MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Wojo'sMojo on April 30, 2014, 05:03:12 PM
-
What do you guys think?
-
I think Sultan believes that Derrick will be elite.
-
I think Sultan believes that Derrick will be elite.
Absolutely he does...if he was the Bucks GM, he might've made him the first pick in the draft.
-
I think Sultan believes that Derrick will be elite.
Absolutely he does...if he was the Bucks GM, he might've made him the first pick in the draft.
You silly people, you.
-
As much as you don't like it Wojo is a 'defense creates offense' guy. So......until someone steps up and plays some D first at point you may see more of him than either of you want.
I hope that others can step it up and raise the bar, but until that time D comes first.
-
As much as you don't like it Wojo is a 'defense creates offense' guy. So......until someone steps up and plays some D first at point you may see more of him than either of you want.
I hope that others can step it up and raise the bar, but until that time D comes first.
That's a great theory, but when your PG can't hit a layup after a steal, it doesn't really matter how good at defense he is...and he's not really all that.
-
Yeah-- we've all seen his game. But if his D is stronger than others he will play more than you want. Might want to let Wojo know you got it handled.
-
Yeah-- we've all seen his game. But if his D is stronger than others he will play more than you want. Might want to let Wojo know you got it handled.
You don't know that...you are making assumptions(as am I.) You have no idea whose is going to be a good defender next year and if Duane or Dawson are equally good on the defensive end. We know for a fact they will be better on the offensive end ;)
-
No sheet--no one can be worse.....BUT if their D isn't as strong.....again DWill may just get more than the 0 minutes you hope for.
-
You don't know that...you are making assumptions(as am I.) You have no idea whose is going to be a good defender next year and if Duane or Dawson are equally good on the defensive end. We know for a fact they will be better on the offensive end ;)
We have no idea if Dawson is as good on the defensive end as Derrick? I know you absolutely hate Derrick but c'mon.
-
We have no idea if Dawson is as good on the defensive end as Derrick? I know you absolutely hate Derrick but c'mon.
I'm saying with an offseason and practice time, Dawson could be vastly improved on the defensive end. Nobody knows yet. Along the same lines, Derrick could turn into an offensive juggernaut this offseason ;D
-
The 0, 2-4, and 17-30 people are all wrong.
-
There's no button for "however many minutes that Wojo feels is appropriate."
-
Eleven scholarships. I am pleased Sandy is coming but I do not expect him to play much next season. Once Luke is eligible, I see 80 minutes divided between Luke, STjr, Deonte and Juan up front. This leaves 120 minutes to split between Matt, Mayo, JJJ, Duane, Derrick, and Dawson. I predict a lot of interchangeability, with Matt, Duane, and Dawson all seeing minutes at more than one position. Mayo and JJJ are strictly SG's, Derrick is strictly a PG. With MU's lack of size, the on-ball pressure is going to be vital. If Wojo extends the pressure, I have no problem seeing Derrick getting around 18-20 mpg. I can also picture sets where, with his strength, he is guarding a much bigger player. It's all speculation, and I realize I may be completely wrong, but right now it is all we have.
-
There's no button for "however many minutes that Wojo feels is appropriate."
That's absurd. Mojo knows the only answer can be zero minutes.
-
I'll admit that I voted 17-30 mins. I think it will be closer to 17 than 30, but I think he will get a significant amount of PT.
He is a very solid defender
He rarely makes big mistakes on either end of the floor
He has alot of experience
His offense can only improve
-
I'm saying with an offseason and practice time, Dawson could be vastly improved on the defensive end. Nobody knows yet. Along the same lines, Derrick could turn into an offensive juggernaut this offseason ;D
As I've read multiple places on this site, you can only get meaningful improvement in games.
-
His offense can only improve
Minor understatement
-
I'll admit that I voted 17-30 mins. I think it will be closer to 17 than 30, but I think he will get a significant amount of PT.
He is a very solid defender
He rarely makes big mistakes on either end of the floor
He has alot of experience
His offense can only improve
Agreed. I expect around 20 for better or worse. I am also a firm believer in the senior bump players get as they enter that last year. Whether it is finality or experience, seniors tend to rise to the occasion. I expect Derrick to enjoy some of that bump and maybe even surprise a few people.
Sadly, that theory was excepted last year.
-
Agreed. I expect around 20 for better or worse. I am also a firm believer in the senior bump players get as they enter that last year. Whether it is finality or experience, seniors tend to rise to the occasion. I expect Derrick to enjoy some of that bump and maybe even surprise a few people.
Sadly, that theory was excepted last year.
Derrick Wilson might play more minutes at the point next year than John Dawson? Wow! What kind of odds would Vegas have given on Marquette having back to back coaches who either intentionally throw games or don't know as much about basketball as Ners and his minions?
-
It is beyond head scratching at this point in the poll 15 people WANT Derrick to play 17-30 minutes a game...did people not get nauseated enough last season seeing us flounder to a 17-15 record with ZERO wins over Top 25 teams?
I'll be shocked if Derrick averages more than 10 a game given that Carlino is in the fold, and Duane and Dawson will be one more year experienced and had an off season of workouts to go through...and it is the off season where major improvement can occur...not so much during the season during practice as very little time is spent on individual skill improvement during the season.
-
I think that Derrick will play better this year because he will be put into a role where he belongs, as a backup pg. He is not meant to play 30+ minutes like he did last year, and we all know Buzz was obsessed with him and he gave him all the minutes he could handle. Derrick did all he could and I truly believe he tried really hard but the fact is he was in over his head and he simply is not good enough to be playing 30+ minutes a game. I think with Carlino, Duane, and Dawson to split time with at both guard positions he will fit into the roll as a STEADY, RELIABLE BACKUP. I think he will be a solid backup because he won't be expected to lead the team to victory.
He will also play better in lineups where he doesn't need to score because clearly that's his weakness. Our offense was a disaster last year when we played a lineup that included Juan, Otule, Jake, and Derrick because they all have offensive weaknesses. But I think that Derrick can play solid if he is in a scoring lineup with say Carlino, Todd, Deonte, and STJ. With this lineup he will be relied on to play defense, handle the ball, and pass. These are his strengths and the other guys will take care of the scoring. I hope to see him playing around 10 solid minutes a game next year.
The Truth
-
I think that Derrick will play better this year because he will be put into a role where he belongs, as a backup pg. He is not meant to play 30+ minutes like he did last year, and we all know Buzz was obsessed with him and he gave him all the minutes he could handle. Derrick did all he could and I truly believe he tried really hard but the fact is he was in over his head and he simply is not good enough to be playing 30+ minutes a game. I think with Carlino, Duane, and Dawson to split time with at both guard positions he will fit into the roll as a STEADY, RELIABLE BACKUP. I think he will be a solid backup because he won't be expected to lead the team to victory.
He will also play better in lineups where he doesn't need to score because clearly that's his weakness. Our offense was a disaster last year when we played a lineup that included Juan, Otule, Jake, and Derrick because they all have offensive weaknesses. But I think that Derrick can play solid if he is in a scoring lineup with say Carlino, Todd, Deonte, and STJ. With this lineup he will be relied on to play defense, handle the ball, and pass. These are his strengths and the other guys will take care of the scoring. I hope to see him playing around 10 solid minutes a game next year.
The Truth
Ditto
-
That's a great theory, but when your PG can't hit a layup after a steal, it doesn't really matter how good at defense he is...and he's not really all that.
Derrick is a better than average defender--but not great or "elite". And we all know about his offensive prowess. So where does the line get drawn on this? I would go with an average defender who can score 10 plus a game.
-
I'll admit that I voted 17-30 mins. I think it will be closer to 17 than 30, but I think he will get a significant amount of PT.
He is a very solid defender
He rarely makes big mistakes on either end of the floor
He has alot of experience
His offense can only improve
What evidence is there that his offense can only improve? And offense improving can be said about several others on the team.
-
Eleven scholarships. I am pleased Sandy is coming but I do not expect him to play much next season. Once Luke is eligible, I see 80 minutes divided between Luke, STjr, Deonte and Juan up front. This leaves 120 minutes to split between Matt, Mayo, JJJ, Duane, Derrick, and Dawson. I predict a lot of interchangeability, with Matt, Duane, and Dawson all seeing minutes at more than one position. Mayo and JJJ are strictly SG's, Derrick is strictly a PG. With MU's lack of size, the on-ball pressure is going to be vital. If Wojo extends the pressure, I have no problem seeing Derrick getting around 18-20 mpg. I can also picture sets where, with his strength, he is guarding a much bigger player. It's all speculation, and I realize I may be completely wrong, but right now it is all we have.
Man o man this team could use a big man transfer that's eligible next year. Would really help balance this team out some.
-
I voted with my heart... and because < 0 wasn't an option
-
I say 2-4 mins. depending on if Duane is that playmaker I expect him to be. If he is, Derrick sees little time only because he's a senior.
-
It is beyond head scratching at this point in the poll 15 people WANT Derrick to play 17-30 minutes a game...did people not get nauseated enough last season seeing us flounder to a 17-15 record with ZERO wins over Top 25 teams?
First off, the poll question is flawed. I want Derrick to get around 17-20 minutes based on the assumption that he earns those 17-20 minutes. In order for that to happen, he will have to improve offensively. I don't want Derrick to play more minutes than he deserves, but I think MU would be a better team if he can earn 20 mins a game.
I don't know what I can say in this post that will stop you from making the logical leaps you use to build your narrative. You keep doing this over and over again. It seems your argument here breaks down like this.
Derrick was bad last year
MU was bad last year
Therefore, Derrick was the reason MU was bad last year
Anyone that wants Derrick to play significant minutes must want MU to be bad next year
I don't think Derrick's play was the cause of last year's problems. He was certainly one of the causes, but he still did plenty of things pretty well. His experience, defense, and ball control will be valuable next year if he can improve offensively.
-
First off, the poll question is flawed. I want Derrick to get around 17-20 minutes based on the assumption that he earns those 17-20 minutes. In order for that to happen, he will have to improve offensively. I don't want Derrick to play more minutes than he deserves, but I think MU would be a better team if he can earn 20 mins a game.
I don't know what I can say in this post that will stop you from making the logical leaps you use to build your narrative. You keep doing this over and over again. It seems your argument here breaks down like this.
Derrick was bad last year
MU was bad last year
Therefore, Derrick was the reason MU was bad last year
Anyone that wants Derrick to play significant minutes must want MU to be bad next year
I don't think Derrick's play was the cause of last year's problems. He was certainly one of the causes, but he still did plenty of things pretty well. His experience, defense, and ball control will be valuable next year if he can improve offensively.
In my opinion, Derrick was the main reason we were bad last year. Not the only reason, but the main reason. What do you think he did well at? His defense was solid to good, depending on the game...not the defensive game changer some make him out to be. His ball control is average. For how few creative things he does on offense, I think his turnover rate is pretty high. He spends 90% of his time swinging the ball around the perimeter, so I think his ball control is more misleading than anything. He would have to play Gary Payton type defense to make up for his offensive shortcomings and I don't know if that would even be worth it to give him playing time.
-
In my opinion, Derrick was the main reason we were bad last year. Not the only reason, but the main reason. What do you think he did well at? His defense was solid to good, depending on the game...not the defensive game changer some make him out to be. His ball control is average. For how few creative things he does on offense, I think his turnover rate is pretty high. He spends 90% of his time swinging the ball around the perimeter, so I think his ball control is more misleading than anything. He would have to play Gary Payton type defense to make up for his offensive shortcomings and I don't know if that would even be worth it to give him playing time.
What he said...
I'll tack on: Many of Derrick's backers and believers here, who seem to think he wasn't the major culprit (other than Buzz choosing to play Derrick max minutes), are already backpedaling for next season from the question of if they believe the team will have a better record in 2014-2015 than this past season - coinciding with the fact that Derrick's minutes are likely to be greatly reduced...which they will be...and I'd be shocked if team doesn't have a better record, even though it will be small, lost its two leading scorers from last year, and 20 years of college basketball experience between Chris, Jake, Jamil and Davante.
Personally, I don't think Derrick, other than having great character and being a hard worker, has any "plus" skills at the high major level...other than being a slightly better than average defender. Everything else with regard to the game, he's quite subpar as a high major D-1 basketball player.
-
2 minutes.
Every game needs some comic relief.
-
What he said...
I'll tack on: Many of Derrick's backers and believers here, who seem to think he wasn't the major culprit (other than Buzz choosing to play Derrick max minutes), are already backpedaling for next season from the question of if they believe the team will have a better record in 2014-2015 than this past season - coinciding with the fact that Derrick's minutes are likely to be greatly reduced...which they will be...and I'd be shocked if team doesn't have a better record, even though it will be small, lost its two leading scorers from last year, and 20 years of college basketball experience between Chris, Jake, Jamil and Davante.
Personally, I don't think Derrick, other than having great character and being a hard worker, has any "plus" skills at the high major level...other than being a slightly better than average defender. Everything else with regard to the game, he's quite subpar as a high major D-1 basketball player.
I won't backpedal from any Derrick questions. I'm sure he will have reduced minutes next year, and we may very well have a better record. That doesn't mean that the former will have caused the latter. You want everyone to accept this argument that if Derrick has reduced minutes and the team gets better, then Derrick was responsible for our sub-par record the year before. I don't think this is a valid argument.
