MUScoop

Coach Williams, during the post game interview, said it as clearly as possible. He sees the game through a different lens.

Despite all the second guessing this year, when one reflects, he coached exactly like he did last year. That is, he sees the game first and foremost from the defensive end. The game begins and ends there for Coach Williams, and his coaching revolves around defense first and last.

This defense orientation, combined with the work ethic culture, has resulted in Warrior success and his "type of guys" getting shots and playing in the NBA.

He did not use hockey type line changes during his first years at Marquette, simply because he did not have any bench. Once he got teams with some depth, Coach Williams started his revolving check-in ... seemingly every 30 seconds.

It has been pointed out by Homer, national announcers, opposing coaches, et al., that he substitutes maybe more than any other coach has ever done.

Why did he change lines, and take micro-management to a new level? One has to go back to his view/emphasis on defense. His "lens" has everything revolve around defense. (That is why, as he has said, D. Wilson and J. Thomas play as many minutes as they do, and D. Gardner was used less.)

He did the same thing two years ago as the team dept increased, and questions were raised then about substitutions. But, the Warriors won and went to the "Sweet 16." Coach Williams did it even more last year, questions were raised again, but, hey, the Warriors went to the "elite 8" and it was all forgotten.

He did it again this year ... that is, focus on defense and substitute like crazy with an almost total focus on stopping the other team ... this year it did not work.

It did not work for all the myriad of reasons posted with increasing frustration on this board. But, it mainly boils down to one, not having guards; and, two, Coach Williams not adapting his defense to his "talent" and the changing nature of big time college basketball. (Coach Williams is also obsessive about playing man-to-man as much as possible, maybe because "tuff" guys play only man-to-man.)

I respect Coach Williams' philosophy. He is unbending on what he thinks will work and what is right. However, one must ask, if Coach Williams' entire philosophy begins and ends with defense, then why did he not become more creative in his types of defenses, and why did he not mix them up more to cover the holes the team obviously had?

No, Coach Williams did not forget how to coach this year. As in the past, he continued to focus on defense, but did not show the flexibility to come-up with more creative and changing defenses during the season and during games.

For emphasizing defense, MU isn't that great a defensive team. Did not seem to get many turkeys this year.

17-15 again next year, and he might be out on the street with a totally different lens.

Quote from: melissasmooth on March 14, 2014, 07:15:07 AM
17-15 again next year, and he might be out on the street with a totally different lens.

i understand your frustration, but i believe there will be a lot of reflection and with the new guys coming in, i hope he develops a different approach/changes lenses

Our starting guards were terrible all around all year - including the defensive end.  Whoever thinks DW is an above average defender is "seeing the game through a different lens".  He and Jake have been torched all year by the other teams' guards.  Our frontcourt just was not good enough to make for the difference.

What in the world was DW turning around and looking at all last night out on the perimeter, while the X guards went by him at will.  I assume it was to see where a pick was coming from, but they burned us all night with this tactic, and nothing ever changed.  Sometimes his head was still looking towards the basket when the defender was already by him.  I don't know who came up with this method of playing defense, but it's pathetic.

BTW, the same thing happened at the end of the St Johns game when Harrison was 25' from the basket, who isn't exactly a driving guard.  Instead of just playing defense, DW is turned around and too busy checking out where everyone else is on the court.  Boom - 3 pointer before he even notices what's going on.  Game over.

Quote from: UticaBusBarn on March 14, 2014, 03:54:14 AM
Coach Williams, during the post game interview, said it as clearly as possible. He sees the game through a different lens.

Despite all the second guessing this year, when one reflects, he coached exactly like he did last year. That is, he sees the game first and foremost from the defensive end. The game begins and ends there for Coach Williams, and his coaching revolves around defense first and last.

This defense orientation, combined with the work ethic culture, has resulted in Warrior success and his "type of guys" getting shots and playing in the NBA.

He did not use hockey type line changes during his first years at Marquette, simply because he did not have any bench. Once he got teams with some depth, Coach Williams started his revolving check-in ... seemingly every 30 seconds.

It has been pointed out by Homer, national announcers, opposing coaches, et al., that he substitutes maybe more than any other coach has ever done.

Why did he change lines, and take micro-management to a new level? One has to go back to his view/emphasis on defense. His "lens" has everything revolve around defense. (That is why, as he has said, D. Wilson and J. Thomas play as many minutes as they do, and D. Gardner was used less.)

He did the same thing two years ago as the team dept increased, and questions were raised then about substitutions. But, the Warriors won and went to the "Sweet 16." Coach Williams did it even more last year, questions were raised again, but, hey, the Warriors went to the "elite 8" and it was all forgotten.

He did it again this year ... that is, focus on defense and substitute like crazy with an almost total focus on stopping the other team ... this year it did not work.

It did not work for all the myriad of reasons posted with increasing frustration on this board. But, it mainly boils down to one, not having guards; and, two, Coach Williams not adapting his defense to his "talent" and the changing nature of big time college basketball. (Coach Williams is also obsessive about playing man-to-man as much as possible, maybe because "tuff" guys play only man-to-man.)

I respect Coach Williams' philosophy. He is unbending on what he thinks will work and what is right. However, one must ask, if Coach Williams' entire philosophy begins and ends with defense, then why did he not become more creative in his types of defenses, and why did he not mix them up more to cover the holes the team obviously had?

No, Coach Williams did not forget how to coach this year. As in the past, he continued to focus on defense, but did not show the flexibility to come-up with more creative and changing defenses during the season and during games.

Yup--"obsessive", "unbending", could be used interchangeably with "stubborn" or "my way or the highway". His defense this year was not good--could not defend the three; centers playing out of position; did not get the stops; and the beat goes on.

I like this original post and I'll say this...there is no doubt Buzz is unconventional. Whether it is "paint touches" or playing guys solely for defense, you cannot argue with his success save this year. I'll tell you another thing, whether you admit it or not, we are a well coached team. The results were not there this year for whatever reason. But our team is doing exactly what they are told to do. Not a game goes by when I see a team (other than Marquette) doing things Buzz would never tolerate. DePaul is a perfect example. That Garrett kid is a good player, but my god he jacks up shots early in possessions and I always thing to myself, "that'd never fly with Buzz."

Another thing, we all get frustrated watching but one thing I was never frustrated with all season long was the hustle our team played with. I cannot remember a single game where we looked disinterested or disengaged. That is coaching.

It didn't workout this year. But is has worked in the past and it will work again.

Cracked Sidewalks tweeted out their offensive and defensive numbers, and MU's defense has been pretty poor under Buzz.

Might be time to get the prescription checked on that lens.

Quote from: PE8983 on March 14, 2014, 07:31:20 AM
Our starting guards were terrible all around all year - including the defensive end.  Whoever thinks DW is an above average defender is "seeing the game through a different lens".  He and Jake have been torched all year by the other teams' guards.  Our frontcourt just was not good enough to make for the difference.

What in the world was DW turning around and looking at all last night out on the perimeter, while the X guards went by him at will.  I assume it was to see where a pick was coming from, but they burned us all night with this tactic, and nothing ever changed.  Sometimes his head was still looking towards the basket when the defender was already by him.  I don't know who came up with this method of playing defense, but it's pathetic.

BTW, the same thing happened at the end of the St Johns game when Harrison was 25' from the basket, who isn't exactly a driving guard.  Instead of just playing defense, DW is turned around and too busy checking out where everyone else is on the court.  Boom - 3 pointer before he even notices what's going on.  Game over.

I don't disagree with you.  However, what better options did he have for defense at the guard positions?

I think Buzz knew what he was going to get this year from his guards.  The biggest disappointment for him must be the lack of productivity from Jamil.  His consistent inconsistency hurt the team the most over the course of the season.  It's too bad, because Jamil's a great guy.  I really like him.  Hope he can get it together in the NIT, and showcase the talent Buzz was hoping for this season.

This thread brought to you by

(http://findlogo.net/images/L/lens%20crafters%20logo.jpg)

You would think his offense defense substitutions will decrease a little with the loss of Gardner and Chris, those guys have been around a long time.

What is amazing to me is that he is calling out multiple man to man defenses. IE 1-4 black.  Meaning he has multiple defensive sets with multiple defensive rotations, for help,  and doubling in his defenses.

Yet his team has poor basic fundamentals.  And this goes for every player on the floor.  Basic closeout techniques.  Basic help and recover.  Basic weak side positioning.  Something was very very wrong with the MU defense this season and from a armchair coaches perspective.  He was trying to do advacned concepts and almost every player hasnt figured out team defense 101 yet.

