They have MU finishing 9th in the Big East. Only BE team they have in their top 40 is Nova. So, 9th in a bad league.
Quote from: tower912 on September 07, 2014, 04:15:45 PM
They have MU finishing 9th in the Big East. Only BE team they have in their top 40 is Nova. So, 9th in a bad league.
I'm trying to be unbiased and see what he sees. But no chance in hell we finish below Depaul, Butler and Creighton. Others fine I can see it but not those 3.
Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on September 07, 2014, 05:20:02 PM
I'm trying to be unbiased and see what he sees. But no chance in hell we finish below Depaul, Butler and Creighton. Others fine I can see it but not those 3.
On paper, Butler and Creighton should both be better than us. Creighton only lost 65% of their offense, we lost 71%. And Creighton was much better than us. Butler gets their leading scorer back from injury and only loses 45% of their offense.
Now I agree that we are better than both of these teams, but if we are to be unbiased, you have to look at the numbers. And the numbers say we are 9th best.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on September 07, 2014, 05:27:17 PM
On paper, Butler and Creighton should both be better than us. Creighton only lost 65% of their offense, we lost 71%. And Creighton was much better than us. Butler gets their leading scorer back from injury and only loses 45% of their offense.
Now I agree that we are better than both of these teams, but if we are to be unbiased, you have to look at the numbers. And the numbers say we are 9th best.
We needed to lose a lot of those numbers - a lot of them were put up by bad players.
Whoever starts at SG will put up better numbers than Thomas. And, Carlino will put up exponentially better numbers than Derrick. Burton will put up better numbers than we got from that position last year. And, I even think Fischer/Taylor will put up better numbers than Gardner/Otule.
The Creighton numbers are meaningless as well as they lost the player who always put up big numbers, as well as opened up opportunities for other players.
My prediction is somewhere from 3rd to 6th. and being on the bubble in March, if we stay injury free. (All predicated on Burton getting 30 minutes a game.)
At least we weren't picked 11th
Who does Lindy work for?
Quote from: tower912 on September 07, 2014, 04:15:45 PM
They have MU finishing 9th in the Big East. Only BE team they have in their top 40 is Nova. So, 9th in a bad league.
Clearly an uninformed web site.
We could finish a lot higher, but there is no reason to think we are anywhere better than 10th.
Quote from: brandx on September 07, 2014, 05:42:08 PM
We needed to lose a lot of those numbers - a lot of them were put up by bad players.
Whoever starts at SG will put up better numbers than Thomas. And, Carlino will put up exponentially better numbers than Derrick. Burton will put up better numbers than we got from that position last year. And, I even think Fischer/Taylor will put up better numbers than Gardner/Otule.
The Creighton numbers are meaningless as well as they lost the player who always put up big numbers, as well as opened up opportunities for other players.
Not sure about Fischer/Taylor being better than Gardner/Otule, but otherwise I agree with everything here. Especially the part about Creighton.
I mean, last year's Lakers didn't just lose a percentage of their offense, they lost Kobe Bryant. That transcends a percentage of points. And though McDermott isn't Kobe Bryant, he was Creighton's Kobe Bryant.
I could see us finishing anywhere from 3rd through 9th. We'll finish toward the top end of that range if you were right about Fischer/Taylor, as of course I hope you are!
I predict MU 3-7
Ninth is simply too low, unbiased or not. Too much talent on this team to finish ninth. One could only place Marquette ninth if you figured Wojo can't coach at all.
I wonder if you made a prop bet in Vegas that Marquette would finish 9th or 10th what kind of odds you would get. Has Marquette since joining the MCC in the early 90's ever finished second to last (or worse) in any conference we were affiliated with?
Quote from: MarquetteDano on September 07, 2014, 10:15:23 PM
Ninth is simply too low, unbiased or not. Too much talent on this team to finish ninth. One could only place Marquette ninth if you figured Wojo can't coach at all.
I wonder if you made a prop bet in Vegas that Marquette would finish 9th or 10th what kind of odds you would get. Has Marquette since joining the MCC in the early 90's ever finished second to last (or worse) in any conference we were affiliated with?
Completely agree Its ludacris to think this team will finish 9th, I'd put big money on it
Quote from: MarquetteDano on September 07, 2014, 10:15:23 PM
Ninth is simply too low, unbiased or not. Too much talent on this team to finish ninth. One could only place Marquette ninth if you figured Wojo can't coach at all.
I wonder if you made a prop bet in Vegas that Marquette would finish 9th or 10th what kind of odds you would get. Has Marquette since joining the MCC in the early 90's ever finished second to last (or worse) in any conference we were affiliated with?
To an outsider, Marquette is a major rebuild. The talent you reference is largely untested, so I can see how the media looks at Marquette as
a bottom of the conference team. Let's hope we, in fact, have too much talent.