I also think Derrick's defense, ball handling, athleticism, are all "plus" skills for a high major point guard. He has a major deficiency on offense. If he can get his jump shot and FTs up to the serviceable level, he will be the best option at point guard. If he can't, he is still a solid backup PG because he will protect the ball, defend, and won't make major mistakes.
I keep hearing how horrible Derrick is. Many of you claim he isn't even a high major player. This narrative that Derrick doesn't do anything well except play okay defense is completely false.
Derrick Wilson was top five in the Big East in the following categories
Assists per game
Steals per game
Assist percentage
Assist to turnover ratio
Top ten in the following categories
Assists
Steals
Steal percentage
He was NOT in the top ten in minutes.
-
Personally, I don't think Derrick, other than having great character and being a hard worker, has any "plus" skills at the high major level...other than being a slightly better than average defender. Everything else with regard to the game, he's quite subpar as a high major D-1 basketball player.
Ners' never-ending discussion of this topic may be annoying, but this is a succinct, very accurate summary of Derrick Wilson the basketball player.
-
Ners' never-ending discussion of this topic may be annoying, but this is a succinct, very accurate summary of Derrick Wilson the basketball player.
No it's not.
A sub-par high major D-1 point guard couldn't finish in the top ten of 8 statistical categories in the Big East, no matter how many minutes he played.
-
I think it will 9-16 minutes. I base that off things I know.
I know Carlino was a better PG last season than Derrick
I know Derrick was a solid backup in his freshman and sophomore years. Many here even advocated for him starting over Cadougan.
I know Derrick can only play the 1
I know JJJ and Mayo cannot play the 1
I know Carlino, Duane, Dawson, and Cohen can play the 1, 2, or even 3 in a three/four guard set
I know Taylor/Anderson/Luke/Burton are only "big men," meaning our guards will have to play out of position a lot.
What we don't know:
Will Derrick imporve?
Will Carlino regress?
Is Duane as good as advertised?
Will Dawson/JJJ shine or wither with more minutes?
What scheme will Wojo use?
What earns you playing time in Wojo's eyes?
Is there another player on his way to us in 2014?
Will Cohen be good enough to earn playing time?
-
No it's not.
A sub-par high major D-1 point guard couldn't finish in the top ten of 8 statistical categories in the Big East, no matter how many minutes he played.
Yes he would if he has the ball in his possession 75% of the time for 30+ mpg with nobody guarding him.
-
Yes he would if he has the ball in his possession 75% of the time for 30+ mpg with nobody guarding him.
As MUSF pointed, D Wilson was not in the top 10 in minutes played. So it was more than just him getting the ball a lot.
I would not call Derrick Wilson great at an one specific thing other than ball control and rebounding (for a PG). However, I would only call him terrible at shooting.
-
I keep hearing how horrible Derrick is. Many of you claim he isn't even a high major player. This narrative that Derrick doesn't do anything well except play okay defense is completely false.
Derrick Wilson was top five in the Big East in the following categories
Assists per game
Steals per game
Assist percentage
Assist to turnover ratio
Top ten in the following categories
Assists
Steals
Steal percentage
He was NOT in the top ten in minutes.
Derrick at best at this level is a backup PG, good for 10 minutes per game maximum..if you want the team to win.
Perhaps the below chart of Big East PG's as a comparison will shed some light. How many more games would MU have won this past season if it's PG just met the Big East average PPG for Point Guards of 12.2ppg? If our PG averaged 7.1ppg more, MU would have won roughly 8 more games
Player Team Min. PPG FG% 3P% FT% APG REB STL TO
Starks GT 36.8 17.1 42 33 86 4.1 2.1 0.9 2.4
S. Gibbs SH 30.4 13.7 42 37 74 4.2 3 1.1 2.2
Cotton PC 40.1 21.7 42 38 85 5.9 3.6 1 2.4
Arcidiacono NOV 30.8 10 40 35 70 3.5 2.4 1 1.4
Wilson MAR 30.9 5.1 39 7 44 4.2 3.8 1.3 1.5
Chatman CRE 29.4 7.6 40 40 77 4.3 3.5 0.6 1.7
Davis XAVI 30.5 7.7 39 38 84 4.9 1.8 1.1 2
Young DEP 34.8 16.2 44 26 68 3.6 4.1 1.8 3.1
Barlow BUT 32.6 6.7 39 40 77 3.5 3.8 2 1.1
Jordan STJ 26 9.4 41 26 67 3.1 3.1 1.3 2.2
Average 32.4 12.2 41 35 76 4.1 3 1.2 2.1
Derrick Rank 5th 10th T-8th 10th 10th T-4th T-2nd T-3rd T-3rd
Derrick Deviation -1.5 -7.1 -2 -28 -32 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.6
Derrick's variance in the main categories that matter - Points per game, 3pt shooting percentage, FT% are so far below the average PG in Big East, and his areas where he is above average (assists, rebounds, steals) are so minimal above the average PG...it renders the point moot. Nor can stats reveal that Derrick in conference play generally would not attempt a FG outside of 3' unless a desperation shot at the shot clock expiration, nor can stats quantify him not needing to be guarded within 5' on the perimeter and how that negatively impacted all the other guys on the team...other than the below point..
Last season MU ranked 96th in Offensive Efficiency in the country the next worst season under Buzz was 2012 where we finished 52nd...all other season's under Buzz we were in Top 25 in Offensive Efficiency. What changed? Buzz's system that was Top 25 good in 4 seasons, and Top 52 good in 1 season....all of a sudden has an outlier at 96??
Care to debate the point further?
-
I expect Derrick may play 8-10 minutes per game for his defense. Although his defense was not that good last year. I think he could slip to third on the PG depth chart next year.
-
Care to debate the point further?
Yes, because none of the "evidence" you are offering up proves your skewed narrative that Derrick is the primary cause of our poor season. I'm no stats wizard, but I think it's a stretch to claim that increased ppg by one player would be directly proportional to team wins. How did you determine that Derricks increased ppg would be a net gain for MU, and not at the expense of other players points?
Furthermore, you are changing the argument again. You claimed that Derrick was sub-par in every area except defense. I countered by showing actual evidence to the contrary, at which point you go back to the argument that his offense is so exceptionally horrible that everything else doesn't matter. Which is it? Is he a non-high major talent in everything but defense? Or is he a high major talent in everything but offense? My argument and your evidence support the latter.
-
Yes, because none of the "evidence" you are offering up proves your skewed narrative that Derrick is the primary cause of our poor season. I'm no stats wizard, but I think it's a stretch to claim that increased ppg by one player would be directly proportional to team wins. How did you determine that Derricks increased ppg would be a net gain for MU, and not at the expense of other players points?
Furthermore, you are changing the argument again. You claimed that Derrick was sub-par in every area except defense. I countered by showing actual evidence to the contrary, at which point you go back to the argument that his offense is so exceptionally horrible that everything else doesn't matter. Which is it? Is he a non-high major talent in everything but defense? Or is he a high major talent in everything but offense? My argument and your evidence support the latter.
So in your amazing "evidence," Derrick exceeding the AVERAGE PG in the Big East in assists per game by 0.1 per game putting him 4th in Big East, rebounds per game at 0.8 above the average PG in Big East good for 2nd among PGs, and finishing 0.1 steals per game better good for 2nd in conference, while turning it over 0.6 times less per game all negate the 7.7ppg scoring deficit, 28% 3pt shooting percentage deficit, 32% FT percentage deficit?? Sorry, but those 0.1, 0.8, and 0.1 stats of being better than the average PG in Big East nowhere near make up for the huge deficits in the other categories.
And my narrative isn't skewed..Derrick was the primary cause of the poor season due to Buzz choosing to play him max minutes (which isn't Derrick's fault). Watch what happens this upcoming season when you have a PG that needs to be defended everywhere, can make 3 point shots and FTS.
But...if you want to say if Derrick scored more, it would have taken away other guys PPG...that's fine...but when he goes to the FT line and misses at a 57% clip...those are points that he's failing to get for the team.
As I said, he's at best a backup PG good for 10 minutes. There can be a role for a guy like that on a good basketball team - but please for the love of God....stop trying to make a silly case for him not being a liability on the floor as a max minutes PG. No team will win many games when its own coach says they are playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end of the court...and that was truth from Buzz...we did play 4 on 5 all year long and that's how you go 17-15, 9-9 and miss the NIT coming off of an Elite 8 season and returning more letter winners than ever before in the history of Buzz's tenure.
-
I didn't read everyone's post, but I didn't see it mentioned as I skimmed them- he can get to the basket and he's strong enough to finish a lot of drives. Problem becomes when he gets fouled and doesn't get the hoop. I think is FT percent was under 50 last year? That is sinful for an experienced PG at the D-1 level. If he could just increase his FT percentage alone to about 70-75% next year- his value to the team would increase infinitely.
Agree with others that he's a good on ball defender, nothing special though.
-
I didn't read everyone's post, but I didn't see it mentioned as I skimmed them- he can get to the basket and he's strong enough to finish a lot of drives. Problem becomes when he gets fouled and doesn't get the hoop. I think is FT percent was under 50 last year? That is sinful for an experienced PG at the D-1 level. If he could just increase his FT percentage alone to about 70-75% next year- his value to the team would increase infinitely.
Agree with others that he's a good on ball defender, nothing special though.
He shot 43% from the line last year. He can get to the rim, but he looks like a fish out of water when he gets there. He is a very below average finisher.
-
He shot 43% from the line last year. He can get to the rim, but he looks like a fish out of water when he gets there. He is a very below average finisher.
Disagree with that assessment - he knows how to use his wide build and strength around the rim, is under control, uses glass when he can, and his touch is pretty good (near the rim only- otherwise horrid). He's not great finishing around the rim, but not below average either.
-
Disagree with that assessment - he knows how to use his wide build and strength around the rim, is under control, uses glass when he can, and his touch is pretty good (near the rim only- otherwise horrid). He's not great finishing around the rim, but not below average either.
Derrick is decent getting to the basket....considering his guy is usually 5' off of him...it generally doesn't happen off the bounce, but getting the ball on a cut to the basket..and when he does..he does use his body well...yet he has a hard time finishing...as evidenced by his 39% FG% which is incredibly low, when roughly 80% of his FG Attempts come from point blank range.
-
So in your amazing "evidence," Derrick exceeding the AVERAGE PG in the Big East in assists per game by 0.1 per game putting him 4th in Big East, rebounds per game at 0.8 above the average PG in Big East good for 2nd among PGs, and finishing 0.1 steals per game better good for 2nd in conference, while turning it over 0.6 times less per game all negate the 7.7ppg scoring deficit, 28% 3pt shooting percentage deficit, 32% FT percentage deficit?? Sorry, but those 0.1, 0.8, and 0.1 stats of being better than the average PG in Big East nowhere near make up for the huge deficits in the other categories.
And my narrative isn't skewed..Derrick was the primary cause of the poor season due to Buzz choosing to play him max minutes (which isn't Derrick's fault). Watch what happens this upcoming season when you have a PG that needs to be defended everywhere, can make 3 point shots and FTS.
But...if you want to say if Derrick scored more, it would have taken away other guys PPG...that's fine...but when he goes to the FT line and misses at a 57% clip...those are points that he's failing to get for the team.
As I said, he's at best a backup PG good for 10 minutes. There can be a role for a guy like that on a good basketball team - but please for the love of God....stop trying to make a silly case for him not being a liability on the floor as a max minutes PG. No team will win many games when its own coach says they are playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end of the court...and that was truth from Buzz...we did play 4 on 5 all year long and that's how you go 17-15, 9-9 and miss the NIT coming off of an Elite 8 season and returning more letter winners than ever before in the history of Buzz's tenure.
I never made any of the arguments you are attacking in the first paragraph of your post. You and others have said that Derrick doesn't have high major ability. I am arguing that he does except for some major shooting deficiencies. I never argued that his stats in other areas negate his poor shooting. You keep saying this, but it's not my position. Remember, I only argued that Derrick should get significant minutes if he can get his shot up to a serviceable level.
Your narrative and your use of stats are both skewed. You have shown a lot of evidence that Derrick is a poor scorer and a good defender, distributor, and ball protector, but nothing that proves he is the primary cause for our poor season. You are trying to prove a causal relationship with stats that don't support the claim.
You also use the term average point guard incorrectly to support your position. Your comparison isn't of all point guards, only starting point guards. So Derrick is truly above the average starting point guards in several important categories. That would be pretty hard to do for a guy without high major ability.
-
I never made any of the arguments you are attacking in the first paragraph of your post. You and others have said that Derrick doesn't have high major ability. I am arguing that he does except for some major shooting deficiencies. I never argued that his stats in other areas negate his poor shooting. You keep saying this, but it's not my position. Remember, I only argued that Derrick should get significant minutes if he can get his shot up to a serviceable level.
Your narrative and your use of stats are both skewed. You have shown a lot of evidence that Derrick is a poor scorer and a good defender, distributor, and ball protector, but nothing that proves he is the primary cause for our poor season. You are trying to prove a causal relationship with stats that don't support the claim.
You also use the term average point guard incorrectly to support your position. Your comparison isn't of all point guards, only starting point guards. So Derrick is truly above the average starting point guards in several important categories. That would be pretty hard to do for a guy without high major ability.