Quote from: CoachesCorner on March 14, 2014, 08:52:13 AM
Yet his team has poor basic fundamentals.  And this goes for every player on the floor.  Basic closeout techniques.  Basic help and recover.  Basic weak side positioning.  Something was very very wrong with the MU defense this season and from a armchair coaches perspective.  He was trying to do advacned concepts and almost every play hasnt figured out team defense 101 yet.

Well said. Their base man defense is putrid, and he's putting in advanced looks based on the scouting report.

Frustrating to say the least.

Quote from: real chili 83 on March 14, 2014, 08:33:03 AM
I don't disagree with you.  However, what better options did he have for defense at the guard positions?

I think Buzz knew what he was going to get this year from his guards.  The biggest disappointment for him must be the lack of productivity from Jamil.  His consistent inconsistency hurt the team the most over the course of the season.  It's too bad, because Jamil's a great guy.  I really like him.  Hope he can get it together in the NIT, and showcase the talent Buzz was hoping for this season.

Jamil is not a superstar.  He is a guy who needs room to operate, and with the lack of threats elsewhere on the floor, he didn't have the space this year that he has had in years past when defenses were also occupied with the likes of Crowder, DJO, Blue, Lockett, etc.

Quote from: CoachesCorner on March 14, 2014, 08:52:13 AM
What is amazing to me is that he is calling out multiple man to man defenses. IE 1-4 black.  Meaning he has multiple defensive sets with multiple defensive rotations, for help,  and doubling in his defenses.

Yet his team has poor basic fundamentals.  And this goes for every player on the floor.  Basic closeout techniques.  Basic help and recover.  Basic weak side positioning.  Something was very very wrong with the MU defense this season and from a armchair coaches perspective.  He was trying to do advacned concepts and almost every player hasnt figured out team defense 101 yet.

Man philosophy to start but really with the weak side defender helping out, almost a zone.  Problem is, weakside O player gets open 3 all the time.  If you have a player who can hit the shot, you lose all the time, wide open.  That is why Creighton killed MU twice.  Plus MU guards were not quick this year, Todd is a step slow, Wilson and Thomas average at best at keeping there player in front of them.  Semi and most points killed Derrick this year, that was as big a problem as there was.

Quote from: BCHoopster on March 14, 2014, 08:57:51 AM
Man philosophy to start but really with the weak side defender helping out, almost a zone.  Problem is, weakside O player gets open 3 all the time.  If you have a player who can hit the shot, you lose all the time, wide open.  That is why Creighton killed MU twice.  Plus MU guards were not quick this year, Todd is a step slow, Wilson and Thomas average at best at keeping there player in front of them.  Semi and most points killed Derrick this year, that was as big a problem as there was.

There is nothing wrong with the philosophy.  Its the implementation.  Same concepts Bennette uses in virginia.(and all over the country)  Its a matter of focus, and effort when going from weakside to ball side, IE closing out.  MUs guys should be moving when the ball is being released from the passers hands and going as fast as humanly possible to a proper closeout on a shooter.  Time and time again MUs defenders wait till the ball is half way there to react and close out standing straight up or even worse make almost no effort to get there.  Whats even worse the help defenders are in position but never step up to stop the ball.  Just fundamental lapses all over the floor.

Quote from: CoachesCorner on March 14, 2014, 09:11:29 AM
There is nothing wrong with the philosophy.  Its the implementation.  Same concepts Bennette uses in virginia.(and all over the country)  Its a matter of focus, and effort when going from weakside to ball side, IE closing out.  MUs guys should be moving when the ball is being released from the passers hands and going as fast as humanly possible to a proper closeout on a shooter.  Time and time again MUs defenders wait till the ball is half way there to react and close out standing straight up or even worse make almost no effort to get there.  Whats even worse the help defenders are in position but never step up to stop the ball.  Just fundamental lapses all over the floor.

The philosophy might be right but as you say and we saw all year, it did not work.  Might as well play a straight man to man much like Wisconsin does.  There problem is there guards are not that quick either and good guards can create and beat there man off the dribble.  Rather be like Syracuse, just play a 2-3 zone and take away the dribble drive and uncontested open threes.
Boeheim must know something after 900 or so victories. 

I absolutely agree that Buzz is now and has always been focused on defense first.  He is also completely obsessed with individual possessions.  Several weeks ago he said on his show that "I'm trying to find a way to get one or two more scoring possessions'.  This is why Dawson comes out after a single mistake.  This is why we go offense - defense with centers early in the game.
I think many of the posters on this board claim that they can't understand why Buzz puts in or pulls a guy would understand better what he is doing if they would understand how he thinks.  They might not like it but they would understand it.  Then once you understand it you have to say that this coach is a little weird and different than most BUT over the long term he has OVER PREFORMED.
The problem Buzz had this year is that unlike in past years with Lazar, Jimmy, Jae, Vander his best players on defense WERE NOT his best players on offense.  In fact his best players on defense were his WORST players on offense.  I think it took him all year to find a compromise he could live with.  MU was hard to watch earlier in the year.  The OSU, Wis, New Mexico and Butler 2nd half away games are exhibits 1-4.  The last 8 games despite most of them being loses the Offense has flowed much better.  That tells me that Buzz did adapt and learn and the fact that he did and the fact that he is still a fairly young coach give me hope.

Quote from: BCHoopster on March 14, 2014, 09:20:15 AM
The philosophy might be right but as you say and we saw all year, it did not work.  Might as well play a straight man to man much like Wisconsin does.  There problem is there guards are not that quick either and good guards can create and beat there man off the dribble.  Rather be like Syracuse, just play a 2-3 zone and take away the dribble drive and uncontested open threes.
Boeheim must know something after 900 or so victories. 

I think either way works.  But you need to pick one and stick with it.  And rep the fundamentals over and over.  BTW UW plays help side the same way MU does.  and almost every team in the country that plays man to man.  UW closes out aggresively as to not give up the 3.  Instead would rather give up the mid range pull up.  But I can assure you they play sagging help side.  Just like MU.  They are just more disciplined.  But if you notice with their technique they have trouble with penatration at times during the year.  Bo has altered his D a bit because of how close and easy the 3pt shot is.

Quote from: CoachesCorner on March 14, 2014, 09:25:47 AM
I think either way works.  But you need to pick one and stick with it.  And rep the fundamentals over and over.  BTW UW plays help side the same way MU does.  and almost every team in the country that plays man to man.  UW closes out aggresively as to not give up the 3.  Instead would rather give up the mid range pull up.  But I can assure you they play sagging help side.  Just like MU.  They are just more disciplined.  But if you notice with their technique they have trouble with penatration at times during the year.  Bo has altered his D a bit because of how close and easy the 3pt shot is.

Bo's philosophy has changed a little bit on the pick and roll that killed him, particularly against a team that can shoot.  The defensive man would go below the pick giving the Offensive player an open shot all time, now they are trying to go above the pick much like MU at times but the bigs do not go to half court like MU player does, and at times the MU big picked up a stupid foul 35 feet from the basket.  Devonte was a defensive liability, does not block out at all, and had no lateral quickness.  They will be a different defensive team next year, probably better at times.
They should have found tapes on Wes Unseld to show him how to play, that dude could rebound.

Buzz saw the game through a foggy lens all year long in my opinion. I really just think he is not a very good in game coach. Great guy, recruiter, leader...his game day coaching left a lot to be desired this year, be it rotations or in game adjustments. He has obviously earned the benefit of the doubt and hoping this was just a one year blip and he learns from it.

"Wilson and Thomas average at best at keeping there player in front of them."
IMO, they are worse than average on defense, much worse than average on offense.
Got torched night in and night out against the decent teams on our schedule.

Quote from: PE8983 on March 14, 2014, 09:45:31 AM
"Wilson and Thomas average at best at keeping there player in front of them."
IMO, they are worse than average on defense, much worse than average on offense.
Got torched night in and night out against the decent teams on our schedule.

Last night was a perfect example of fundamental flaws at the end of the half.  Lets not even get into May going to the hoop with 12 seconds left...

The last posession on d of the first half:

Thomas is challenging Christon way too far out on the floor.  Almost 25ft from the hoop.
This causes him to get blown by right away.
Jamil and 2 others are in position to force a pass(and a last second tough shot by someone other then their star) and step in and help.  None of them do.
Christon gets all the way to the hoop.
None of the help defenders were even in a defensive stance.  All standing basically straight up.

