHT LIGHTS come on......well for me it's a 'no brainer' - but Buzz and his apologists apparently disagree
Quote from: BenCat12 on March 09, 2014, 03:34:51 PM
So basically nobody has a right to question anything Buzz does because he has all the information and we don't. Than why should anyone ever post on a message board? Strictly to blow sunshine about how great the program is? I am guessing you would be defending Oliver Purnell if this was a DePaul board. Despite his recruiting classes, his data, his strategy, all of his past accomplishments, the team is 17-14. Whether you like it or not Buzz failed this season.
Not what I said at all. I love debating points. I disagree with decisions Buzz makes all the time. I think Dawson should be getting at least 15 minute a game. I think Burton needs to be forgiven for his little mistakes and given 15-20 minutes a game. I don't think Juan should sniff the floor the rest of the season. But I have never devolved into Buzz is an idiot, Buzz has forgotten how to coach, what the hell is Buzz doing.
Is it "blowing sunshine" just because I refuse to insult our coach? I disagree with him all the time, but I still respect him.
I would have zero problems with anyone on this board if they tuned down the hyperbole and insults.
I am really going to miss Davante. He's such a unique player and personality. Great hands, great footwork, knows how to use his body to create space, great touch down low, and is money at the FT line. His twitter handle perfectly summarizes his game. Dude just gets buckets. Should be interesting to see how his playing career goes after he leaves MU. I hope he can find a niche at some professional level. With his frame he could make good money somewhere in the world for a while.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 10, 2014, 09:21:34 AM
Not what I said at all. I love debating points. I disagree with decisions Buzz makes all the time. I think Dawson should be getting at least 15 minute a game. I think Burton needs to be forgiven for his little mistakes and given 15-20 minutes a game. I don't think Juan should sniff the floor the rest of the season. But I have never devolved into Buzz is an idiot, Buzz has forgotten how to coach, what the hell is Buzz doing.
Is it "blowing sunshine" just because I refuse to insult our coach? I disagree with him all the time, but I still respect him.
I would have zero problems with anyone on this board if they tuned down the hyperbole and insults.
How can you, "disagree with decisions Buzz makes all the time?" He has more data than you.
You should really PM your address to me, nobody talks in circles more than you do, I'll send you a compass.
Quote from: BenCat12 on March 10, 2014, 11:01:11 AM
You should really PM your address to me, nobody talks in circles more than you do, I'll send you a compass.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbdlbynpF61qbn6bbo1_500.gif)
Sorry, I love this GIF. Makes me smile every time ;D
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 10, 2014, 11:11:38 AM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbdlbynpF61qbn6bbo1_500.gif)
Sorry, I love this GIF. Makes me smile every time ;D
Well, when the facts get in the way just use a personal insult or a funny GIF. Got it!
Quote from: BenCat12 on March 10, 2014, 11:01:11 AM
How can you, "disagree with decisions Buzz makes all the time?" He has more data than you.
Because based off the data I have (less than Buzz), many of his decisions don't make sense. So I disagree. However, I know that Buzz is no idiot, so I try to figure out the question, "why would he make this decision?" I don't always figure it out but by doing so, I can make an informed decision on whether or not I agree with his call.
For example, he starts Juan despite his deficiencies. This does not make sense to me. So why would Buzz do it. Well, in the past, Buzz has stated multiple times that starting positions are earned by the toughest players in practice. If Juan is that player, how can Buzz keep his credibility with his players, without significantly hurting his teams chances for victory? He can start Juan and then yank him. Play him only 5 minutes.
Now, I don't agree with this philosophy. I understand why it is done, but I think Juan starting hurts us too much. The ends do not justify the means. I think there are other ways Buzz can get this point across without hurting the team's on the court performance.
There is a difference between "I disagree with Buzz's decision" and "Buzz is an idiot." My only point, as it has ever been, is that Buzz is no idiot. He simply has a different philosophy than many on this board (as well as access to additional information).
"When I was I losing, they called me nuts. When I was winning, they called me eccentric."
Quote from: BenCat12 on March 10, 2014, 11:15:31 AM
Well, when the facts get in the way just use a personal insult or a funny GIF. Got it!
I was writing my response. You can see it in the post above.
When have I ever resorted to a personal insult? Please point it out, and I will apologize.
I use funny gifs because they make me smile. I enjoy smiling. Also because we are adults debating a game on the internet. It shouldn't ever be taken that seriously.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 10, 2014, 11:28:19 AM
I was writing my response. You can see it in the post above.
When have I ever resorted to a personal insult? Please point it out, and I will apologize.
I use funny gifs because they make me smile. I enjoy smiling. Also because we are adults debating a game on the internet. It shouldn't ever be taken that seriously.
The "funny GIF" could be viewed as an insult, but I have thicker skin than that.
As far as your other post, I don't recall calling Buzz an "idiot." I question many of the things he does as I believe he values running a boys home more than a D1 basketball team sometimes. But overall I like the guy. I like him much more as a person and a motivational speaker than I do an actual basketball coach, but I do like him and don't think he is an idiot. I think he makes too many emotional decisions for a big time basketball coach. I believe his relationships with players causes him to lose games he shouldn't. Your example of Juan's minutes is a prime example of that. The problem with some on this board is that we are not allowed to criticize Buzz under any circumstance. It is annoying and exhausting. Too many fly to Buzz's rescue without realizing there are problems with some of his decisions. Worst of all they can't distinguish between criticizing and "hating" or "whining."