Derrick was our starting PG last year. And the stats I provided compared him to the other starters. Getting an assist or rebound aren't exactly hallmarks of having high major D-1 ability. Truly..any player that is on a D1 scholarship as a PG and gets 32 minutes per game is going to get assists and rebounds and a few steals. Derrick barely does any of those things better than the average PG in the Big East. But he is WAY below average in the more critical areas - scoring, shooting, FT shooting, 3 point shooting.
He is a backup at best at this level. Period. Doesn't mean he doesn't have high major ability...but just that his ability is that as a backup, a stop gap, at best...and when you force him to be a 32 minute a game player as Buzz did last year...that causes major problems on a team..especially when the deficiency is at the most critical position on a basketball team. It's a guards game, and a PG's world in college hoops...you simply cannot have a guy that challenged offensively at that position 32 minutes a game and expect to have a good team.
Vander Blue and Trent Lockett are not the reasons why this team went from an Elite 8 team to missing the NIT. Would Vander have been near the slasher if he had to deal with Derrick's defender collapsing the paint and being able to help off of Derrick 6'? Did MU have any semblance of a fast break/transition game this past season? Why didn't it have a fast break/transition game? How do you explain playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end doesn't hurt a basketball team and cause it to not be very good??
It all trickles down to effect the other guys on the team...when one guy is ZERO threat to make a perimeter shot, won't shoot one, and if he does, shoots 7% from the 3point line.
-
As many as he earns based on his play. If he plays like this past year then backup minutes; if he improves then as much as he is capable of.
-
I won't backpedal from any Derrick questions. I'm sure he will have reduced minutes next year, and we may very well have a better record. That doesn't mean that the former will have caused the latter. You want everyone to accept this argument that if Derrick has reduced minutes and the team gets better, then Derrick was responsible for our sub-par record the year before. I don't think this is a valid argument.
I also think Derrick's defense, ball handling, athleticism, are all "plus" skills for a high major point guard. He has a major deficiency on offense. If he can get his jump shot and FTs up to the serviceable level, he will be the best option at point guard. If he can't, he is still a solid backup PG because he will protect the ball, defend, and won't make major mistakes.
I keep hearing how horrible Derrick is. Many of you claim he isn't even a high major player. This narrative that Derrick doesn't do anything well except play okay defense is completely false.
Derrick Wilson was top five in the Big East in the following categories
Assists per game
Steals per game
Assist percentage
Assist to turnover ratio
Top ten in the following categories
Assists
Steals
Steal percentage
He was NOT in the top ten in minutes.
DING DING DING
logical fallacy
-
DING DING DING
logical fallacy
Just to be clear, you are agreeing with MUSF that the argument others make that he quotes in his post where you have bolded is, as MUSF says, invalid because it's a logical fallacy.
-
Derrick was our starting PG last year. And the stats I provided compared him to the other starters. Getting an assist or rebound aren't exactly hallmarks of having high major D-1 ability. Truly..any player that is on a D1 scholarship as a PG and gets 32 minutes per game is going to get assists and rebounds and a few steals. Derrick barely does any of those things better than the average PG in the Big East. But he is WAY below average in the more critical areas - scoring, shooting, FT shooting, 3 point shooting.
He is a backup at best at this level. Period. Doesn't mean he doesn't have high major ability...but just that his ability is that as a backup, a stop gap, at best...and when you force him to be a 32 minute a game player as Buzz did last year...that causes major problems on a team..especially when the deficiency is at the most critical position on a basketball team. It's a guards game, and a PG's world in college hoops...you simply cannot have a guy that challenged offensively at that position 32 minutes a game and expect to have a good team.
Vander Blue and Trent Lockett are not the reasons why this team went from an Elite 8 team to missing the NIT. Would Vander have been near the slasher if he had to deal with Derrick's defender collapsing the paint and being able to help off of Derrick 6'? Did MU have any semblance of a fast break/transition game this past season? Why didn't it have a fast break/transition game? How do you explain playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end doesn't hurt a basketball team and cause it to not be very good??
It all trickles down to effect the other guys on the team...when one guy is ZERO threat to make a perimeter shot, won't shoot one, and if he does, shoots 7% from the 3point line.
I think I'm going to regret this, but:
1. I don't think that anyone on this board doesn't agree that Derrick was awful as a shooter and scorer last year. He'll never be good at those two things. Your boy Dawson was a better shooter and scorer and so probably were scores of guys playing pick up games in the rec center.
2. That said, saying that scoring, shooting, FT shooting and 3 pt shooting are "more critical" to point guard play than taking care of the basketball, assists, A/TO ratio and defense is basketball brain dead. So is playing an inexperienced, weak with the ball, turnover prone, poor defensive player at the point over an experienced, strong with the ball, solid assist/turnover, really good defensive guy when he is also below average offensively.
Certainly we took a major step back last season and point guard play was responsible for some of that. Derrick was definitely a drop off from Junior. Not anywhere near the drop off that the walk on (Jake) was to the NBA guy (Vander) at the 2, though. Todd was better in spurts than Trent at the 3 but nowhere near as consistent. And the senior leader expected to take a leap forward instead regressed. Put that all in a blender and the results are predictable, but the idea that an inexperienced point guard with a weak handle and at best average offensive skills who was totally overmatched on defense was some sort of a panacea is ridiculous.
-
I think I'm going to regret this, but:
1. I don't think that anyone on this board doesn't agree that Derrick was awful as a shooter and scorer last year. He'll never be good at those two things. Your boy Dawson was a better shooter and scorer and so probably were scores of guys playing pick up games in the rec center.
2. That said, saying that scoring, shooting, FT shooting and 3 pt shooting are "more critical" to point guard play than taking care of the basketball, assists, A/TO ratio and defense is basketball brain dead. So is playing an inexperienced, weak with the ball, turnover prone, poor defensive player at the point over an experienced, strong with the ball, solid assist/turnover, really good defensive guy when he is also below average offensively.
Certainly we took a major step back last season and point guard play was responsible for some of that. Derrick was definitely a drop off from Junior. Not anywhere near the drop off that the walk on (Jake) was to the NBA guy (Vander) at the 2, though. Todd was better in spurts than Trent at the 3 but nowhere near as consistent. And the senior leader expected to take a leap forward instead regressed. Put that all in a blender and the results are predictable, but the idea that an inexperienced point guard with a weak handle and at best average offensive skills who was totally overmatched on defense was some sort of a panacea is ridiculous.
No worries Lenny. 17-15, 9-9. It wouldn't have been worse playing the freshman with the weaknesses you cite above...the benefit alone he would have brought having to be guarded all over the floor would have helped the "senior leader" take a step forward...and the other senior...our best post player in several decades take a big step up, instead of just a lateral season.
I disagree..the ability to shoot 1, 2 and 3pt shots at the D-1 level is far more critical than being able to assist/protect the ball. If Dawson got 30+ minutes a game, a guarn-god-dang tee you he would have averaged at least as many assists as Derrick did last year as he sees the floor much better and has a better feel for the game. Yes, Dawson would have turned it over probably 1-2 times per game more...yet that would be offset by his ability to make Free Throws at an 81% clip compared to the 43% of Derrick...and his 3pt shooting percentage being 4 times better than Derrick's would have made up for any such defensive deficiency. Last season was also Buzz's worst defensive team...and numerous PG's lit us up...if Derrick were truly an elite defender...doesn't happen.
-
No worries Lenny. 17-15, 9-9. It wouldn't have been worse playing the freshman with the weaknesses you cite above...the benefit alone he would have brought having to be guarded all over the floor would have helped the "senior leader" take a step forward...and the other senior...our best post player in several decades take a big step up, instead of just a lateral season.
I disagree..the ability to shoot 1, 2 and 3pt shots at the D-1 level is far more critical than being able to assist/protect the ball. If Dawson got 30+ minutes a game, a guarn-god-dang tee you he would have averaged at least as many assists as Derrick did last year as he sees the floor much better and has a better feel for the game. Yes, Dawson would have turned it over probably 1-2 times per game more...yet that would be offset by his ability to make Free Throws at an 81% clip compared to the 43% of Derrick...and his 3pt shooting percentage being 4 times better than Derrick's would have made up for any such defensive deficiency. Last season was also Buzz's worst defensive team...and numerous PG's lit us up...if Derrick were truly an elite defender...doesn't happen.
If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.
-
No worries Lenny. 17-15, 9-9.
It really is hard to take you seriously when you base the entire reason for last year's failures on one person. I mean earlier in the thread you said "Vander Blue and Trent Lockett are not the reasons why this team went from an Elite 8 team to missing the NIT."
Really? Replacing the team's leading scorer, a top 100 RSCI guy who played in the NBA this past year, with a former walk on who transferred from South Dakota and who has no NBA aspirations whatsoever, is not a reason for the problems of last year?
You have become so singularly focused on being so vehemently "anti-Derrick" that you aren't really thinking clearly and comprehensively about what exactly the problems were last year.
-
It really is hard to take you seriously when you base the entire reason for last year's failures on one person. I mean earlier in the thread you said "Vander Blue and Trent Lockett are not the reasons why this team went from an Elite 8 team to missing the NIT."
Really? Replacing the team's leading scorer, a top 100 RSCI guy who played in the NBA this past year, with a former walk on who transferred from South Dakota and who has no NBA aspirations whatsoever, is not a reason for the problems of last year?
You have become so singularly focused on being so vehemently "anti-Derrick" that you aren't really thinking clearly and comprehensively about what exactly the problems were last year.
What were the problems last year in your expert view? I know you discount Todd Mayo being every bit the player Vander Blue was..even when provided every statistical category that shows proves the point to be true. Buzz...if he weren't intent on making a point to the admin and their issues on recruiting character risks...should have played Mayo 33 minutes like Vander got...Jake/JJJ could have been in back up role like Mayo was when Vander was here.
Lockett was widely criticized until the last month of the season..was a role player/glue guy. Juan Anderson probably would have accomplished similar results in played as consistently as Lockett was...which is saying something.
How you and the few others in the minority viewpoint cannot conclude the obvious - that having a PG as severely limited as Derrick - wasn't the primary and significant cause of last year's fall off..well...
you aren't really thinking clearly and comprehensively about what exactly the problem was last year.
-
that having a PG as severely limited as Derrick - wasn't the primary and significant cause of last year's fall off..well...
you aren't really thinking clearly and comprehensively about what exactly the problem was last year.
Have we ever gone through the exercise of comparing Derrick to Junior when they were both on the same team?
If Derrick was such a huge problem, wouldn't he have been a huge problem on the elite eight team as well?
-
What were the problems last year in your expert view?
1. Blue leaving early
2. Poor point guard play (which I never argued wasn't a problem)
3. Lack of next step development from returning players (Juan, Steve, Jamil)
4. Lack of consistency from freshmen
-
Have we ever gone through the exercise of comparing Derrick to Junior when they were both on the same team?
If Derrick was such a huge problem, wouldn't he have been a huge problem on the elite eight team as well?
Exactly. And didn't Derrick replace the suspended Cadougan at the Kohl Center as a FRESHMAN? And didn't he stop their All American point guard Jordan Taylor cold? And didn't we beat top 10 UW in that game? Much more impressive than one good run versus an average Georgetown team last year.
Jamil Wilson was lousy last year. We could have been better with somebody better than him playing his position. That doesn't mean that someone was an even lousier Steve Taylor Jr. Same for Derrick/JD.
-
1. Blue leaving early
2. Poor point guard play (which I never argued wasn't a problem)
3. Lack of next step development from returning players (Juan, Steve, Jamil)
4. Lack of consistency from freshmen
Pay the man, Shirley. And #2 was an even bigger problem when Derrick was on the bench.
-
As MUSF pointed, D Wilson was not in the top 10 in minutes played. So it was more than just him getting the ball a lot.
I would not call Derrick Wilson great at an one specific thing other than ball control and rebounding (for a PG). However, I would only call him terrible at shooting.
Don't be politically correct. The kid was a bum last year. Hopefully his game improves in all aspects this year.
-
Have we ever gone through the exercise of comparing Derrick to Junior when they were both on the same team?
If Derrick was such a huge problem, wouldn't he have been a huge problem on the elite eight team as well?
Seriously? Derrick is fine as a 10 minute per game player as he was on the Elite 8 team...nobody disagrees that Derrick can be a serviceable back up PG at this level..
Pay the man, Shirley. And #2 was an even bigger problem when Derrick was on the bench.
LOL - Because the production we got was so good from him while he was on the floor. Derrick's last 6 games of last season:
33.3 minutes per game
2.1 ppg
4-19 shooting from Field
5-16 from FT Line
2.0 Turnovers per game
But he did average 4.3 assists.
Pretty damn hard to win with those numbers at your PG position, and for the rest of the team to be successful.
You guys really need to give it up...it was atrocious play...and no..it wouldn't have been worse with Dawson running the Point. A guy who can at least make FTs and shoot 4 times better from 3pt line adds far more value than a "ball protector" who doesn't even have to worry about being guarded closely on the perimeter!!
-
Don't be politically correct. The kid was a bum last year. Hopefully his game improves in all aspects this year.