Why is this a big deal?
This is a win or go home game.   At this point a tie game in the last seconds of the half at the end of the season.  And the players arent even focused enough to guard where they should or get in a stance to help and recover.

Lack of focus and effort.  Hard to understand.  Especially from your senior leaders...

Quote from: PE8983 on March 14, 2014, 09:45:31 AM
"Wilson and Thomas average at best at keeping there player in front of them."
IMO, they are worse than average on defense, much worse than average on offense.
Got torched night in and night out against the decent teams on our schedule.

There has been enough bashing of those 2 guys this year, blame Buzz he recruited Derrick, Jake was just a walk-on, considering that he was pretty good.  Blame Buzz on either not starting Mayo
all year or finding a better 2 guard, everybody thought it was JJJ, but it was not.  Did JJJ have a scholarship to Memphis?  Just curious, if not, there must have been a reason Pastner did not recruit him?

What I find frustrating is that Buzz's defense is so difficult to understand he cannot trust freshmen to play.

And yet, his defense is not effective.

Quote from: BCHoopster on March 14, 2014, 09:54:20 AM
There has been enough bashing of those 2 guys this year, blame Buzz he recruited Derrick, Jake was just a walk-on, considering that he was pretty good.  Blame Buzz on either not starting Mayo
all year or finding a better 2 guard, everybody thought it was JJJ, but it was not.  Did JJJ have a scholarship to Memphis?  Just curious, if not, there must have been a reason Pastner did not recruit him?

Can you not understand that Mayo is to blame for not starting? He didn't earn it. By the way, he was HORRENDOUS for the first 20 minutes last night.

Anybody can see he's a more talented player than Thomas. Even Thomas would probably acknowledge this. So why isn't Mayo starting? I'll bet Todd knows.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 10:06:38 AM
Can you not understand that Mayo is to blame for not starting? He didn't earn it. By the way, he was HORRENDOUS for the first 20 minutes last night.

Anybody can see he's a more talented player than Thomas. Even Thomas would probably acknowledge this. So why isn't Mayo starting? I'll bet Todd knows.

And by the way, historically, Buzz would have relegated Mayo to the bench for the remainder of the game if he started as poorly as he did against Xavier last night....but as has been shown the last 10 games...you have to stick with a TALENTED player and let him get in a flow to extract the talent...

Yet, ironically, Buzz can stick and grind with a player for 32 minutes a night for an entire season at the most critical position on the floor...and get piss poor production....but yeah...he sure earns those minutes.

Why didn't Burton start from beginning of conference play?  Is there any comparison between Juan Anderson and Burton??  Burton not earning starting role too?  What about Gardner?  Any reason for him to not play 32 minutes?

Find one other Top 100 college basketball team that has its leading scorer come off the bench, as well as its 3rd leading scorer...therein lies the difference between an NCAA bid and NIT...especially if Buzz was hell bent on riding as limited offensive PG as you will ever see in hign major ball - you need 4 offensive studs out there with him if you are going to ride him 32 minutes a game...

Until someone on this board brings multiple teams to the Sweet 16, one to the Elite 8, and puts three (?) players in the NBA, I think we should assume that Buzz knows more about coaching at a high level than any of us.

This was a tough year.  Players who left would have helped, others did not develop or live up to their full potential.  It's unfortunate but it happens.  This team is LOADED with talent for the future (see Burton putting up his best numbers of the season in the biggest game of the season) and I remain optimistic.  And confident that Buzz is very, very capable of coaching us back to the Final Four.

Quote from: humanlung on March 14, 2014, 10:19:46 AM
Until someone on this board brings multiple teams to the Sweet 16, one to the Elite 8, and puts three (?) players in the NBA, I think we should assume that Buzz knows more about coaching at a high level than any of us.

This was a tough year.  Players who left would have helped, others did not develop or live up to their full potential.  It's unfortunate but it happens.  This team is LOADED with talent for the future (see Burton putting up his best numbers of the season in the biggest game of the season) and I remain optimistic.  And confident that Buzz is very, very capable of coaching us back to the Final Four.

Agreed, but the team is not loaded in the future.  Steve Taylor is a big question mark, he is soft, bad knee, Juan, no comment, Pierce and Fisher are raw, which leaves Burton upfront who is undersized and needs more understanding how to play Buzz's defensive schemes.  Todd will be fine on the wing, not sure he is quick enough to play the 2 guard as he cannot defend that type of player, Duane Wilson who knows, Dawson, maybe, Derrick do not see it, Cohen to skinny, Mayok not sure, Hill probably but still a frosh, and JJJ needs muscle.  Buzz is lacking a power player next year and the following year, very young next year, loaded, I do not see it.  Needs to recruit at least 2 bigs and a point.

This team is not loaded by any measure. The freshman and sophomore classes are good, but need seasoning and good coaching. How many real good 4 year players has Buzz had? Whos going to develop them, there is no continuity of winning
like we had in previous years to build on. I hope the assistant coaches and staff are cohesive and talented enough to build
a winning culture. Real tough year, I hope its a quiet off-season.

"Christon gets all the way to the hoop.
None of the help defenders were even in a defensive stance.  All standing basically straight up.

Why is this a big deal?
This is a win or go home game.   At this point a tie game in the last seconds of the half at the end of the season.  And the players arent even focused enough to guard where they should or get in a stance to help and recover.

Lack of focus and effort.  Hard to understand.  Especially from your senior leaders..."


To top it all off, that lineup on the floor was in for defensive purposes only as a TO was taken right before the half.
If Jamil would have stepped in and taken a charge on that play, it would have been foul #3 on Christon.
Ball goes thru the hole with maybe 3-4 seconds left.  Could have passed it in and got a shot off.  Instead everyone, notably Jamil and Juan go running out towards half court with no one to in-bound.  Jamil eventually goes back to in-bound and clock runs out.  No shot attempt.  Whoever was closest to the ball should have got it in-bounds to allow for a shot.  Inexplicably, the same player has to in-bound every time.  When you have a constantly changing line-up, I assume that causes these brain farts with simple execution.

Quote from: Ners on March 14, 2014, 10:15:22 AM
And by the way, historically, Buzz would have relegated Mayo to the bench for the remainder of the game if he started as poorly as he did against Xavier last night....but as has been shown the last 10 games...you have to stick with a TALENTED player and let him get in a flow to extract the talent...

Yet, ironically, Buzz can stick and grind with a player for 32 minutes a night for an entire season at the most critical position on the floor...and get piss poor production....but yeah...he sure earns those minutes.

Why didn't Burton start from beginning of conference play?  Is there any comparison between Juan Anderson and Burton??  Burton not earning starting role too?  What about Gardner?  Any reason for him to not play 32 minutes?

Find one other Top 100 college basketball team that has its leading scorer come off the bench, as well as its 3rd leading scorer...therein lies the difference between an NCAA bid and NIT...especially if Buzz was hell bent on riding as limited offensive PG as you will ever see in hign major ball - you need 4 offensive studs out there with him if you are going to ride him 32 minutes a game...

You're advocating letting the inmates run the asylum. Reading between the lines, Gardner doesn't start because he's lazy. I'm going to guess Mayo's work habits are also questionable. I don't know about Burton. He seems like a monster in the making. You cannot run a team where the hardest workers sit and the other guys skate by without doing what they're asked to do and get rewarded for it. You just can't.

If you want to blame somebody for our lack of success, stop blaming Buzz and start looking at the reasons Mayo couldn't beat out Thomas or a talented guy like Davante couldn't unseat a marginal player like Otule. If the effort was even close, I'm betting the story would be different.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 11:45:57 AM
You're advocating letting the inmates run the asylum. Reading between the lines, Gardner doesn't start because he's lazy. I'm going to guess Mayo's work habits are also questionable. I don't know about Burton. He seems like a monster in the making. You cannot run a team where the hardest workers sit and the other guys skate by without doing what they're asked to do and get rewarded for it. You just can't.

If you want to blame somebody for our lack of success, stop blaming Buzz and start looking at the reasons Mayo couldn't beat out Thomas or a talented guy like Davante couldn't unseat a marginal player like Otule. If the effort was even close, I'm betting the story would be different.

Almost every successful company that relies on TALENTED workers instead of the number of workers needed does the exact same thing.

Any job that requires skills unique to the individual will see the hardest workers toil away while those with real talent earn real money.  Perhaps those without talent understand this and their hard work is what keeps them from being shown the door.

Now when an extremely talented individual also has a great work ethic that's when superstars are made.  Usually you get one or the other.  If I had to choose someone to hire I'd choose talent every time, that is unless I'm hiring for a no skill laborer/order taker position where quantity is more important than quality.