Quote from: Chip Chipman on September 07, 2014, 09:25:04 PM
Who....does.... number.... 2.... work.... for?????
https://www.youtube.com/v/J-YVt4gfquA
There will at least two train wrecks in the conference. MU won't be one of them. That gets us at least 8th just by fielding a team.
Quote from: Johnny Basketball on September 07, 2014, 08:16:55 PM
I predict MU 3-7
Or 3-5, which is about where they would finish in either division of Big Ten football.
From the outside Marquette looks like a team that's destined to be playing the first day of the BET.
I read this board enough to know how the majority feel about Buzz's rotation last year and it being the cause for Marquette's struggles.
But the team still lost a lot especially up front which was where the majority of Marquette's strength was last year. And while many people are high on Wojo and he's gotten off to a good start recruiting he's still a first time head coach. Look at how Butler struggled last year with a first time head coach.
It's not unreasonable for people to objectively look at Marquette and expect them to struggle with their lack of size and inexperience both on the bench and on the court ( only 4 upper classmen), and a short bench (10 eligible scholarship players(9 until end of 1st semester)).
Obviously it would be really weird for fans of the program to think this way, but it's not unreasonable for a magazine to look at last year and what you lost and expect things to get worse before they get better. Again not trying to convince anyone to think down on the teams prospects, you're fans you're going to be optimistic, but this prediction shouldn't just be dismissed as stupid or impossible.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on September 07, 2014, 10:15:23 PM
Ninth is simply too low, unbiased or not. Too much talent on this team to finish ninth. One could only place Marquette ninth if you figured Wojo can't coach at all.
I wonder if you made a prop bet in Vegas that Marquette would finish 9th or 10th what kind of odds you would get. Has Marquette since joining the MCC in the early 90's ever finished second to last (or worse) in any conference we were affiliated with?
We were awful last year.....and still finished 6th. Can't see us dropping any lower than that.
Quote from: MUEagle1090 on September 08, 2014, 10:09:06 AM
We were awful last year.....and still finished 6th. Can't see us dropping any lower than that.
What makes you so certain we will be better this year? The talent we will have doesn't have much experience and vice versa. Talent may cause us to win a game or two we aren't supposed to...but the lack of experience (especially in the front court) may cause us to lose a handful.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on September 08, 2014, 10:12:30 AM
What makes you so certain we will be better this year? The talent we will have doesn't have much experience and vice versa. Talent may cause us to win a game or two we aren't supposed to...but the lack of experience (especially in the front court) may cause us to lose a handful.
Well, unlike last year, you'd presume Coach will have his five best players on the court.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on September 08, 2014, 10:12:30 AM
What makes you so certain we will be better this year? The talent we will have doesn't have much experience and vice versa. Talent may cause us to win a game or two we aren't supposed to...but the lack of experience (especially in the front court) may cause us to lose a handful.
Here's what makes one more certain that we will be better:
- We had a doofus for a coach last year. We now have an adult as coach.
We were 17-15 last year. We sucked. can't be worse.
We have a better PG which will be a big upgrade
Du. Wilson, and JJJ were collared last year by the doofus. They will break out this year.
We should likely end up about 18-14 or 19-13--an improvement over the doofus' abombination.]
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on September 07, 2014, 05:27:17 PM
On paper, Butler and Creighton should both be better than us. Creighton only lost 65% of their offense, we lost 71%. And Creighton was much better than us. Butler gets their leading scorer back from injury and only loses 45% of their offense.
Now I agree that we are better than both of these teams, but if we are to be unbiased, you have to look at the numbers. And the numbers say we are 9th best.
If you define "offense" as points scored, then yes. While I don't have numbers to back it up (and I'm not entirely sure it's possible), I would argue that Creighton lost more of their offense by having lottery pick Doug McDermott and 3 undrafted players leave than 5 undrafted players.
How much better did McDermott make the underclassmen that team that count as the 35% returning to inflate that number? I'm not sure you could argue that Burton's, Johnson's, Dawson's, or Taylor's stats were enhanced by having those other players on the team.
Quote from: PistolPete on September 08, 2014, 10:26:59 AM
Well, unlike last year, you'd presume Coach will have his five best players on the court.
Well, it is Wojo's first year, so there will be a bit of a honeymoon. For as long as that lasts or as long as he outperforms collective expectations most here won't try to coach the team. At some point, though, expect a "choking dogs" or a "coach is insane" moment from one of our experts. It's embedded deep in Scoop's DNA.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on September 08, 2014, 10:59:33 AM
Well, it is Wojo's first year, so there will be a bit of a honeymoon. For as long as that lasts or as long as he outperforms collective expectations most here won't try to coach the team. At some point, though, expect a "choking dogs" or a "coach is insane" moment from one of our experts. It's embedded deep in Scoop's DNA.