This whole he didn't play Top 10 in minutes point is ridiculous..no..he didn't play Top 10 minutes of ALL players in the conference...but he played more minutes than any other player on the MU roster.
-
Seriously? Derrick is fine as a 10 minute per game player as he was on the Elite 8 team...nobody disagrees that Derrick can be a serviceable back up PG at this level..
Fine, but if Derrick was THE problem with last year's team (as you have repeatedly stated), wouldn't it have been blatantly obvious that he was REALLY bad on the elite 8 team?
At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that MU didn't have very good PG play last season. However, I think you have vastly overstated it, and refuse to take other factors into account.
-
Fine, but if Derrick was THE problem with last year's team (as you have repeatedly stated), wouldn't it have been blatantly obvious that he was REALLY bad on the elite 8 team?
At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that MU didn't have very good PG play last season. However, I think you have vastly overstated it, and refuse to take other factors into account.
A guy playing 8-10 minutes per game as a stop gap measure and backup doesn't have to be any kind of game changer/playmaker...just a guy who doesn't totally screw up/blow it for the team in his 8-10 minutes, which Derrick doesn't do. That doesn't make him a GOOD option for 32 minutes a game as the primary offensive conduit.
Sorry, I just don't think I am vastly overstating it...his offensive limitations were crippling to the team...and of historically bad proportions. I mean this is high major, D-1 basketball - a PG who makes exactly 1 3pt shot in 966 minutes of play? I suspect you couldn't find another guard in the last 5 years who's played that many minutes and made just 1 3pt shot. The 3pt shot is becoming a huge part of the game as you know..
-
Sorry, I just don't think I am vastly overstating it...his offensive limitations were crippling to the team...and of historically bad proportions.
Guns how on earth can you say he's "vastly overstating it?" ::)
-
Fine, but if Derrick was THE problem with last year's team (as you have repeatedly stated), wouldn't it have been blatantly obvious that he was REALLY bad on the elite 8 team?
At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that MU didn't have very good PG play last season. However, I think you have vastly overstated it, and refuse to take other factors into account.
Was he good on the elite eight team? Here's a little recap for you...13.1mpg, 1.1 ppg, 1.6 assts, 0.9 Rebs, 0.7 spg, and 0.5 to's per game. Also shot 27% from the field and 45% from the line. That to me, tells me he was pretty bad on that team as well. It was just more magnified last year, because he played more than twice as many minutes.
-
This whole he didn't play Top 10 in minutes point is ridiculous..no..he didn't play Top 10 minutes of ALL players in the conference...but he played more minutes than any other player on the MU roster.
It's valid when people counter the fact that Derrick was top ten in 8 statistical categories with the argument that anyone playing his amount of minutes would have accomplished the same thing.
-
1. Blue leaving early
2. Poor point guard play (which I never argued wasn't a problem)
3. Lack of next step development from returning players (Juan, Steve, Jamil)
4. Lack of consistency from freshmen
This.
It's odd to me that Ners is getting so worked up because essentially people aren't placing all of the blame on Derrick and Buzz's decision to play him so much. It sure would be nice to say that Derrick was the reason for all of our problems because the solution next year would be simple.
-
Guns how on earth can you say he's "vastly overstating it?" ::)
Are you that dense? Guns feels I vastly overstate how bad Derrick was...and I provide an example that his 1 made 3 pt shot in 966 minutes of play as a D-1 PG, is likely unmatched in the last 5 years (being generous there, but probably historically too) of college basketball. So therefore, how then, am I vastly overstating things? I suspect there was no PG last year that shot 7% from the 3pt line, AND less than 50% from the FT line.
I know this past season was brutal for you Sultan and have a ton of egg to wipe off your face as a result, but at what point do you not just stop putting more egg on your face?
-
This.
It's odd to me that Ners is getting so worked up because essentially people aren't placing all of the blame on Derrick and Buzz's decision to play him so much. It sure would be nice to say that Derrick was the reason for all of our problems because the solution next year would be simple.
Watch how simple the solution is next season...and we are coming off an off season where we lost 20 years of experience, and our top two leading scorers, and best big man in 20+ years at MU..and we'll be a better team...even with a rookie head coach...
-
I know this past season was brutal for you Sultan and have a ton of egg to wipe off your face as a result, but at what point do you not just stop putting more egg on your face?
I don't have any egg to wipe off my face.
The point guard position was a problem. Derrick was the best of bad options. Nothing you say changes my point of view...nor will it change it at anytime in the future.
I think your continued obsessiveness of it is hilarious. Let it go. Breathe in...breathe out...
-
A guy playing 8-10 minutes per game as a stop gap measure and backup doesn't have to be any kind of game changer/playmaker...just a guy who doesn't totally screw up/blow it for the team in his 8-10 minutes, which Derrick doesn't do. That doesn't make him a GOOD option for 32 minutes a game as the primary offensive conduit.
Sorry, I just don't think I am vastly overstating it...his offensive limitations were crippling to the team...and of historically bad proportions. I mean this is high major, D-1 basketball - a PG who makes exactly 1 3pt shot in 966 minutes of play? I suspect you couldn't find another guard in the last 5 years who's played that many minutes and made just 1 3pt shot. The 3pt shot is becoming a huge part of the game as you know..
Again, fine, but if he is historically bad, and a crippling PG, then he should have been crippling MU for the 13MPG he played the year before, right?
Was MU a significantly worse team when DW played vs when JC played?
Would those stats interest you?
-
It's valid when people counter the fact that Derrick was top ten in 8 statistical categories with the argument that anyone playing his amount of minutes would have accomplished the same thing.
Please remind of the 8 statistical categories Derrick Wilson was in the Top 10 of in the Big East? But guess what...a PG playing 31 minutes a game is going to get assists, steals and rebounds..Derrick's numbers in those categories where exactly 0.1, 0.1, and 0.8 per game better than the AVERAGE PG in the Big East.
-
But they were still better.
-
Was he good on the elite eight team? Here's a little recap for you...13.1mpg, 1.1 ppg, 1.6 assts, 0.9 Rebs, 0.7 spg, and 0.5 to's per game. Also shot 27% from the field and 45% from the line. That to me, tells me he was pretty bad on that team as well. It was just more magnified last year, because he played more than twice as many minutes.
Right, and was he crippling MU for the 13mpg he played? Was MU a TERRIBLE team when he was in the game, but an E8 team when he was on the bench?
-
Again, fine, but if he is historically bad, and a crippling PG, then he should have been crippling MU for the 13MPG he played the year before, right?
Was MU a significantly worse team when DW played vs when JC played?
Would those stats interest you?
Historically bad as a 30 MINUTE PER GAME STARTING PG...what part of the distinction between a backup 10 minute a game player versus leading minute getter on a team do you not understand?? Please...debate on the topic - shooting percentages from 1, 2 and 3 point.
And if you think Derrick Wilson is even comparable to Junior Cadougan (who wasn't even that great of PG), I don't know what to tell you.
-
Historically bad as a 30 MINUTE PER GAME STARTING PG...
So your assertion is now that Derrick Wilson is the worst point guard ever who played 30 mpg?
At least your position has evolved reasonably...
-
But they were still better.
It's come to this..making statements of a guy being better than the average PG by 0.1, 0.1 and 0.8 in Derricks 3 best statistical categories....yet he averages 7.1 ppg less than the AVERAGE PG in the Big East and shoots 3's and FTS roughly 30% worse than the average Big East PG...and let's not forget...teams didn't even guard him withing 5-6 feet on the perimeter....do I really need to upload the picture again that shows how ridiculous it was??
-
Please remind of the 8 statistical categories Derrick Wilson was in the Top 10 of in the Big East? But guess what...a PG playing 31 minutes a game is going to get assists, steals and rebounds..Derrick's numbers in those categories where exactly 0.1, 0.1, and 0.8 per game better than the AVERAGE PG in the Big East.
None of this negates my original point. If Derrick truly didn't have any high major plus skills beyond defense as you asserted, he wouldn't be better than average. In fact, if he doesn't have high major ball handling and decision making ability, his assist to turnover ratio should have gone up with more minutes. Instead, he was top 5 in the Big East in that category. How could that be?
-
So your assertion is now that Derrick Wilson is the worst point guard ever who played 30 mpg?
At least your position has evolved reasonably...
Go find me another PG that has played 30 minutes a game in a high major conference, that made exactly 1, 3pt shot for the season on 7% shooting, while shooting 43% from the line.
Good luck. But I'll be glad to wear the egg on my face when you can cite just one example...go back 10 years if you want..
-
Right, and was he crippling MU for the 13mpg he played? Was MU a TERRIBLE team when he was in the game, but an E8 team when he was on the bench?
Well he sure as hell wasn't a positive. It's funny that you think if he wasn't "crippling" us, he was playing well enough to justify the minutes he was given. Because of his character, we settle for non crippling performances and tell ourselves he's an asset because of his ball control and defense ::)
-
None of this negates my original point. If Derrick truly didn't have any high major plus skills beyond defense as you asserted, he wouldn't be better than average. In fact, if he doesn't have high major ball handling and decision making ability, his assist to turnover ratio should have gone up with more minutes. Instead, he was top 5 in the Big East in that category. How could that be?
Pretty hard to turn the ball over when teams sag 5-6' off of you in the halfcourt and apply no pressure to you....however there were a few times teams did pressure Derrick heavily, and he didn't handle it well at all..
And for the last time...getting an assist as a high major PG playing 30 minutes a game isn't exactly high major talent....recall how many assists he got in one game where Jamil was en fuego..and Derrick simply threw the ball backward, away from the goal to the trailing Jamil, and he drained 4 3's? A 5th grader could have made those passes...
-
Historically bad as a 30 MINUTE PER GAME STARTING PG...what part of the distinction between a backup 10 minute a game player versus leading minute getter on a team do you not understand?? Please...debate on the topic - shooting percentages from 1, 2 and 3 point.
And if you think Derrick Wilson is even comparable to Junior Cadougan (who wasn't even that great of PG), I don't know what to tell you.
I think something is getting lost in translation. I'll clarify.
#1 Derrick Wilson is a bad starting PG. He should not play 30mpg.
#2 I don't think Derrick Wilson is such a historically bad PG that he is the sole cause all of MU's problems last season.
#3 If Derrick Wilson was bad enough to RUIN MU's season, wouldn't the E8's team's offensive & defensive numbers been HORRIBLE when Derrick was in the game back then?
#4 On the E8 team, did the team's production greatly decrease when DW was in the game (13mpg)?
-
Well he sure as hell wasn't a positive. It's funny that you think if he wasn't "crippling" us, he was playing well enough to justify the minutes he was given. Because of his character, we settle for non crippling performances and tell ourselves he's an asset because of his ball control and defense ::)
Slow down, Amigo. You're projecting.
I never said anything about Derrick's character, or him deserving minutes, or his defense.
He's not a good PG. Fine.
BUT, I don't think DW is the sole reason MU didn't make the tournament, as has been implied REPEATEDLY by 1 poster.
AND, I think it's virtually IMPOSSIBLE for 1 player to be the sole reason for a team's struggles. I mean, if you replaced Dwyane Wade with me, then yes, I would certainly be the problem. But, Wilson isn't a fat white guy off of the street. He's not THAT bad.
If he can be "ok" for 10mpg, then he can't be HISTORICALLY HORRIBLE if he plays 30mpg.
-
Pretty hard to turn the ball over when teams sag 5-6' off of you in the halfcourt and apply no pressure to you....however there were a few times teams did pressure Derrick heavily, and he didn't handle it well at all..
You simply have tunnel vision on your established narrative at this point. Derrick's lack of shooting ability in no way explains his good assist to turnover ratio. There are so many different scenarios that create opportunities for turnovers in 30 mins of a bball game. If he truly didn't possess high major ability as a ball handler, decision maker, or passer, he would have many more turnovers.
-
Slow down, Amigo. You're projecting.
I never said anything about Derrick's character, or him deserving minutes, or his defense.
He's not a good PG. Fine.
BUT, I don't think DW is the sole reason MU didn't make the tournament, as has been implied REPEATEDLY by 1 poster.
AND, I think it's virtually IMPOSSIBLE for 1 player to be the sole reason for a team's struggles. I mean, if you replaced Dwyane Wade with me, then yes, I would certainly be the problem. But, Wilson isn't a fat white guy off of the street. He's not THAT bad.
If he can be "ok" for 10mpg, then he can't be HISTORICALLY HORRIBLE if he plays 30mpg.
I'll bet you could find a guy who plays 10 minutes a game at PG for a season, who only made 1, 3pt FG. I'll bet you that you won't find a guy who played 966 minutes in a season as a PG who only made 1 3pt FG. See the difference/distinction?
The warts are magnified 3 times in the 10 versus 30 minute a game scenario and cause 3 times the issues to a team.
-
I'll just say this:
Derrick Wilson is not the only reason last year's team struggled.
I know that's a controversial opinion for some people, but I'm going to stand by it.
-
I'll just say this:
Derrick Wilson is not the only reason last year's team struggled.
I know that's a controversial opinion for some people, but I'm going to stand by it.
Buzz Williams was the biggest reason..as he chose to play who he played and there were better options available.