Quote from: Henry Sugar on March 14, 2014, 10:03:26 AM
What I find frustrating is that Buzz's defense is so difficult to understand he cannot trust freshmen to play.

And yet, his defense is not effective.

This is my biggest issue with Buzz

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 08:16:43 AM
It didn't workout this year. But is has worked in the past and it will work again.

Agreed, happens with the best of programs.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 11:45:57 AM
If you want to blame somebody for our lack of success, stop blaming Buzz and start looking at the reasons Mayo couldn't beat out Thomas or a talented guy like Davante couldn't unseat a marginal player like Otule. If the effort was even close, I'm betting the story would be different.

I agree with what you said except this about Davante.  I think Buzz always intended to bring Davante off the bench.  Davante seems to play better coming off the bench and Buzz likes to have so instance offense he can bring in.  Also there is that thing about winning the tip (again Buzz is fixated on getting an extra possession).  Chris either gets into the flow of the game or its not his night, therefore you start him, see if he's on.  If so you ride him if not you know he'll really just be available for limited defensive duty.

Also I hope everyone has figured out by now that Derrick has a severe lack of confidence problem.  That's why he doesn't shoot, can't make free throws and is so "careful" running the offense.  He's also the best of a bunch of bad options at PG (and some of that is on Buzz going back several years of recruiting).  The reason Buzz praises him is not because Buzz is blind to his weaknesses.  Its an attempt to build his confidence in the hope of making a bad option a little better.

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 11:56:51 AM
Almost every successful company that relies on TALENTED workers instead of the number of workers needed does the exact same thing.

Any job that requires skills unique to the individual will see the hardest workers toil away while those with real talent earn real money.  Perhaps those without talent understand this and their hard work is what keeps them from being shown the door.

Now when an extremely talented individual also has a great work ethic that's when superstars are made.  Usually you get one or the other.  If I had to choose someone to hire I'd choose talent every time, that is unless I'm hiring for a no skill laborer/order taker position where quantity is more important than quality.

This is nonsense. Also, comparing a basketball program that turns over every couple years to an established business is moronic. Buzz has to recreate his "business" almost every other year. Marquette basketball is not a "team" it's a program. Rewarding the hardest workers is what has made it successful and what has helped shape Lazar, Jae, Butler, DJO and everybody else into a "Marquette brand" we have started to hear about.

You want Buzz to change that "business model" because of Todd Freaking Mayo? Get real. Buzz has done the difficult...and right...thing this season.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 12:59:52 PM
This is nonsense. Also, comparing a basketball program that turns over every couple years to an established business is moronic. Buzz has to recreate his "business" almost every other year. Marquette basketball is not a "team" it's a program. Rewarding the hardest workers is what has made it successful and what has helped shape Lazar, Jae, Butler, DJO and everybody else into a "Marquette brand" we have started to hear about.

You want Buzz to change that "business model" because of Todd Freaking Mayo? Get real. Buzz has done the difficult...and right...thing this season.

Lazar, Jae, Butler and DJO - the names you mentioned - certainly were the most talented.  You're implying they were also the hardest working.  They quite possibly were but don't interchange talent for work ethic.

And it's not BS what I said earlier.

Question:  Do you want your financial advisor to be the hardest working, pour through the market trends, spend late nights analysing charts and what not who never seems to make your portfolio grow or do you want the guy who's always on the golf course or on some vacation but has the uncanny ability to make all the right decisions allowing your money to grow and you to retire early?

Hard work paying off is a make believe fantasy of the untalented.  Without talent, hardworkers are relegated for mid management jobs their entire lives.  It's exactly the same as basketball just exchange mid management for role players and bench warmers.

Quote from: PE8983 on March 14, 2014, 11:27:30 AM

Ball goes thru the hole with maybe 3-4 seconds left.  Could have passed it in and got a shot off.  Instead everyone, notably Jamil and Juan go running out towards half court with no one to in-bound.  Jamil eventually goes back to in-bound and clock runs out.  No shot attempt.  Whoever was closest to the ball should have got it in-bounds to allow for a shot.  Inexplicably, the same player has to in-bound every time.  When you have a constantly changing line-up, I assume that causes these brain farts with simple execution.

Glad you noticed that play - I was absolutely stunned when that happened. And that is why we want the seniors on the floor? Cuz Buzz thrusts them? Just low basketball IQ.

Something is wrong there. Similar to never ever going two for one possessions at the end of a half. If Mack can do it why can't Buzz. There is no logical/illogical reason not to.

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 01:08:53 PM
Lazar, Jae, Butler and DJO - the names you mentioned - certainly were the most talented.  You're implying they were also the hardest working.  They quite possibly were but don't interchange talent for work ethic.

And it's not BS what I said earlier.

Question:  Do you want your financial advisor to be the hardest working, pour through the market trends, spend late nights analysing charts and what not who never seems to make your portfolio grow or do you want the guy who's always on the golf course or on some vacation but has the uncanny ability to make all the right decisions allowing your money to grow and you to retire early?

Hard work paying off is a make believe fantasy of the untalented.  Without talent, hardworkers are relegated for mid management jobs their entire lives.  It's exactly the same as basketball just exchange mid management for role players and bench warmers.

There is no such thing as a financial advisor with "uncanny ability." Those people are total frauds and gamblers.

Again, you cannot compare some business school garbage with running a basketball program.

Consider this. Marquette will NEVER have the most talent in the Big East. never. We didn't last year and we shared the title. We will NEVER, EVER have more talent than Syracuse, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, even Indiana.

How can we expect to compete with this talent gap?

Here's another question for you. Who works more hours, you or Buzz Williams? Who makes more money? Now ask yourself how a guy with Buzz's somewhat pedestrian education has gotten to a position making millions of dollars a year. The answer is he is out worked the other guys. He sure as hell isn't more talented or smoother or polished or an ex player. This is who Buzz is. I find it hard to believe anybody could say they don't admire Buzz. And Buzz is trying to instill his ethic and attitude into the program. Not into Todd Mayo or Davante Gardner or Jujaun. He's gonna play who best reflects who he is. And who can argue with that?

If nothing else, this season has proven to me that we have fans who are completely ignorant of who Buzz has been since he got here.

If anything, I like him more now than ever before. He's not gonna sell out for some whiny fans.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 01:23:30 PM
There is no such thing as a financial advisor with "uncanny ability." Those people are total frauds and gamblers.

Again, you cannot compare some business school garbage with running a basketball program.

Consider this. Marquette will NEVER have the most talent in the Big East. never. We didn't last year and we shared the title. We will NEVER, EVER have more talent than Syracuse, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, even Indiana.

How can we expect to compete with this talent gap?

Here's another question for you. Who works more hours, you or Buzz Williams? Who makes more money? Now ask yourself how a guy with Buzz's somewhat pedestrian education has gotten to a position making millions of dollars a year. The answer is he is out worked the other guys. He sure as hell isn't more talented or smoother or polished or an ex player. This is who Buzz is. I find it hard to believe anybody could say they don't admire Buzz. And Buzz is trying to instill his ethic and attitude into the program. Not into Todd Mayo or Davante Gardner or Jujaun. He's gonna play who best reflects who he is. And who can argue with that?

If nothing else, this season has proven to me that we have fans who are completely ignorant of who Buzz has been since he got here.

If anything, I like him more now than ever before. He's not gonna sell out for some whiny fans.

I have said that numerous times this year - especially when people suggested someone else would start at PG next year.

But a coach needs to be able to get just as much effort from his talented players as he does from the less talented. Leaving more talented players on the bench = 17-15.

As far as financial advisors, I totally disagree. The ones with an "uncanny ability" to spot trends early is clearly going to do better. They are not all equal with equal abilities.

1.  Buzz makes slightly more money than me and I'm sure a few others on this board.  I prefer we not bring up personal net worth and income.  It's irrelevant to this discussion and I promise you in a couple years when I am earning more than Buzz I won't bring it up on this board.  That might have been the most rediculous thing you've said yet.

2.  None of the teams you listed are in the Big East.  You just named off six of the top ten most successful schools in NCAAB history.  What's your point since no one thinks or expects Marquette is competing with these schools on a recruiting basis?

3.  Stop acting like Marquette is some kind of underdog in the Big East.  Take McDermott away from Creighton and the only schools who may get more talented recruits are Georgetown and Villanova.  I'd suggest you look back at recent recruiting classes before assuming we're consistently less talented as reality doesn't fit your opinion on this one.

4.  Buzz can continue to instill himself into this program.  He's done a good job with his work ethic but I think we've reached his ceiling unless he's willing to adjust his philosophy to fit with a program headed in the right direction in terms of success.  Producers in any industry always are your most difficult to manage because they know their value.  If Buzz's aspirations for the program is to win a championship then he will have to be more flexible with the more talented recruits or he won't get the talented recruits and our program will diminish in terms of success.

5.  You may not like how both the world and high major college basketball work.  Sometimes i don't like how it works, but I've aligned myself with that same reality rather than stand in opposition to it.

6.  Since my first attempt at a rather quality analogy regarding talent either was blatantly discounted without thought or went over your head, I've found another good question for you.  Let's say you have been wrongly accused and being prosecuted for a murder.  You didn't commit a crime and are facing a life sentence.  Would you rather have the hardest working lawyer who passed his BAR exam on the 4th try with a mixed bag of results in run of the mill criminal trials or do you want the hot shot attorney who you rarely hear from for long stretches yet has a spotless trial record resulting in zero convictions for his clients?  Talent is paramount in life and in basketball.

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 01:42:55 PM
1.  Buzz makes slightly more money than me and I'm sure a few others on this board.  I prefer we not bring up personal net worth and income.  It's irrelevant to this discussion and I promise you in a couple years when I am earning more than Buzz I won't bring it up on this board.  That might have been the most rediculous thing you've said yet.

2.  None of the teams you listed are in the Big East.  You just named off six of the top ten most successful schools in NCAAB history.  What's your point since no one thinks or expects Marquette is competing with these schools on a recruiting basis?

3.  Stop acting like Marquette is some kind of underdog in the Big East.  Take McDermott away from Creighton and the only schools who may get more talented recruits are Georgetown and Villanova.  I'd suggest you look back at recent recruiting classes before assuming we're consistently less talented as reality doesn't fit your opinion on this one.

4.  Buzz can continue to instill himself into this program.  He's done a good job with his work ethic but I think we've reached his ceiling unless he's willing to adjust his philosophy to fit with a program headed in the right direction in terms of success.  Producers in any industry always are your most difficult to manage because they know their value.  If Buzz's aspirations for the program is to win a championship then he will have to be more flexible with the more talented recruits or he won't get the talented recruits and our program will diminish in terms of success.

5.  You may not like how both the world and high major college basketball work.  Sometimes i don't like how it works, but I've aligned myself with that same reality rather than stand in opposition to it.

6.  Since my first attempt at a rather quality analogy regarding talent either was blatantly discounted without thought or went over your head, I've found another good question for you.  Let's say you have been wrongly accused and being prosecuted for a murder.  You didn't commit a crime and are facing a life sentence.  Would you rather have the hardest working lawyer who passed his BAR exam on the 4th try with a mixed bag of results in run of the mill criminal trials or do you want the hot shot attorney who you rarely hear from for long stretches yet has a spotless trial record resulting in zero convictions for his clients?  Talent is paramount in life and in basketball.

You make some valid points, but you're comparing brain vs. brawn. Different animal altogether. If the choice was between having A Jake Thomas or Chris Otule type lawyer or a Mayo/Gardner type, I'll go with the former. We don't have any hot shot lawyers on this team. But we've got a helluva impartial judge.

Your case is dismissed.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 02:50:00 PM
You make some valid points, but you're comparing brain vs. brawn. Different animal altogether. If the choice was between having A Jake Thomas or Chris Otule type lawyer or a Mayo/Gardner type, I'll go with the former. We don't have any hot shot lawyers on this team. But we've got a helluva impartial judge.

Your case is dismissed.

Can you please reconsider your statement.

Without Otule this team probably still goes 17-15.  Without Gardner we'd be lucky to have 10 wins.  Mayo probably would have been awarded 8-9 SotG awards on this board if our team actually would have utilized his out of this world efforts to keep us in games.  @Nova, @Providence, St Johns come to mind without giving it much thought.

I hope Buzz changes and grows.  I hope he doesn't abandon his philosophy as it is what has gotten this team where he's taken it but to take it to the next level (final fours, championships) he'll need to adapt to the talent quality and babysitting that comes along with having those players.  Our recruiting classes are getting better and therefore Buzz is now coaching a different type of player than he was previously and it's his job to adjust.

And probably the only example in Buzz's coaching career at MU of a non celebrated player coming out of highschool changing himself in four years into a dominant offensive force is Davante Gardner.  Derrick, Jake and to a lesser extent Chris never elevated their games the way Gardner has and he's the guy that Buzz is always the hardest on.  The best example of a kid outplaying his talent level is the one who isn't given a pass doesn't make sense to me.  If Buzz really values taking kids with a limited skill set and transforming them into success stories through hard work Gardner should be the object of Buzz's celebration, not the guy on the team that hasn't improved in three seasons one single bit other than logging more minutes (sorry Derrick but it's true).

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 03:07:12 PM
Can you please reconsider your statement.

Without Otule this team probably still goes 17-15.  Without Gardner we'd be lucky to have 10 wins.  Mayo probably would have been awarded 8-9 SotG awards on this board if our team actually would have utilized his out of this world efforts to keep us in games.  @Nova, @Providence, St Johns come to mind without giving it much thought.

I hope Buzz changes and grows.  I hope he doesn't abandon his philosophy as it is what has gotten this team where he's taken it but to take it to the next level (final fours, championships) he'll need to adapt to the talent quality and babysitting that comes along with having those players.  Our recruiting classes are getting better and therefore Buzz is now coaching a different type of player than he was previously and it's his job to adjust.

And probably the only example in Buzz's coaching career at MU of a non celebrated player coming out of highschool changing himself in four years into a dominant offensive force is Davante Gardner.  Derrick, Jake and to a lesser extent Chris never elevated their games the way Gardner has and he's the guy that Buzz is always the hardest on.  The best example of a kid outplaying his talent level is the one who isn't given a pass doesn't make sense to me.  If Buzz really values taking kids with a limited skill set and transforming them into success stories through hard work Gardner should be the object of Buzz's celebration, not the guy on the team that hasn't improved in three seasons one single bit other than logging more minutes (sorry Derrick but it's true).

I agree with this post and I think the part I bolded is your best point and one I haven't considered. You are right!

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 01:23:30 PM


Consider this. Marquette will NEVER have the most talent in the Big East. never. We didn't last year and we shared the title.

If nothing else, this season has proven to me that we have fans who are completely ignorant of who Buzz has been since he got here.

If anything, I like him more now than ever before. He's not gonna sell out for some whiny fans.

In this Big East, I don't know why we couldn't have the best talent some years.  I truly don't agree with that.....the years prior Big East, agree, but not this iteration.  For those that judge high school talent by the RSCI, I believe MU is either #1 or #2 in top 100 kids the last 5 years of the programs still in the Big East.  There are flaws with the RSCI, but I'm merely pointing out that recruiting experts believe the talent acquired by MU has been good.

Quote from: PE8983 on March 14, 2014, 11:27:30 AM
"Christon gets all the way to the hoop.
None of the help defenders were even in a defensive stance.  All standing basically straight up.

Why is this a big deal?
This is a win or go home game.   At this point a tie game in the last seconds of the half at the end of the season.  And the players arent even focused enough to guard where they should or get in a stance to help and recover.

Lack of focus and effort.  Hard to understand.  Especially from your senior leaders..."

This was the tale of the game. No rotation on defense. X allowed to drive to the hoop at will. And the last play of the 1st half was pathetic. Enough blame to go around from coaching staff to disconnected execution. No play ,no plan even after a timeout.


To top it all off, that lineup on the floor was in for defensive purposes only as a TO was taken right before the half.
If Jamil would have stepped in and taken a charge on that play, it would have been foul #3 on Christon.
Ball goes thru the hole with maybe 3-4 seconds left.  Could have passed it in and got a shot off.  Instead everyone, notably Jamil and Juan go running out towards half court with no one to in-bound.  Jamil eventually goes back to in-bound and clock runs out.  No shot attempt.  Whoever was closest to the ball should have got it in-bounds to allow for a shot.  Inexplicably, the same player has to in-bound every time.  When you have a constantly changing line-up, I assume that causes these brain farts with simple execution.

Quote from: brandx on March 14, 2014, 01:20:24 PM
Glad you noticed that play - I was absolutely stunned when that happened. And that is why we want the seniors on the floor? Cuz Buzz thrusts them? Just low basketball IQ.

Something is wrong there. Similar to never ever going two for one possessions at the end of a half. If Mack can do it why can't Buzz. There is no logical/illogical reason not to.