Mayo/JJJ > Jake
Burton > Juan
Dawson > Derrick
Gardner > Otule (no reason Gardner shouldn't have been playing 30-33 minutes per game)
-
Go find me another PG that has played 30 minutes a game in a high major conference, that made exactly 1, 3pt shot for the season on 7% shooting, while shooting 43% from the line.
Good luck. But I'll be glad to wear the egg on my face when you can cite just one example...go back 10 years if you want..
I can't do that, you are right. But I can come close.
Tom Maayan averaged 22 minutes a game for Seton Hall during the 2012-2013 season. He was their starting PG. He averaged 1.8 ppg, made 2 three pointers all season, and shot an abysmal .353 from the FT line. He only made 22 FGs all season.
Not that this in anyway legitimizes Derrick Wilson. I just remembered Seton Hall having a terrible PG and went and looked up his stats.
-
Buzz Williams was the biggest reason..as he chose to play who he played and there were better options available.
Mayo/JJJ > Jake
Burton > Juan
Dawson > Derrick
Gardner > Otule (no reason Gardner shouldn't have been playing 30-33 minutes per game)
Right, but doesn't this fly in the face of your "Derrick Wilson was historically bad" argument?
I mean, how is the kid supposed to be good if Buzz won't play the best players around him?
Maybe Derrick didn't make everybody else look bad, maybe everybody else was making derrick look bad? Maybe some combination of both?
-
Buzz...if he weren't intent on making a point to the admin and their issues on recruiting character risks...
I know you want to believe this is true. Hell, we all want to believe that by removing Buzz we will solve everything because we have "character risks" with talent on the bench.
I can assure you 100% that it is not true.
The talent is there. But Buzz did not play the roster he did to prove a point. Buzz played with the players he thought gave him the best chance to win.
The exceptions to this were Mayo, Johnson, and Taylor. Mayo was in Buzz' doghouse early and often and deserved to be there in his first two seasons. Because of this, Buzz was slow to trust and forgive any perceived transgression. JJJ and Steve, from what I am told, and I quote, "did not see eye to eye with Buzz." You can interpret this however you want. It could mean that Buzz was on a power trip. It could also mean that the players had an attitude. I think both are true, depending on who you talk to. There was definitely a rift between the administration and Buzz. I asked point blank "did Buzz play certain players to make a point to the administration?" The response was, and I quote again "Absolutely not, it is absurd to think so."
Everyone else's playing time was based off of what Buzz looked for in practice. Toughness, playing to the scouting report, and the ability to run his overly complex defensive schemes.
That last point was on of my biggest frustrations. If your defense is too complicated for your most talented players to run, then something is wrong IMHO.
-
Right, but doesn't this fly in the face of your "Derrick Wilson was historically bad" argument?
I mean, how is the kid supposed to be good if Buzz won't play the best players around him?
Maybe Derrick didn't make everybody else look bad, maybe everybody else was making derrick look bad? Maybe some combination of both?
I can agree Buzz compounded Derrick's warts by starting him with Jake, Juan, and Chris. However, the statement - maybe everybody else was making Derrick look bad - can't agree with....as every other player on the team, I recall being guarded honestly. I've never seen a guard in high major basketball consistently sagged off of 5-6'.
No way, for example, Vander would have been as effective playing alongside Derrick, as his slashing lanes would have been shut off by Derrick's defender...where was our transition game this past season? Why were we so ineffective pushing the tempo/ball..and getting easy baskets off of transition?
At the end of the day...it all rests at Buzz's feet. How in God's name he thought he could compete legitimately with the starting 5 he rolled out (even though he made substitutions relatively early), it was just ludicrous. Doubt you could find another Top 100 team that brought its two leading scorers off the bench. Buzz was way out there last year..
-
I can't do that, you are right. But I can come close.
Tom Maayan averaged 22 minutes a game for Seton Hall during the 2012-2013 season. He was their starting PG. He averaged 1.8 ppg, made 2 three pointers all season, and shot an abysmal .353 from the FT line. He only made 22 FGs all season.
Not that this in anyway legitimizes Derrick Wilson. I just remembered Seton Hall having a terrible PG and went and looked up his stats.
Interesting you recall Seton Hall having a "terrible" PG with stats similar to Derricks - albeit, he played 256 minutes less than Derrick or the equivalent of 6.4 less games. Derrick should have gotten 22 minutes a game last year and Dawson the other 18...but nope...Buzz instead gave the guy more minutes than any other player on the team.
The fact none of the existing players transferred after Buzz left, says all we need to know about how they all felt about Buzz...JJJ and Steve Taylor were GONE if Buzz was still here...perhaps 1 or 2 others gone too...
-
Just to be clear, you are agreeing with MUSF that the argument others make that he quotes in his post where you have bolded is, as MUSF says, invalid because it's a logical fallacy.
Yes
-
Interesting you recall Seton Hall having a "terrible" PG with stats similar to Derricks - albeit, he played 256 minutes less than Derrick or the equivalent of 6.4 less games. Derrick should have gotten 22 minutes a game last year and Dawson the other 18...but nope...Buzz instead gave the guy more minutes than any other player on the team.
The fact none of the existing players transferred after Buzz left, says all we need to know about how they all felt about Buzz...JJJ and Steve Taylor were GONE if Buzz was still here...perhaps 1 or 2 others gone too...
I would agree with your first paragraph. To give one below average player so many minutes was questionable to me. But Buzz was convinced it was the winning formula. I think a 25/15 split would have been much better than a 32/8.
The second is a matter of perspective. If we would have had a great season last year and Buzz stayed, but JJJ and Taylor transferred, we would have been saying "they weren't good enough" "they have attitude problems" "we can get someone better." Winning cures all ailments.
-
I would agree with your first paragraph. To give one below average player so many minutes was questionable to me. But Buzz was convinced it was the winning formula. I think a 25/15 split would have been much better than a 32/8.
The second is a matter of perspective. If we would have had a great season last year and Buzz stayed, but JJJ and Taylor transferred, we would have been saying "they weren't good enough" "they have attitude problems" "we can get someone better." Winning cures all ailments.
Winning certainly helps for sure...and had we won....Some may have dogged Steve and JJJ if they left, Dawson too...not me though...all three had good reasons to want to transfer at the end of this past season. As all three were playing behind inferior players at their position while watching the losses mount and the guy in front of them flounder...other than Steve if you call him a stretch 4 like Jamil.
-
I know you want to believe this is true. Hell, we all want to believe that by removing Buzz we will solve everything because we have "character risks" with talent on the bench.
I can assure you 100% that it is not true.
The talent is there. But Buzz did not play the roster he did to prove a point. Buzz played with the players he thought gave him the best chance to win.
The exceptions to this were Mayo, Johnson, and Taylor. Mayo was in Buzz' doghouse early and often and deserved to be there in his first two seasons. Because of this, Buzz was slow to trust and forgive any perceived transgression. JJJ and Steve, from what I am told, and I quote, "did not see eye to eye with Buzz." You can interpret this however you want. It could mean that Buzz was on a power trip. It could also mean that the players had an attitude. I think both are true, depending on who you talk to. There was definitely a rift between the administration and Buzz. I asked point blank "did Buzz play certain players to make a point to the administration?" The response was, and I quote again "Absolutely not, it is absurd to think so."
Everyone else's playing time was based off of what Buzz looked for in practice. Toughness, playing to the scouting report, and the ability to run his overly complex defensive schemes.
That last point was on of my biggest frustrations. If your defense is too complicated for your most talented players to run, then something is wrong IMHO.
Hey Eagle--did it ever occur to you that your boy Buzz had the attitude? Probably not!
-
Right, but doesn't this fly in the face of your "Derrick Wilson was historically bad" argument?
I mean, how is the kid supposed to be good if Buzz won't play the best players around him?
Maybe Derrick didn't make everybody else look bad, maybe everybody else was making derrick look bad? Maybe some combination of both?
It also reinforces the argument that Derrick wasn't our only problem, and maybe not even our biggest problem.
-
Everyone calm down. If Derrick only plays 10-15mpg or less next season and we play better, it will solidify that Derrick was the reason that we were so bad last season. And if we play worse, then it will only solidify that Derrick was the reason we were so bad last season.
-
Hey Eagle--did it ever occur to you that your boy Buzz had the attitude? Probably not!
1. Yes. I acknowledged that in my post.
2. He's not my boy.
3. He's the coach. He gets to have an attitude.
-
1. Yes. I acknowledged that in my post.
2. He's not my boy.
3. He's the coach. He gets to have an attitude.
I am sure glad that you are the determiner of who gets to have an attitude. As a representative of a Jesuit University, he gets to have an attitude. I am sure you wrote that into his contract. Maybe it occurred to you that his attitude sent him packing, but I doubt it. And BTW, Buzz will always be your boy, in spite of your denials. Your loyalty to the phony downhome lonesome cowboy is admirable. May the parables be written about that loyalty.
-
I am sure glad that you are the determiner of who gets to have an attitude. As a representative of a Jesuit University, he gets to have an attitude. I am sure you wrote that into his contract. Maybe it occurred to you that his attitude sent him packing, but I doubt it. And BTW, Buzz will always be your boy, in spite of your denials. Your loyalty to the phony downhome lonesome cowboy is admirable. May the parables be written about that loyalty.
I don't think anyone would read the parables. Largely because no one really cares.
-
#3 If Derrick Wilson was bad enough to RUIN MU's season, wouldn't the E8's team's offensive & defensive numbers been HORRIBLE when Derrick was in the game back then?
#4 On the E8 team, did the team's production greatly decrease when DW was in the game (13mpg)?
I don't think you can draw such conclusions.
In the E8 season, Buzz likely matched the moves of the opposing coach with respect to PG minutes (and vice versa). I would venture to guess that Wilson's minutes matched the backup PG of our opposition.
Its like saying that MU never lost when Dylan Flood played, therefore he's no worse than any other player.
In the e8 season, Wilson got backup minutes--therefore there are no conclusions that can be drawn on what we did or the other team did while he was in the game. His minutes were not comparable to Cadougan's minutes.
That having been said, I'm not willing to write him off for the coming season becuase I believe his play (as well as the perceived deficiencies of others) were largely due to poor coaching and player development. I don't know whether he's not good enough---but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until we see what he does under coach Wojo.
-
I am sure glad that you are the determiner of who gets to have an attitude. As a representative of a Jesuit University, he gets to have an attitude. I am sure you wrote that into his contract. Maybe it occurred to you that his attitude sent him packing, but I doubt it. And BTW, Buzz will always be your boy, in spite of your denials. Your loyalty to the phony downhome lonesome cowboy is admirable. May the parables be written about that loyalty.
He is the boss of his team. He gets to run his team as he sees fit, provided it's in an ethical matter. He does NOT get to have an attitude with his boss. Just like any workplace in America.
With how much you bring him up. I'm beginning to think he is your boy ;)
-
I don't think you can draw such conclusions.
In the E8 season, Buzz likely matched the moves of the opposing coach with respect to PG minutes (and vice versa). I would venture to guess that Wilson's minutes matched the backup PG of our opposition.
Its like saying that MU never lost when Dylan Flood played, therefore he's no worse than any other player.
In the e8 season, Wilson got backup minutes--therefore there are no conclusions that can be drawn on what we did or the other team did while he was in the game. His minutes were not comparable to Cadougan's minutes.
That having been said, I'm not willing to write him off for the coming season becuase I believe his play (as well as the perceived deficiencies of others) were largely due to poor coaching and player development. I don't know whether he's not good enough---but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until we see what he does under coach Wojo.
For a "normal player", I would agree with you.
However, Ners is asserting that Derrick was so historically bad that he is the reason MU was bad.
If Derrick was really THAT big of a problem, he would have been a bigger problem in 13mpg (regardless of when he played them, or who the opposition was).
I don't think Derrick was so bad that he is single-handedly the player that sunk MU's season. To me, that's absurd.
MU had some holes last year at almost every position.
- I love Davante, but I don't think Derrick made him miss free throws.
- I love Jamil, but I don't think Derrick made him disappear at times.
- I really like Steve Taylor, but Derrick didn't toy with Steve's minutes, and Derrick didn't make Steve invisible on defense.
- Derrick didn't crush Juan Anderson's confidence.
- Derrick didn't make Juan pass up every open jump shot.
- Derrick didn't nail JJJ to the bench
- ETC.
See what I'm getting at?
LOTS of variables. Too many to isolate one and say "DERRICK WILSON IS THE REASON MU WAS BAD!!!"
It's silly.
AND, next year, if MU is good, it's not logical to say: "SEE! Derrick is playing less! He was the problem." That's f*cking idiotic.
-
I'm beginning to think he is your boy ;)
No, that's the Mythical Blue Chip Center Committing to MU
-
For a "normal player", I would agree with you.
However, Ners is asserting that Derrick was so historically bad that he is the reason MU was bad.
If Derrick was really THAT big of a problem, he would have been a bigger problem in 13mpg (regardless of when he played them, or who the opposition was).
I don't think Derrick was so bad that he is single-handedly the player that sunk MU's season. To me, that's absurd.
MU had some holes last year at almost every position.
- I love Davante, but I don't think Derrick made him miss free throws.
- I love Jamil, but I don't think Derrick made him disappear at times.
- I really like Steve Taylor, but Derrick didn't toy with Steve's minutes, and Derrick didn't make Steve invisible on defense.