Did you notice how Christon's make landed right in Juan's hands and he basically just dropped the ball under the basket and ran up the court, leaving Mayo standing there?  Mayo looked at Juan like WTF...

But, I also feel that due to all of the rotations theatrics, in/out, in/out - we don't have designated inbound guy in a situation like that...perhaps Juan thought Jamil was going to do it, and Jamil thought Juan would due to little time left on clock...

What was most annoying about it all was we once again called timeout to the the A defensive team on the floor, and Christon abused it...much like has happened all year with a good guard on the other team..yet we supposedly have such a lockdown defender in Derrick...why wasn't he guarding Christon??  Most coaches assign their defensive stopper to the best player all the time...perhaps maybe he just isn't so elite after all?

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 14, 2014, 11:45:57 AM

If you want to blame somebody for our lack of success, stop blaming Buzz and start looking at the reasons Mayo couldn't beat out Thomas or a talented guy like Davante couldn't unseat a marginal player like Otule. If the effort was even close, I'm betting the story would be different.

Davante did not start for one reason, and one reason only. Otule wins nearly every tip he does, Davante would barely win any, and it was evident early in the season that Davante cannot play the 4. Pretty simple really.

Just read PRN and mattys banter. Quite entertaining.

Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 14, 2014, 06:20:23 PM
Just read PRN and mattys banter. Quite entertaining.

Not quite sure whether that's a good thing or not.

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 01:42:55 PM
Let's say you have been wrongly accused and being prosecuted for a murder.  You didn't commit a crime and are facing a life sentence.  Would you rather have the hardest working lawyer who passed his BAR exam on the 4th try with a mixed bag of results in run of the mill criminal trials or do you want the hot shot attorney who you rarely hear from for long stretches yet has a spotless trial record resulting in zero convictions for his clients?  Talent is paramount in life and in basketball.

It all depends. Which one of these two lawyers knows the judge?

Bear in mind what the great attorney Louis Nizer said: "I'm at my most brilliant at 1:00 AM alone in my law library".

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 06:38:47 PM
Not quite sure whether that's a good thing or not.

I'd say very interesting, good or bad there is no answer.  It did inform me on where a lot of differences lie, and it honestly is seeing things through a different lens.

Your business examples are ok, but you miss key vital aspects.

Every small or large business owner I know says the same thing about hiring their team (at least the successful ones).  The most important thing is passion, drive and dedication.  Intelligence (ability) is a far lesser concern.  The second most important thing is that you create a culture of personalities.  If everyone gets along and has the same mentality it will sustain itself or (those that don't fit the mold will leave).  That is why, passion drive and dedication need to be the most important initial aspects.

That doesn't mean you throw ability away.  There is a baseline level of talent that is required as a minimum, that minimum talent level that with the appropriate passion, drive and dedication you can mold into a star.  One person (whether the most talented...aka Carmelo) that doesn't fit that persona can kill a team/organization...bigger entities can survive based on sheer number...no team mentality, but small companies and hence basketball teams require that all members maintain the team culture.

You have likely heard of specific examples like at Microsoft where Gates will find a guy that is brilliant (passion, drive or not) they are given a job and let go to work, hoping for brilliance.  The difference is for large entities the marginal cost of a gamble is minimum, and the sheer numbers of employees will assure that they won't change company mentality...very different scenario and not apt for comparison to basketball.

The interesting thing is, like your use of statistics, you recognize key aspects that are important, but miss the key peripheral details needed to properly analyze the situation.

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 01:42:55 PM
  Let's say you have been wrongly accused and being prosecuted for a murder.  You didn't commit a crime and are facing a life sentence.  Would you rather have the hardest working lawyer who passed his BAR exam on the 4th try with a mixed bag of results in run of the mill criminal trials or do you want the hot shot attorney who you rarely hear from for long stretches yet has a spotless trial record resulting in zero convictions for his clients?  Talent is paramount in life and in basketball.

Is this a movie pitch for a combination of "A Time to Kill" and "My Cousin Vinnie"?   

Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 14, 2014, 06:07:52 PM
Davante did not start for one reason, and one reason only. Otule wins nearly every tip he does, Davante would barely win any, and it was evident early in the season that Davante cannot play the 4. Pretty simple really.

Tip really doesn't matter cuz the other team gets the ball at the next tip situation. Pretty flimsy excuse.

Quote from: brandx on March 14, 2014, 07:55:30 PM
Tip really doesn't matter cuz the other team gets the ball at the next tip situation. Pretty flimsy excuse.

I also wonder about the benefits of winning the tip, but being without your most reliable offensive weapon for the ensuing possession.

Quote from: forgetful on March 14, 2014, 07:16:43 PM
I'd say very interesting, good or bad there is no answer.  It did inform me on where a lot of differences lie, and it honestly is seeing things through a different lens.

Your business examples are ok, but you miss key vital aspects.

Every small or large business owner I know says the same thing about hiring their team (at least the successful ones).  The most important thing is passion, drive and dedication.  Intelligence (ability) is a far lesser concern.  The second most important thing is that you create a culture of personalities.  If everyone gets along and has the same mentality it will sustain itself or (those that don't fit the mold will leave).  That is why, passion drive and dedication need to be the most important initial aspects.

That doesn't mean you throw ability away.  There is a baseline level of talent that is required as a minimum, that minimum talent level that with the appropriate passion, drive and dedication you can mold into a star.  One person (whether the most talented...aka Carmelo) that doesn't fit that persona can kill a team/organization...bigger entities can survive based on sheer number...no team mentality, but small companies and hence basketball teams require that all members maintain the team culture.

You have likely heard of specific examples like at Microsoft where Gates will find a guy that is brilliant (passion, drive or not) they are given a job and let go to work, hoping for brilliance.  The difference is for large entities the marginal cost of a gamble is minimum, and the sheer numbers of employees will assure that they won't change company mentality...very different scenario and not apt for comparison to basketball.

The interesting thing is, like your use of statistics, you recognize key aspects that are important, but miss the key peripheral details needed to properly analyze the situation.

Let's clarify a few things as I think you have the wrong read on me regarding statistics.

I'll use an example I've used before and forgive me if I don't have the exact ORtg and DRtg on hand.  Look at Gardner and Otule again.  One is perceived to be the better offensive talent.  One is perceived to be the better defender.  In this particular case Gardner's ORtg is significantly higher than Otule's (and everyone elses on this team as well), yet Otule's DRtg is a fraction better than Gardner's.

Does this mean I think Gardner is an equal defender to Otule?  No, it just means that for whatever reason the team gives up the essentially the same amount of points regardless of who's in the game between the two.  And situations make a difference, for example if we're up 2 defending the last shot I think Otule should definitely be in the game over Gardner.  Do I think Otule's better defense compared to Gardner is a reason your team's leading offensive player should only get 26 minutes a game?  Absolutely not.

Buzz said himself this team didn't have any margin for error.  I know he values defense, but with the exception being 2012 he hasn't had good defensive teams.  I honestly think this season would look better in regards to wins and losses with Gardner playing more.  You may disagree and that's ok.

As far as real life business is concerned, I believe there is a big difference between being paid solely on production or being paid what someone else values your time at a set rate.  I consult in an industry that regardless of how big or small your earnings were for a month/year you get paid exactly what you were worth.

And please don't be so naive to believe that favoritism, special treatment, job perks, different pay plans, scheduling concessions don't happen in the work place because they do in every field across the country and it's exactly what should be happening if you want to keep talented employees.  People with real talent understand that the company needs them more than they need the company.  That's an empowering situation when a person actually grasps that and it changes the paradigm.  Most people that actually are a revenue source for a company realize this.  Most people that are a necessary expense don't realize this and are offended by those that do.

Human Resources, accounting, customer relations, warranty claims, reception, stocking, shipping and receiving are all examples of positions within a company that are necessary expenses.  Trust me, as soon as companies can find a way to operate without these individuals through automation and what not these jobs will be cut.  They cost revenue.  They're required in day to day operations but in no way actually contribute to the profitability of a company.

Sales and advertising is where your actual revenue is generated.  Individuals and companies need to be compelled to purchase said item/ad space/professional service/etc.  These people are a net contributor and without them no one else is collecting a paycheck.  To find truly gifted people in these fields companies will go to great lengths to find them and this is where rules are bent daily to keep these people employed.  It's here that companies put up with all kinds of behavioral quirks from these individuals because you cannot simply replace one cog for another as a company's actual income is on the line.  Owners, board of directors, and managers will look the other way unless a grievance is truly so detrimental to the company that a termination is necessary.  The trade off is that once you stop producing your behavioral quirks become a detriment and not worth your lack of productivity, but if you truly can move the needle your employers will usually put up with anything to keep you producing.