- Derrick didn't crush Juan Anderson's confidence.
- Derrick didn't make Juan pass up every open jump shot.
- Derrick didn't nail JJJ to the bench
- ETC.
See what I'm getting at?
LOTS of variables. Too many to isolate one and say "DERRICK WILSON IS THE REASON MU WAS BAD!!!"
It's silly.
AND, next year, if MU is good, it's not logical to say: "SEE! Derrick is playing less! He was the problem." That's f*cking idiotic.
As I said...please...go find an example in the last 10 years of a PG who got 970 minutes for the season and made 1, 3pt shot all year on 7% shooting and 43% FT shooting. Those are historically bad numbers...and when the QB of your team is so inept offensively, yes, it cripples everyone else.
And really Guns - talk about f'in idiotic, you want to cite Davante missing FTs?? Pretty sure he shot them about 40% better than Derrick.
And lastly, no, it isn't f'in idiotic to think that if Derrick plays less next season and the team is better, it isn't evidence that he was the major problem with last years team (other than Buzz.) How anyone would argue differently is what it idiotic, and the only people who would do so are you, Sultan, Tower, TAMU JesMU84, and MUSF - all guys who tried to tell us all of last year that Derrick wasn't the problem. At least the poll shows 84% of MU fans think he should play less than 16 minutes...
A team loses 20 years of experience in its 4 seniors, including its two leading scorers and leading rebounder, most efficient offensive player/best big man in 20 years at MU - and replaces it with Sandy Cohen and Matt Carlino - no reason that team should get better...as replacing Garndner and Jamil with Fischer and Steve or Juan is at best a wash, yet more likely a downgrade.
The reality is, it should be easy to improve on 17-15, 9-9, as we were awful last year. I doubt Derrick will play 30+ minutes a game ever again, and that will go a long way toward helping the team get better. Yet, who knows, maybe Wojo is an idiot and went out and recruited Matt Carlino just for the hell of it..even though he has 3 PGs on the roster as it is. Perhaps Wojo wasn't sold on Derrick a whole lot. Hmm.
-
For a "normal player", I would agree with you.
However, Ners is asserting that Derrick was so historically bad that he is the reason MU was bad.
If Derrick was really THAT big of a problem, he would have been a bigger problem in 13mpg (regardless of when he played them, or who the opposition was).
I don't think Derrick was so bad that he is single-handedly the player that sunk MU's season. To me, that's absurd.
MU had some holes last year at almost every position.
- I love Davante, but I don't think Derrick made him miss free throws.
- I love Jamil, but I don't think Derrick made him disappear at times.
- I really like Steve Taylor, but Derrick didn't toy with Steve's minutes, and Derrick didn't make Steve invisible on defense.
- Derrick didn't crush Juan Anderson's confidence.
- Derrick didn't make Juan pass up every open jump shot.
- Derrick didn't nail JJJ to the bench
- ETC.
See what I'm getting at?
LOTS of variables. Too many to isolate one and say "DERRICK WILSON IS THE REASON MU WAS BAD!!!"
It's silly.
AND, next year, if MU is good, it's not logical to say: "SEE! Derrick is playing less! He was the problem." That's f*cking idiotic.
Just out of curiosity, what do you think was the main reason for MU's disappointing season? I personally feel Derrick was the main factor. Plenty of other minor factors that added up and helped in the disappointing season, but he was the main reason imo. I genuinely feel bad for the kid, because he was clearly in over his head and was painful to watch. If Carlino takes Derrick's minutes and we go 24-8 next year, I think it would prove how big a problem he really was.
-
As I said...please...go find an example in the last 10 years of a PG who got 970 minutes for the season and made 1, 3pt shot all year on 7% shooting and 43% FT shooting. Those are historically bad numbers...and when the QB of your team is so inept offensively, yes, it cripples everyone else.
And really Guns - talk about f'in idiotic, you want to cite Davante missing FTs?? Pretty sure he shot them about 40% better than Derrick.
And lastly, no, it isn't f'in idiotic to think that if Derrick plays less next season and the team is better, it isn't evidence that he was the major problem with last years team (other than Buzz.) How anyone would argue differently is what it idiotic, and the only people who would do so are you, Sultan, Tower, TAMU JesMU84, and MUSF - all guys who tried to tell us all of last year that Derrick wasn't the problem. At least the poll shows 84% of MU fans think he should play less than 16 minutes...
A team loses 20 years of experience in its 4 seniors, including its two leading scorers and leading rebounder, most efficient offensive player/best big man in 20 years at MU - and replaces it with Sandy Cohen and Matt Carlino - no reason that team should get better...as replacing Garndner and Jamil with Fischer and Steve or Juan is at best a wash, yet more likely a downgrade.
The reality is, it should be easy to improve on 17-15, 9-9, as we were awful last year. I doubt Derrick will play 30+ minutes a game ever again, and that will go a long way toward helping the team get better. Yet, who knows, maybe Wojo is an idiot and went out and recruited Matt Carlino just for the hell of it..even though he has 3 PGs on the roster as it is. Perhaps Wojo wasn't sold on Derrick a whole lot. Hmm.
Logic 101. Even if Derrick doesn't play at all next season and MU wins it all, there are way too many variables in play to come to the conclusion that MU played better because Derrick didn't play. I'm not going to speak for the rest of your hit-list (there's a list now??), but, do I personally think if someone beats out Derrick as the lead MPG at the PG spot our team will likely play better? Yes, I do. But I also believe that development of the young guys in the off-season, plus a different team atmosphere, plus a different coaching staff will also be a reason our team improves, plus a different schedule would all be reasons our team improves. Again, no one is saying the team can't play better if Derrick plays less. NO ONE.
-
Logic 101. Even if Derrick doesn't play at all next season and MU wins it all, there are way too many variables in play to come to the conclusion that MU played better because Derrick didn't play. I'm not going to speak for the rest of your hit-list (there's a list now??), but, do I personally think if someone beats out Derrick as the lead MPG at the PG spot our team will likely play better? Yes, I do. But I also believe that development of the young guys in the off-season, plus a different team atmosphere, plus a different coaching staff will also be a reason our team improves, plus a different schedule would all be reasons our team improves. Again, no one is saying the team can't play better if Derrick plays less. NO ONE.
The team atmosphere last year was bad...and it was bad due to Buzz's awful coaching of ALL the guys. That bad coaching started first and foremost by playing Derrick and Jake max minutes - which without question would lead to frustration for Todd, JJJ, Dawson...and Davante as well as he was handicapped all year long by a packed painted area due to limitations of Derrick. Juan starting over Burton. Sure that was frustrating for Burton. Buzz's maniacal substitutions and rotations. Yes, all of that contributed to a bad season.
Yet, the biggest improvement the team can make next year - even though it lost its two leading scorers - will be replacing Derrick at PG. The team should make a big jump, even though it will be quite young, and undersized...especially compared to last year's team.
-
As I said...please...go find an example in the last 10 years of a PG who got 970 minutes for the season and made 1, 3pt shot all year on 7% shooting and 43% FT shooting. Those are historically bad numbers...and when the QB of your team is so inept offensively, yes, it cripples everyone else.
And really Guns - talk about f'in idiotic, you want to cite Davante missing FTs?? Pretty sure he shot them about 40% better than Derrick.
And lastly, no, it isn't f'in idiotic to think that if Derrick plays less next season and the team is better, it isn't evidence that he was the major problem with last years team (other than Buzz.) How anyone would argue differently is what it idiotic, and the only people who would do so are you, Sultan, Tower, TAMU JesMU84, and MUSF - all guys who tried to tell us all of last year that Derrick wasn't the the only problem. At least the poll shows 84% of MU fans think he should play less than 16 minutes...
A team loses 20 years of experience in its 4 seniors, including its two leading scorers and leading rebounder, most efficient offensive player/best big man in 20 years at MU - and replaces it with Sandy Cohen and Matt Carlino - no reason that team should get better...as replacing Garndner and Jamil with Fischer and Steve or Juan is at best a wash, yet more likely a downgrade.
The reality is, it should be easy to improve on 17-15, 9-9, as we were awful last year. I doubt Derrick will play 30+ minutes a game ever again, and that will go a long way toward helping the team get better. Yet, who knows, maybe Wojo is an idiot and went out and recruited Matt Carlino just for the hell of it..even though he has 3 PGs on the roster as it is. Perhaps Wojo wasn't sold on Derrick a whole lot. Hmm.
FIFY
Seriously, you make that one change to your argument and everyone agrees.
-
The team atmosphere last year was bad...and it was bad due to Buzz's awful coaching of ALL the guys. That bad coaching started first and foremost by playing Derrick and Jake max minutes - which without question would lead to frustration for Todd, JJJ, Dawson...and Davante as well as he was handicapped all year long by a packed painted area due to limitations of Derrick. Juan starting over Burton. Sure that was frustrating for Burton. Buzz's maniacal substitutions and rotations. Yes, all of that contributed to a bad season.
Yet, the biggest improvement the team can make next year - even though it lost its two leading scorers - will be replacing Derrick at PG. The team should make a big jump, even though it will be quite young, and undersized...especially compared to last year's team.
100% agree. No one has denied that. No one has argued against that. We all believe that (including everyone on the axis of evil list).
-
For a "normal player", I would agree with you.
However, Ners is asserting that Derrick was so historically bad that he is the reason MU was bad.
If Derrick was really THAT big of a problem, he would have been a bigger problem in 13mpg (regardless of when he played them, or who the opposition was).
I don't think Derrick was so bad that he is single-handedly the player that sunk MU's season. To me, that's absurd.
MU had some holes last year at almost every position.
- I love Davante, but I don't think Derrick made him miss free throws.
- I love Jamil, but I don't think Derrick made him disappear at times.
- I really like Steve Taylor, but Derrick didn't toy with Steve's minutes, and Derrick didn't make Steve invisible on defense.
- Derrick didn't crush Juan Anderson's confidence.
- Derrick didn't make Juan pass up every open jump shot.
- Derrick didn't nail JJJ to the bench
- ETC.
See what I'm getting at?
LOTS of variables. Too many to isolate one and say "DERRICK WILSON IS THE REASON MU WAS BAD!!!"
It's silly.
AND, next year, if MU is good, it's not logical to say: "SEE! Derrick is playing less! He was the problem." That's f*cking idiotic.
I generally agree with you--I don't think Derrick Wilson was the reason we had a bad year, either.
I will say that I believe Derrick is capable of much more than we saw this past year--whether its more than Dawson or Duane Wilsion can provide next year remains to be seen. I note that many of the other issues you point out are coaching failures, which makes me think that Derrick may also be a victim of that same deficiency.
-
Just out of curiosity, what do you think was the main reason for MU's disappointing season? I personally feel Derrick was the main factor. Plenty of other minor factors that added up and helped in the disappointing season, but he was the main reason imo. I genuinely feel bad for the kid, because he was clearly in over his head and was painful to watch. If Carlino takes Derrick's minutes and we go 24-8 next year, I think it would prove how big a problem he really was.
It's a fair question.
I was surprised at the team's struggles last season.
Here is what I think went wrong:
#1 The upper clansmen didn't improve. Jamil, Derrick, Chris & Juan were all basically the same player as the year before. If each of them saw a bump in production from the previous year, this team is probably pretty good. (I didn't really expect Chris to improve much, but you get the idea).
#2 Mayo and Gardner were improved, but neither was improved enough to cover up all of the team's flaws. They were both close to my expectations, but neither was really a wold-beater.
#3 Steve Taylor regressed badly. (you can pick the reason, injury, coaching, etc.)
#4 Lack of role players. Buzz has never been really good at developing specific roles for guys, and this year that became even more apparent. Too many minutes with guys he "trusts", which I understand, but he needed to do a better job of getting some guys into roles where they could be successful for 10-15mpg. (Dawson, Burton, JJJ, Taylor)
#5 Duane's injury. I didn't have huge expectations for him, but he could have been a good 10mpg player and provide MU with some punch. Derrick has some obvious limitations, and Duane might have complimented him well in a mix n match scenario.
Now, on the plus side, I think Jake was better than I expected, and so was Dawson. I think JD could be a nice player.
-
As I said...please...go find an example in the last 10 years of a PG who got 970 minutes for the season and made 1, 3pt shot all year on 7% shooting and 43% FT shooting. Those are historically bad numbers...and when the QB of your team is so inept offensively, yes, it cripples everyone else.
And really Guns - talk about f'in idiotic, you want to cite Davante missing FTs?? Pretty sure he shot them about 40% better than Derrick.
And lastly, no, it isn't f'in idiotic to think that if Derrick plays less next season and the team is better, it isn't evidence that he was the major problem with last years team (other than Buzz.) How anyone would argue differently is what it idiotic, and the only people who would do so are you, Sultan, Tower, TAMU JesMU84, and MUSF - all guys who tried to tell us all of last year that Derrick wasn't the problem. At least the poll shows 84% of MU fans think he should play less than 16 minutes...
A team loses 20 years of experience in its 4 seniors, including its two leading scorers and leading rebounder, most efficient offensive player/best big man in 20 years at MU - and replaces it with Sandy Cohen and Matt Carlino - no reason that team should get better...as replacing Garndner and Jamil with Fischer and Steve or Juan is at best a wash, yet more likely a downgrade.