Here's my one core belief I try to instill in the people I have trained.  YOU'RE TRADING YOUR TIME/LIFE FOR A MONETARY SUM.  That's a profound realization.  Either love what you do or make your time so valuable/profitable that it's worth the trade off.

How it relates to basketball can be summed up with this.  If your son was a top 5 high school prospect and could choose between playing for Buzz at MU or Coach K at Duke I'd tell him every time to go to Duke.  If your son was a low 3 or 4 star high school player who really doesn't have the ability to play in the NBA and he could choose between Marquette and a dozen other top 25-40 programs nationally I'd tell him to play for Buzz.

Now remember, Duke wasn't a blue blood before Coach K.  He build that program to what it is now.  I also don't believe Buzz Williams wants to simply build a perennial tournament team with regular runs to the sweet 16.  If he truly doesn't have championship aspirations for this program after his success so far then he is indeed the wrong man for the job.  I personally think he has the real desire to win it all, and therefore he will have to transition from coaching every last bit of talent out of guys that give maximum effort to coaxing every last bit of effort out of guys that have always had the supreme talent to never have to work hard.

High Major NCAA basketball is not the same as little league where everyone gets a trophy.  The corporate world doesn't care how many times your parents tell you you're special because at the end of the day you're not.

In both cases natural talent is rewarded and most hard workers never really succeed unless they belonged in the former group to begin with.

Quote from: tower912 on March 14, 2014, 07:38:41 PM
Is this a movie pitch for a combination of "A Time to Kill" and "My Cousin Vinnie"?   

Agreed. The "hot shot" lawyer who glances at the file over his coffee and then walks in and conducts a brilliant cross doesn't exist. This poster has been watching too many movies. In any event, comparing such a character with an athlete is pretty meaningless. The  Babe and the Mick might have played hung over and still knocked a few out of the park, but I suspect these days in Division 1, just having natural talent is not enough.   

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 09:31:32 PM
I personally think he has the real desire to win it all, and therefore he will have to transition from coaching every last bit of talent out of guys that give maximum effort to coaxing every last bit of effort out of guys that have always had the supreme talent to never have to work hard.

I've been thinking along these same lines.  Buzz's coaching style worked better with his rosters the past few years.  As he gets more talented players he is going to have to adjust his style.

Quote from: Litehouse on March 14, 2014, 11:01:09 PM
I've been thinking along these same lines.  Buzz's coaching style worked better with his rosters the past few years.  As he gets more talented players he is going to have to adjust his style.

I don't think we are going to get more talented players than Crowder, Matthews or Butler, and his style seemed to work ok with them.

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 09:31:32 PM

Now remember, Duke wasn't a blue blood before Coach K.  He build that program to what it is now.  

It's interesting that you bring up Coach K.  He did build a program (an empire) and he did it by establishing a culture...The Duke Way.

You could be the most talented basketball player on the planet, but if they didn't subscribe to the Duke way, best case scenario they are sitting on the bench, worst case they are off the team.  He made it a blue blood and can take a few more chances now, because he created a culture and continues to recruit to that culture.

Buzz is trying to do the same thing.  He wants to create his own empire.  That means creating the Marquette way and playing people that subscribe to his ideology and work ethic.  If you deviate from that plan you can destroy everything you created. 

Quote from: Mutaman on March 14, 2014, 11:31:01 PM
I don't think we are going to get more talented players than Crowder, Matthews or Butler, and his style seemed to work ok with them.

Maybe talent isn't the best word.  Buzz has had the most success with players having a chip on their shoulder playing with an "us against the world" mentality, and needing to prove something.  A lot of these players have been juco's, but I think Vander and Matthews fit that role also.  They may have been highly rated, but they had a lot of crap to deal with coming to MU from Madison.  Vander was underappreciated by our fans, and some of his off the court stuff also put him in that position.  Matthews was overlooked as the 3rd amigo.  Buzz helped instill that toughness, but his development continued after he left MU.  Buzz has to continue to learn new ways to motivate players that have experienced success their whole lives.  Buzz likes the diamond in the rough types, but the odds of finding those are slim.  If he is going to continue building this program into a Final Four/Championship contender he needs to continue bringing in highly rated talent that has a better chance of panning out and get the most out of that talent.

Quote from: Litehouse on March 15, 2014, 12:35:55 PM
Maybe talent isn't the best word.  Buzz has had the most success with players having a chip on their shoulder playing with an "us against the world" mentality, and needing to prove something.  A lot of these players have been juco's, but I think Vander and Matthews fit that role also.  They may have been highly rated, but they had a lot of crap to deal with coming to MU from Madison.  Vander was underappreciated by our fans, and some of his off the court stuff also put him in that position.  Matthews was overlooked as the 3rd amigo.  Buzz helped instill that toughness, but his development continued after he left MU.  Buzz has to continue to learn new ways to motivate players that have experienced success their whole lives.  Buzz likes the diamond in the rough types, but the odds of finding those are slim.  If he is going to continue building this program into a Final Four/Championship contender he needs to continue bringing in highly rated talent that has a better chance of panning out and get the most out of that talent.

Matthews was under appreciated as a "third amigo" because Crean was too busy stroking James' fragile ego.

Quote from: forgetful on March 15, 2014, 12:57:21 AM
It's interesting that you bring up Coach K.  He did build a program (an empire) and he did it by establishing a culture...The Duke Way.

You could be the most talented basketball player on the planet, but if they didn't subscribe to the Duke way, best case scenario they are sitting on the bench, worst case they are off the team.  He made it a blue blood and can take a few more chances now, because he created a culture and continues to recruit to that culture.

Buzz is trying to do the same thing.  He wants to create his own empire.  That means creating the Marquette way and playing people that subscribe to his ideology and work ethic.  If you deviate from that plan you can destroy everything you created. 

Coach K was a different coach compared to he is today and the players are different players then they were as well.

He's adapted.  Look how long it was before someone left early for the NBA at Duke.  It was something like 19 seasons before Mike lost an underclassman to the NBA draft.  Since then his team's have suffered some of the worst attrition in the country with something close to 23+ college seasons not played.  Once again, the old mantra for Coach K and Duke is a distant memory and not rooted in what's currently the culture of Duke basketball.  It's a myth at this point that once was true but has is in no way reality today.

Lombardi's power sweep is something his teams were famous for, but how does that relate to this current Packers team?

These top recruits today have had privledges and special treatment from an extremely early age.  Most have been conditioned through youth, AAU and prep schools as superstars.  If you can't relate to those types of kids the program will suffer.  It's easy to get guys that were overlooked (DJO, Crowder, Butler) and passed over to buy in.  It's more difficult to get that out of someone who everybody wants on their team.  It's Buzz's job to find out how to connect with them.  If he fails to do so then he's probably not destined to win an NCAA championship whether it be at MU or elsewhere.

Interesting topic, talent versus hard work.

Personally, I think it is a silly argument. Call me greedy, but I want both.

Teams and companies only go as far as their superstars get them. As Matty pointed out, a superstar is a rare person with tons of talent who is also willing to put in the hard work to become better. Best example I can come up with is Aaron Rodgers (yay Julius Peppers!). He obviously has god-given talent, but when the Pack lost to the 49ers in the playoffs this season, the first thing he said in the postgame was "I am finding the best trainers and I will work this offseason until I am in the best shape of my life."

Here is why I love Buzz. He has recruited both talented players and hard working players. You need both in order to win. He doesn't settle by letting the talented players just be talented. He wants them to be hard working as well. If he plays the hard working players (Buzz actually says toughest players), he may inspire the talented players to become more hard working. It doesn't work in reverse.

Playing the talented players doesn't make the hard working players more talented. But playing the hard working players can make the talented players more hard working.

In the past, Buzz has had the most talented players buy into this culture. Wes, Lazar, Jimmy, DJO, and Jae had great talent but also worked their arses off to become even better. From the sound of things, this team didn't do the same. How could the coach retain any credibility with his players if he told them that the "toughest players play" (direct quote from Marquette Basketball revealed)...but then he just plays the talented?

If you want to see what an all talent, no work ethic team looks like, look at St. John's. Lavin gets arguably the best recruiting classes of anyone in the BEast. But he's been to the tournament once. Yes, they kicked our butts this season, but we usually won't have none of the talented players buying into the culture, and we usually won't have hard working kids with such little talent.

I liked the lawyer example that was brought up. It's true, as a defendant, I would pick the hot shot lawyer every time. But I bet you that the hot shot lawyer will never get his name on the door. The senior partners would never allow some one with zero work ethic to make partner with talent alone. Just like the hard working lawyer will never make partner because he doesn't have the talent.

You need talent and hard work to win. Buzz was trying to get the talent to work hard. He failed to do that this season. It is on the players some, but it is ultimately on Buzz for not getting them to buy into the culture. But I see nothing wrong with the philosophy and the rotations.

The defensive scheme is another thing entirely. I think the freshmen didn't play because the defense is too complicated. You either recruit for your defense (JJJ's HS team played zone for example), or you change your defense to match your personnel.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 15, 2014, 05:24:30 PM
Interesting topic, talent versus hard work.

Personally, I think it is a silly argument. Call me greedy, but I want both.

Exactly, you need both to be truly great. Buzz has shown he's good at squeezing talent out of effort. Now I think he needs to work on getting effort out of talent.  As coach, he needs to find ways to motivate different types of players.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 15, 2014, 05:24:30 PM
Interesting topic, talent versus hard work.

Personally, I think it is a silly argument. Call me greedy, but I want both.

Teams and companies only go as far as their superstars get them. As Matty pointed out, a superstar is a rare person with tons of talent who is also willing to put in the hard work to become better. Best example I can come up with is Aaron Rodgers (yay Julius Peppers!). He obviously has god-given talent, but when the Pack lost to the 49ers in the playoffs this season, the first thing he said in the postgame was "I am finding the best trainers and I will work this offseason until I am in the best shape of my life."

Here is why I love Buzz. He has recruited both talented players and hard working players. You need both in order to win. He doesn't settle by letting the talented players just be talented. He wants them to be hard working as well. If he plays the hard working players (Buzz actually says toughest players), he may inspire the talented players to become more hard working. It doesn't work in reverse.

Playing the talented players doesn't make the hard working players more talented. But playing the hard working players can make the talented players more hard working.

In the past, Buzz has had the most talented players buy into this culture. Wes, Lazar, Jimmy, DJO, and Jae had great talent but also worked their arses off to become even better. From the sound of things, this team didn't do the same. How could the coach retain any credibility with his players if he told them that the "toughest players play" (direct quote from Marquette Basketball revealed)...but then he just plays the talented?

If you want to see what an all talent, no work ethic team looks like, look at St. John's. Lavin gets arguably the best recruiting classes of anyone in the BEast. But he's been to the tournament once. Yes, they kicked our butts this season, but we usually won't have none of the talented players buying into the culture, and we usually won't have hard working kids with such little talent.

I liked the lawyer example that was brought up. It's true, as a defendant, I would pick the hot shot lawyer every time. But I bet you that the hot shot lawyer will never get his name on the door. The senior partners would never allow some one with zero work ethic to make partner with talent alone. Just like the hard working lawyer will never make partner because he doesn't have the talent.

You need talent and hard work to win. Buzz was trying to get the talent to work hard. He failed to do that this season. It is on the players some, but it is ultimately on Buzz for not getting them to buy into the culture. But I see nothing wrong with the philosophy and the rotations.

The defensive scheme is another thing entirely. I think the freshmen didn't play because the defense is too complicated. You either recruit for your defense (JJJ's HS team played zone for example), or you change your defense to match your personnel.

This is much more eloquent than the point I was trying to make, but I agree wholeheartedly. Matty also makes good points, but it think you all understand the point I was trying to make. Buzz cannot sacrifice a particular team/season for the program he is trying (and has) built.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on March 15, 2014, 12:53:42 PM
Matthews was under appreciated as a "third amigo" because Crean was too busy stroking James' fragile ego.

You are wrong Nightmare. Crean was too busy stroking his own outsized fragile ego

Quote from: mattyv1908 on March 14, 2014, 09:31:32 PM
Let's clarify a few things as I think you have the wrong read on me regarding statistics.

I'll use an example I've used before and forgive me if I don't have the exact ORtg and DRtg on hand.  Look at Gardner and Otule again.  One is perceived to be the better offensive talent.  One is perceived to be the better defender.  In this particular case Gardner's ORtg is significantly higher than Otule's (and everyone elses on this team as well), yet Otule's DRtg is a fraction better than Gardner's.

Does this mean I think Gardner is an equal defender to Otule?  No, it just means that for whatever reason the team gives up the essentially the same amount of points regardless of who's in the game between the two.  And situations make a difference, for example if we're up 2 defending the last shot I think Otule should definitely be in the game over Gardner.  Do I think Otule's better defense compared to Gardner is a reason your team's leading offensive player should only get 26 minutes a game?  Absolutely not.

Buzz said himself this team didn't have any margin for error.  I know he values defense, but with the exception being 2012 he hasn't had good defensive teams.  I honestly think this season would look better in regards to wins and losses with Gardner playing more.  You may disagree and that's ok.

As far as real life business is concerned, I believe there is a big difference between being paid solely on production or being paid what someone else values your time at a set rate.  I consult in an industry that regardless of how big or small your earnings were for a month/year you get paid exactly what you were worth.

And please don't be so naive to believe that favoritism, special treatment, job perks, different pay plans, scheduling concessions don't happen in the work place because they do in every field across the country and it's exactly what should be happening if you want to keep talented employees.  People with real talent understand that the company needs them more than they need the company.  That's an empowering situation when a person actually grasps that and it changes the paradigm.  Most people that actually are a revenue source for a company realize this.  Most people that are a necessary expense don't realize this and are offended by those that do.

Human Resources, accounting, customer relations, warranty claims, reception, stocking, shipping and receiving are all examples of positions within a company that are necessary expenses.  Trust me, as soon as companies can find a way to operate without these individuals through automation and what not these jobs will be cut.  They cost revenue.  They're required in day to day operations but in no way actually contribute to the profitability of a company.

Sales and advertising is where your actual revenue is generated.  Individuals and companies need to be compelled to purchase said item/ad space/professional service/etc.  These people are a net contributor and without them no one else is collecting a paycheck.  To find truly gifted people in these fields companies will go to great lengths to find them and this is where rules are bent daily to keep these people employed.  It's here that companies put up with all kinds of behavioral quirks from these individuals because you cannot simply replace one cog for another as a company's actual income is on the line.  Owners, board of directors, and managers will look the other way unless a grievance is truly so detrimental to the company that a termination is necessary.  The trade off is that once you stop producing your behavioral quirks become a detriment and not worth your lack of productivity, but if you truly can move the needle your employers will usually put up with anything to keep you producing.

Here's my one core belief I try to instill in the people I have trained.  YOU'RE TRADING YOUR TIME/LIFE FOR A MONETARY SUM.  That's a profound realization.  Either love what you do or make your time so valuable/profitable that it's worth the trade off.

How it relates to basketball can be summed up with this.  If your son was a top 5 high school prospect and could choose between playing for Buzz at MU or Coach K at Duke I'd tell him every time to go to Duke.  If your son was a low 3 or 4 star high school player who really doesn't have the ability to play in the NBA and he could choose between Marquette and a dozen other top 25-40 programs nationally I'd tell him to play for Buzz.

Now remember, Duke wasn't a blue blood before Coach K.  He build that program to what it is now.  I also don't believe Buzz Williams wants to simply build a perennial tournament team with regular runs to the sweet 16.  If he truly doesn't have championship aspirations for this program after his success so far then he is indeed the wrong man for the job.  I personally think he has the real desire to win it all, and therefore he will have to transition from coaching every last bit of talent out of guys that give maximum effort to coaxing every last bit of effort out of guys that have always had the supreme talent to never have to work hard.

High Major NCAA basketball is not the same as little league where everyone gets a trophy.  The corporate world doesn't care how many times your parents tell you you're special because at the end of the day you're not.

In both cases natural talent is rewarded and most hard workers never really succeed unless they belonged in the former group to begin with.

You have just defined capitalism, that is also human nature. Those who deliver get rewarded since the tribe leadership benefits and indirectly all tribe members benefit to a lesser degree. While it is true talent and work effort are required to reach the peak of success, many with lesser talent also succeed at a lower level if we work hard. Thankfully that is good enough for most of us. In basketball finding 5 star players that learn the motivation, teamwork, etc. skills is very rare as it is in business. Therefore, teams of highly motivated 3-4 stars beat low motivated, non team oriented 5 star teams. Since most of us, including me are not 5 star players in life, we just love when Kentucky looses or a team from Milwaukee goes to the elite eight or wins a national championship.