The reality is, it should be easy to improve on 17-15, 9-9, as we were awful last year. I doubt Derrick will play 30+ minutes a game ever again, and that will go a long way toward helping the team get better. Yet, who knows, maybe Wojo is an idiot and went out and recruited Matt Carlino just for the hell of it..even though he has 3 PGs on the roster as it is. Perhaps Wojo wasn't sold on Derrick a whole lot. Hmm.
Regardless of what happens next season, or how Derrick plays, it won't "prove" anything. There are simply too many variables in play. That's science. That's logic.
-
It's a fair question.
I was surprised at the team's struggles last season.
Here is what I think went wrong:
#1 The upper clansmen didn't improve. Jamil, Derrick, Chris & Juan were all basically the same player as the year before. If each of them saw a bump in production from the previous year, this team is probably pretty good. (I didn't really expect Chris to improve much, but you get the idea).
#2 Mayo and Gardner were improved, but neither was improved enough to cover up all of the team's flaws. They were both close to my expectations, but neither was really a wold-beater.
#3 Steve Taylor regressed badly. (you can pick the reason, injury, coaching, etc.)
#4 Lack of role players. Buzz has never been really good at developing specific roles for guys, and this year that became even more apparent. Too many minutes with guys he "trusts", which I understand, but he needed to do a better job of getting some guys into roles where they could be successful for 10-15mpg. (Dawson, Burton, JJJ, Taylor)
#5 Duane's injury. I didn't have huge expectations for him, but he could have been a good 10mpg player and provide MU with some punch. Derrick has some obvious limitations, and Duane might have complimented him well in a mix n match scenario.
Uh...okay..basically 5 things went wrong in your estimation...with barely a mention of Derrick being an issue....lump him in with the other upperclassmen not taking a big step up!! How do you think MU would have fared had Derrick just hit a customary 75% from the FT line for a guard? How many games did we lose in Overtime? Where just 1 more point per game would have made all the difference? What if our 31 minute per game PG made more than just 1, 3 point shot ALL year long?? If he could have knocked down just 1 per game, and shot 75% from the FT line...that probably translates into 5 more points per game....where does MU finish with 5 more PPG from PG position?? Hmm....I'm gonna guess a little better than 17-15..probably more like 22-10 and an NCAA team.
Regardless of what happens next season, or how Derrick plays, it won't "prove" anything. There are simply too many variables in play. That's science. That's logic.
Uh...okay...Wojo knew Derrick was a huge liability and his first signee as head coach was to get a 1-year rental at PG....even though he had an incumbent senior at the position who just got 31 minutes a game of experience his whole junior year. Wojo knows. Anyone with a shred of honest basketball intelligence knows you cannot win with a PG THAT incredibly limited.
-
Uh...okay..basically 5 things went wrong in your estimation...with barely a mention of Derrick being an issue....lump him in with the other upperclassmen not taking a big step up!! How do you think MU would have fared had Derrick just hit a customary 75% from the FT line for a guard? How many games did we lose in Overtime? Where just 1 more point per game would have made all the difference? What if our 31 minute per game PG made more than just 1, 3 point shot ALL year long?? If he could have knocked down just 1 per game, and shot 75% from the FT line...that probably translates into 5 more points per game....where does MU finish with 5 more PPG from PG position?? Hmm....I'm gonna guess a little better than 17-15..probably more like 22-10 and an NCAA team.
Uh...okay...Wojo knew Derrick was a huge liability and his first signee as head coach was to get a 1-year rental at PG....even though he had an incumbent senior at the position who just got 31 minutes a game of experience his whole junior year. Wojo knows. Anyone with a shred of honest basketball intelligence knows you cannot win with a PG THAT incredibly limited.
I think you are getting too tied up into the minutia of a specific player, and laying a lot on him. MU had several players who underperformed, or were simply the same as the previous year. When you are trying to replace Vander & Junior, you have to have guys get better. That includes Derrick. His performance wasn't good. It also includes Jamil, who was the same player, and Juan, and Taylor, who were arguably worse.
As far as Wojo bringing in another PG, I think it's a great move. MU needs better performance from that position. No doubt.
BUT, logically, there are far too many variables to "prove" anything. Again, that's not a rationalization, or "slurper". It's just logic 101.
-
I think you are getting too tied up into the minutia of a specific player, and laying a lot on him. MU had several players who underperformed, or were simply the same as the previous year. When you are trying to replace Vander & Junior, you have to have guys get better. That includes Derrick. His performance wasn't good. It also includes Jamil, who was the same player, and Juan, and Taylor, who were arguably worse.
As far as Wojo bringing in another PG, I think it's a great move. MU needs better performance from that position. No doubt.
BUT, logically, there are far too many variables to "prove" anything. Again, that's not a rationalization, or "slurper". It's just logic 101.
Jest a few corrections Ammo. Yes , Derrick's performance was not good--it was well below average. Yes, Juan was worse, Taylor never really had a chance due to Buzz's stupid rotations.
-
I think you are getting too tied up into the minutia of a specific player, and laying a lot on him. MU had several players who underperformed, or were simply the same as the previous year. When you are trying to replace Vander & Junior, you have to have guys get better. That includes Derrick. His performance wasn't good. It also includes Jamil, who was the same player, and Juan, and Taylor, who were arguably worse.
As far as Wojo bringing in another PG, I think it's a great move. MU needs better performance from that position. No doubt.
BUT, logically, there are far too many variables to "prove" anything. Again, that's not a rationalization, or "slurper". It's just logic 101.
Can you provide a logic 101 case for how the rest of the guys on the court with a guy who doesn't need to be defended within 5' on the perimeter, are expected to perform well on the offensive end/take big steps up?
Can you explain which player you would try to take away with a starting lineup of: Derrick, Jake, Juan, Jamil and Chris?
As for losing Vander, sure it hurt - but Mayo is virtually the exact same player as Blue - problem was Buzz only played him 23 minutes a game instead of Vander's 33.
I think you greatly discount the value and what the PG position means to a basketball team. In my view, it is the most important position/player on the floor - and when it is of historical weak proportions...it makes it very difficult on the guys around him to significantly up their production. The fact Jamil and Gardner were able to make slight upticks in their game is actually quite impressive.
I just fundamentally disagree that the blame rests at the feet of Gardner and Jamil for not improving to your expectations, when they were crippled with having to play with a backcourt of Derrick and Jake for 32 minutes. Imagine what Derrick or Jakes production would have been if they were the ones consistently double teamed??!!
-
Can you provide a logic 101 case for how the rest of the guys on the court with a guy who doesn't need to be defended within 5' on the perimeter, are expected to perform well on the offensive end/take big steps up?
Can you explain which player you would try to take away with a starting lineup of: Derrick, Jake, Juan, Jamil and Chris?
As for losing Vander, sure it hurt - but Mayo is virtually the exact same player as Blue - problem was Buzz only played him 23 minutes a game instead of Vander's 33.
I think you greatly discount the value and what the PG position means to a basketball team. In my view, it is the most important position/player on the floor - and when it is of historical weak proportions...it makes it very difficult on the guys around him to significantly up their production. The fact Jamil and Gardner were able to make slight upticks in their game is actually quite impressive.
I just fundamentally disagree that the blame rests at the feet of Gardner and Jamil for not improving to your expectations, when they were crippled with having to play with a backcourt of Derrick and Jake for 32 minutes. Imagine what Derrick or Jakes production would have been if they were the ones consistently double teamed??!!
The logic works like this:
There are too many variables to lay a poor season on 1 player, and specifically 1 stat, (3pt shooting). That's it.
Here it is in a math formula:
A+B+C+D = X.
We know B = 3
What does X equal?
X = A+3+C+D
That's it. That's all we know.
You have an opinion about Derrick, and I'm not debating you on that. I'm debating you because you are looking for validation from members of this board using faulty logic.
-
I'm sure this won't work, but I'm going to try and say a statement that I think everyone will agree with.
"One of the central problems, perhaps the number 1 problem, of the 2013-2014 Marquette Men's Basketball team was that its coach, Buzz Williams, let the team get into a position where he thought that the best option for the team's success was to play Derrick Wilson at the point guard position for 32 mpg."
Can we agree on this common ground? Honestly just curious if anyone else feels differently.
-
I'm sure this won't work, but I'm going to try and say a statement that I think everyone will agree with.
"One of the central problems, perhaps the number 1 problem, of the 2013-2014 Marquette Men's Basketball team was that its coach, Buzz Williams, let the team get into a position where he thought that the best option for the team's success was to play Derrick Wilson at the point guard position for 32 mpg."
Can we agree on this common ground? Honestly just curious if anyone else feels differently.
That pretty much sums it up well for me.
-
I'm sure this won't work, but I'm going to try and say a statement that I think everyone will agree with.
"One of the central problems, perhaps the number 1 problem, of the 2013-2014 Marquette Men's Basketball team was that its coach, Buzz Williams, let the team get into a position where he thought that the best option for the team's success was to play Derrick Wilson at the point guard position for 32 mpg."
Can we agree on this common ground? Honestly just curious if anyone else feels differently.
I'm on board. But so far you only have support from the axis of evil.
But, I must make clear, I don't think any of us ever disagreed with that. And until recently, I thought EVERYONE was on the same page. It was only the new topic of "if MU does better this year w/out Derrick must prove everything last year was Derrick's fault" that got me going again. And I wasn't even arguing about Derrick or the team, but just the lack of logic in the argument.
-
I'm on board. But so far you only have support from the axis of evil.
But, I must make clear, I don't think any of us ever disagreed with that. And until recently, I thought EVERYONE was on the same page. It was only the new topic of "if MU does better this year w/out Derrick must prove everything last year was Derrick's fault" that got me going again. And I wasn't even arguing about Derrick or the team, but just the lack of logic in the argument.
This.
I'm not debating because I'm a Derrick slurper, I'm debating because I have a degree from MU, and I was required to take logic.
-
The logic works like this:
There are too many variables to lay a poor season on 1 player, and specifically 1 stat, (3pt shooting). That's it.
Here it is in a math formula:
A+B+C+D = X.
We know B = 3
What does X equal?
X = A+3+C+D
That's it. That's all we know.
You have an opinion about Derrick, and I'm not debating you on that. I'm debating you because you are looking for validation from members of this board using faulty logic.
LOL. One stat? 3 point shooting? How about FT shooting? How about a total and complete unwillingness to shoot a jump shot from the Field other than if in desperation mode, thereby only shooting at the basket, and resulting in no pressure nor defense being applied to him during his 80% of the time on the perimeter.
Also, basketball is a GAME - it isn't a logical equation per se. But here's some logic you can wrap your head around - generally when outnumbered in a sport...you are at a disadvantage. There is a reason teams like to play 5 on 5 in basketball, and 11 on 11 in football. When your head coach says you are playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end (which is a true statement), that affects players 2, 3, 4 and 5 quite negatively.
Would you answer the questions though Guns: How many more wins this season would MU have had if its starting PG just shot a pedestrian 75% from the FT line, and made 28% of his 3 point attempts? There is something to be said about carrying your weight as a teammate. One guy fails to do an adequate job, and instead of being just adequate, the poor job is to the level of historic proportions - it hurts the whole team...and team in turn struggles to be successful/win.
-
I'm sure this won't work, but I'm going to try and say a statement that I think everyone will agree with.
"One of the central problems, perhaps the number 1 problem, of the 2013-2014 Marquette Men's Basketball team was that its coach, Buzz Williams, let the team get into a position where he thought that the best option for the team's success was to play Derrick Wilson at the point guard position for 32 mpg."
Can we agree on this common ground? Honestly just curious if anyone else feels differently.
Ners, the axis of slurpers have offered the above terms. Do you agree to this piece of common ground? Our tacticians believe it will shorten the war by 5 years and save thousands of lives.
-
I'm sure this won't work, but I'm going to try and say a statement that I think everyone will agree with.
"One of the central problems, perhaps the number 1 problem, of the 2013-2014 Marquette Men's Basketball team was that its coach, Buzz Williams, let the team get into a position where he thought that the best option for the team's success was to play Derrick Wilson at the point guard position for 32 mpg."
Can we agree on this common ground? Honestly just curious if anyone else feels differently.
I can go along with the above edits. It was Buzz's fault...no coach in his right mind would continue to bang his head against the same wall over and over and over again with a guy who quite consistently performed poorly. The ridiculous Derrick bear hug during the home game against Xavier or Seton Hall when Derrick had a nice stretch of 3 minutes was all I needed to see that Buzz was dying more than anything to be proven right and vindicated that his blind loyalty to a guy was paying off when there was so much evidence and fan consternation to the contrary.
-
I can go along with the above edits. It was Buzz's fault...no coach in his right mind would continue to bang his head against the same wall over and over and over again with a guy who quite consistently performed poorly. The ridiculous Derrick bear hug during the home game against Xavier or Seton Hall when Derrick had a nice stretch of 3 minutes was all I needed to see that Buzz was dying more than anything to be proven right and vindicated that his blind loyalty to a guy was paying off when there was so much evidence and fan consternation to the contrary.
Exactly, but you will never get an agreement from the Buzz slurpers on Derrick. After all, Buzz said Derrick was an elite defender and a gamechanger. which is what the slurpers hung their hats on all year long. And according to them, Buzz was the coach who could do no wrong. How could anybody question the downhome lonesome cowboy? Anybody who did was immediately slandered on this board--deflection as they say.
But wait...apparently the administration must have been asking some of those questions, which is why the phony downhome lonesome cowboy skipped out.
-
But wait...apparently the administration must have been asking some of those questions, which is why the phony downhome lonesome cowboy skipped out.
I can personally guarantee you, with 100% certainty, that Buzz' departure had absolutely nothing to do with his on the court performance.
His off the court however...
-
I will again point out, that if you take a good look at MUScoop during the tenure of Buzz, Ners was one of the bigger "slurpers" out there.
People who supported Buzz's decisions wrt Derrick Wilson have nothing on Ners slandering alleged sexual assault victims for his sake.
-
I will again point out, that if you take a good look at MUScoop during the tenure of Buzz, Ners was one of the bigger "slurpers" out there.
People who supported Buzz's decisions wrt Derrick Wilson have nothing on Ners slandering alleged sexual assault victims for his sake.
For his sake? I didn't know that Buzz was accused of sexual assault.
-
I will again point out, that if you take a good look at MUScoop during the tenure of Buzz, Ners was one of the bigger "slurpers" out there.
People who supported Buzz's decisions wrt Derrick Wilson have nothing on Ners slandering alleged sexual assault victims for his sake.
I was one of Buzz's biggest fans...until this past season...early on, when it became clear something wasn't right with Buzz and subsequently how he was coaching the team. I'd rarely been critical of Buzz at any point in his tenure prior to this season - other than thinking the DJ Newbill deal wasn't right - but at that time gave him the benefit of the doubt.
As for "slandering" ALLEGED sexual assault victims - I simply won't crucify a head coach for the conduct of his players. A coach cannot be with their players 24x7 and we are talking about 18-22 year old, high profile men on a campus like MU or any football player at a Big football school. By and large most players under Buzz behaved well in their time at MU, and things like underage drinking, being at clubs, a student being accused of sexual assault - I'd venture a guess that all of those things happen at just as high of rate among the general student body as they do D-1 athletes - yet the men of the general student body, rarely have women throw themselves at them (though I'm sure they did you Sultan you big stud)...as do many girls at high profile athletes.
And as for the slandering - I just said what was true about the case - there was a previous consensual sexual relationship between the parties involved...and it began consensual..but then at some point it allegedly became non-consensual. Obviously no charges were filed and as I recall the girl didn't take it to the police for some period of time after the episode...lots of gray areas as there always are in such cases...and I don't subscribe to guilty until proven innocent...unfortunate incident for all involved.
-
1. There were 2 players accused. Not 1.
2. While a previous consensual relationship existed in one of the cases, nothing that happened the night of the assault was consensual. The 2nd case had no previous consensual relationship.
3. Buzz cannot be blamed for his players actions. But he sure as hell can be blamed for how he handled the fallout. His role was almost as despicable as the involved players.
4. I'm not sure what you are getting at, but it sounds like you are implying that because "a student being accused of sexual assault - I'd venture a guess that all of those things happen at just as high of rate among the general student body as they do D-1 athletes " and "have women throw themselves at them as do many girls at high profile athletes" it's not a big deal that two of our players were (justly) accused of raping women. I really hope that is not what you are trying to imply because that is disgusting.
5. Sexual assault is the most unreported crime in the world, by a large margin. It's because victims are intimidated to go through the process. And who can blame them? Many ran to protect our basketball players and demonized the victims.
6. The victim did go to the police right away. The Marquette police. They failed to properly report it the Milwaukee PD as they are required by law to do.
7. The accused were found guilty by the university judicial system and the victim decided that that was good enough.
8. While I too don't subscribe to "guilty until proven innocent" I also don't prescribe to "innocent because they were not prove guilty." They are absolutely innocent in the eyes of the law, but that doesn't mean they are innocent in the eyes of God.
-
Exactly, but you will never get an agreement from the Buzz slurpers on Derrick. After all, Buzz said Derrick was an elite defender and a gamechanger. which is what the slurpers hung their hats on all year long. And according to them, Buzz was the coach who could do no wrong. How could anybody question the downhome lonesome cowboy? Anybody who did was immediately slandered on this board--deflection as they say.
But wait...apparently the administration must have been asking some of those questions, which is why the phony downhome lonesome cowboy skipped out.
Willie, serious question - Do you actually read any of the posts of the alleged "slurpers"? For instance, any of the ones in this very thread where the alleged "slurpers" admit that Derrick was part of the problem?
-
I can go along with the above edits. It was Buzz's fault...no coach in his right mind would continue to bang his head against the same wall over and over and over again with a guy who quite consistently performed poorly. The ridiculous Derrick bear hug during the home game against Xavier or Seton Hall when Derrick had a nice stretch of 3 minutes was all I needed to see that Buzz was dying more than anything to be proven right and vindicated that his blind loyalty to a guy was paying off when there was so much evidence and fan consternation to the contrary.
I thought Buzz, according to you, was playing his "high character guys" to prove a point to the admin?
Now you are saying he played DW out of blind loyalty.
Which is it?
-
And as for the slandering - I just said what was true about the case - there was a previous consensual sexual relationship between the parties involved...and it began consensual..but then at some point it allegedly became non-consensual. Obviously no charges were filed and as I recall the girl didn't take it to the police for some period of time after the episode...lots of gray areas as there always are in such cases...and I don't subscribe to guilty until proven innocent...unfortunate incident for all involved.
That is a flat-out, 100% lie.
You presented *as a fact* that it was a "woman scorned" scenario.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=28095.msg324414#msg324414
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned...
End of story."
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27353.msg312151#msg312151
"Hell hath no fury, like a woman scorned. And my 2 cents - this is exactly what happened here..."
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27584.msg316187#msg316187
"Take responsibility for the flawed policy (which was the same under your boy Crean), but reiterate the FACTS:
1) DPS didn't have reasonable cause to think an assault occurred.
2) DPS gave girl the option to take matter up with police if she felt their conclusion wasn't satisfactory.
3) Girl chose not to go to police for a long time.
4) Girl realizes player is never going to date her again, is bitter, and decides to wage war against player and university.
5) Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."
-
That is a flat-out, 100% lie.
You presented *as a fact* that it was a "woman scorned" scenario.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=28095.msg324414#msg324414
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned...
End of story."
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27353.msg312151#msg312151
"Hell hath no fury, like a woman scorned. And my 2 cents - this is exactly what happened here..."
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=27584.msg316187#msg316187
"Take responsibility for the flawed policy (which was the same under your boy Crean), but reiterate the FACTS:
1) DPS didn't have reasonable cause to think an assault occurred.
2) DPS gave girl the option to take matter up with police if she felt their conclusion wasn't satisfactory.
3) Girl chose not to go to police for a long time.
4) Girl realizes player is never going to date her again, is bitter, and decides to wage war against player and university.
5) Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."
Think I need to modify the statement to: Hell hath no fury like a Sultan scorned. Not sure why you'd want to revisit and rehash a potentially hurtful topic to the victim you advocate for...seems to lack sensitivity on your part?
The only people who truly know exactly what happened the night of the ALLEGED crime were the parties that were there. I offered my take...you and others offered theirs...and there was disagreement...end of the day...No charges ended up being filed. DPS apparently didn't witness evidence that would suggest sex assault. Highly doubt they wouldn't have turned the matter over to MPD if they saw physical signs of rape - which I believe tend to be present in most cases?
Lastly, just because you spent all of last season being wrong on your take on Buzz/the team, doesn't mean you weren't right about some of your prior takes on him as a coach. As I recall, you too felt the Newbill deal was dirty at the time...and perhaps you are right on how Buzz handled the alleged sexual assault charges against his players - perhaps unethically - yet in my view Buzz handled it from what we know - as would many coaches at high major programs....do what they could to protect their player/provide the best advice to the player.
Still can't believe you took it to the level of re-hashing the sex assault...for the guy who champions himself as a victim advocate you showed a complete lack of sensitivity to the alleged victim?
-
Think I need to modify the statement to: Hell hath no fury like a Sultan scorned. Not sure why you'd want to revisit and rehash a potentially hurtful topic to the victim you advocate for...seems to lack sensitivity on your part?
Still can't believe you took it to the level of re-hashing the sex assault...for the guy who champions himself as a victim advocate you showed a complete lack of sensitivity to the alleged victim?
LOL. Complete deflection. Gotta love Ners.
Here is why I brought it up. You have a complete inability to see any shades of gray in any situation.
When you were on Buzz's side, you defended to the point of certainty that the alleged victim was simply "a woman scorned," and no matter how many times people pointed out the flaws in your argument, you were strident in your take. At that point in time, you would pretty much do anything not to paint Buzz or his players in a poor light.
When you were not on Buzz's side, you continue to defend to the point of certainly that Derrick Wilson wasn't just *one* of the issues, he was *the* issue. When people make a counter argument, ANY counter argument, you are strident in your belief. At this point, everything Buzz did was wrong...his playing time, his substitutions, etc.
There is never any compromise...never any shades of gray...in Ners' world. Only black and white. Only right or wrong.
You were once King of the Slurpers. And now you are King of the Rebellion.
-
Would you answer the questions though Guns: How many more wins this season would MU have had if its starting PG just shot a pedestrian 75% from the FT line, and made 28% of his 3 point attempts? There is something to be said about carrying your weight as a teammate. One guy fails to do an adequate job, and instead of being just adequate, the poor job is to the level of historic proportions - it hurts the whole team...and team in turn struggles to be successful/win.
We AGREE!
Derrick was BAD.
Fine.
BUT, it still doesn't change the fact that you are identifying ONE VARIABLE, assigning it blame, and using faulty logic as to prove it.
MU could go undefeated with DW playing 40mpg this coming season. Guess what? It wouldn't magically mean he wasn't bad this past season. He was bad. Sunk cost. Done. Nothing he does this season will change that.
You keep setting up this "argument" about Derrick's minutes this coming season so you can somehow shove it in people's faces if/when MU plays well without Derrick. Quit doing that. It's bad logic. Does not compute.
Okay? We good?
-
The only people who truly know exactly what happened the night of the ALLEGED crime were the parties that were there. I offered my take...you and others offered theirs...and there was disagreement...end of the day...No charges ended up being filed. DPS apparently didn't witness evidence that would suggest sex assault. Highly doubt they wouldn't have turned the matter over to MPD if they saw physical signs of rape - which I believe tend to be present in most cases?
Would it change your opinion if you knew that the players were found guilty by the university judicial system and they were dismissed from the university because of it?
-
LOL. Complete deflection. Gotta love Ners.
Here is why I brought it up. You have a complete inability to see any shades of gray in any situation.
When you were on Buzz's side, you defended to the point of certainty that the alleged victim was simply "a woman scorned," and no matter how many times people pointed out the flaws in your argument, you were strident in your take. At that point in time, you would pretty much do anything not to paint Buzz or his players in a poor light.
When you were not on Buzz's side, you continue to defend to the point of certainly that Derrick Wilson wasn't just *one* of the issues, he was *the* issue. When people make a counter argument, ANY counter argument, you are strident in your belief. At this point, everything Buzz did was wrong...his playing time, his substitutions, etc.
There is never any compromise...never any shades of gray...in Ners' world. Only black and white. Only right or wrong.
You were once King of the Slurpers. And now you are King of the Rebellion.
I have an inability to see shades of grey? I'm the one saying that an alleged sexual assault is the HEIGHT of shades of grey, particularly one that involves people who have had a consensual relationship historically....and I'm not going to pass judgment and say guilty...when no charges were ultimately filed.
As for Derrick...obviously, I feel quite strongly that his play was the MAIN reason the team had a bad season for all the reasons I've cited 1,000 times. Having a PG that devoid of offensive ability kills a team...as does a head coach who decides to play the PG with a 2 guard that cannot create his own shot, or for the most part, make a 2 pt FG - together for 32 minutes a game. Above Derrick and Jake, the biggest problem was Buzz for thinking he could somehow win games at a high level playing those guys more minutes than any other players on the team. Yet, when I was blaming Buzz above Derrick?Jake/shades of grey) you of course were critical of my criticism of Buzz...saying his track record of results was proof that he was beyond making coaching mistakes.
-
So...how about that Derrick Wilson minutes thing...
-
LOL. Complete deflection. Gotta love Ners.
Here is why I brought it up. You have a complete inability to see any shades of gray in any situation.
When you were on Buzz's side, you defended to the point of certainty that the alleged victim was simply "a woman scorned," and no matter how many times people pointed out the flaws in your argument, you were strident in your take. At that point in time, you would pretty much do anything not to paint Buzz or his players in a poor light.
When you were not on Buzz's side, you continue to defend to the point of certainly that Derrick Wilson wasn't just *one* of the issues, he was *the* issue. When people make a counter argument, ANY counter argument, you are strident in your belief. At this point, everything Buzz did was wrong...his playing time, his substitutions, etc.
There is never any compromise...never any shades of gray...in Ners' world. Only black and white. Only right or wrong.
You were once King of the Slurpers. And now you are King of the Rebellion.
Wow!! Huge praise from the Sultan calling Ners "once the King of slurpers" Unfortunately, that crown will always reside with the Sultan.