Probably the first time we lose to a team we were "supposed" to beat.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on September 08, 2014, 10:12:30 AM
What makes you so certain we will be better this year? The talent we will have doesn't have much experience and vice versa. Talent may cause us to win a game or two we aren't supposed to...but the lack of experience (especially in the front court) may cause us to lose a handful.
I'm not certain we will be better, but I'm pretty confident we won't be much worse. Creighton and Providence both lost a ton and the teams behind us didn't get better with the exception of Seton Hall. I could see anywhere from 3rd to 7th. Certainly not 9th.
Quote from: slack00 on September 08, 2014, 10:56:29 AM
If you define "offense" as points scored, then yes. While I don't have numbers to back it up (and I'm not entirely sure it's possible), I would argue that Creighton lost more of their offense by having lottery pick Doug McDermott and 3 undrafted players leave than 5 undrafted players.
How much better did McDermott make the underclassmen that team that count as the 35% returning to inflate that number? I'm not sure you could argue that Burton's, Johnson's, Dawson's, or Taylor's stats were enhanced by having those other players on the team.
True but that can't be measured. At least not accurately. No matter what stat you look at, it says we are going to be even worse next year. Fortunately for us, basketball is not played on paper. So I do agree that we will be better, but I fully expect every news outlet to predict an 8th or worse finish in the BEast. I don't mind having low expectations. Marquette has a history of success as an underdog.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on September 08, 2014, 11:24:54 AM
True but that can't be measured. At least not accurately. No matter what stat you look at, it says we are going to be even worse next year. Fortunately for us, basketball is not played on paper. So I do agree that we will be better, but I fully expect every news outlet to predict an 8th or worse finish in the BEast. I don't mind having low expectations. Marquette has a history of success as an underdog.
This. In addition to a (potentially) weak conference, we have a chance at making some noise this year.
Quote from: PistolPete on September 08, 2014, 10:26:59 AM
Well, unlike last year, you'd presume Coach will have his five best players on the court.
+1000
If only Mayo, Burton, JJJ and Gardner could have "played to the scouting report."
Quote from: Ners on September 08, 2014, 12:02:03 PM
+1000
If only Mayo, Burton, JJJ and Gardner could have "played to the scouting report."
Buzz wished the same thing.
Quote from: Ners on September 08, 2014, 12:02:03 PM
+1000
If only Mayo, Burton, JJJ and Gardner could have "played to the scouting report."
Or if only Buzz would have just rolled the ball out on the court, played his 5 most talented offensive players regardless of attitude or readiness and let the players coach themselves, rec center style.
Is it possible we are better, yes. Is it likely we are better, yes. Do we know things that 99% of the media doesn't know or recognize, very likely.
We hope and believe the flaws in our team will be better this season than last. We have players coming back with talent and players who haven't previously played that we believe to have more talent. Having said all that I get it and if I'm a media person I put us way down in the bottom too.
-We have no front court until late December and even then we are an injury or two away from a 6'5" center.
-Brand new coach that while well regarded, there is absolutely no proof of his ability to win basketball games especially against tough competition
-We are coming off a bad season in which we had more experience and a "known" entity as a coach
-We have two players on the roster that have started in a game, only one of whom has actually played starter minutes
-The one starter to play starter minutes is regarded by the fanbase as the worst event since the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye
There is a lot of reason to be skeptical of this team. I don't think they finish 9th, but if they do as well as Wojo can coach and there was improvement with the team over the season I'll be ok with it. 2015 is the year, especially if we get Ellenson.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on September 08, 2014, 12:09:51 PM
Or if only Buzz would have just rolled the ball out on the court, played his 5 most talented offensive players regardless of attitude or readiness and let the players coach themselves, rec center style.
So basically youre telling me that Mayo shouldn't have been playing in front of Thomas and JJJ shouldn't have gotten a chance. OH and that you completely agree with Buzz's decision to bench Deonte against Xavier because they needed a more defensive minded team? Please, im not even arguing about Derrick but these other instances are inexcusable by a coach.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on September 08, 2014, 12:09:51 PM
Or if only Buzz would have just rolled the ball out on the court, played his 5 most talented offensive players regardless of attitude or readiness and let the players coach themselves, rec center style.
I don't think the end result would have been much worse and probably would have been a lot more fun to watch ;D
Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on September 08, 2014, 12:16:54 PM
So basically youre telling me that Mayo shouldn't have been playing in front of Thomas and JJJ shouldn't have gotten a chance. OH and that you completely agree with Buzz's decision to bench Deonte against Xavier because they needed a more defensive minded team? Please, im not even arguing about Derrick but these other instances are inexcusable by a coach.
I'd rather give a senior who we know is going to be eligible for every game the minutes over a junior who can't stay eligible.
Hold the Mayo.
I'm not worried about what we lost - someone has to put up numbers on every team, and on a not very good team it's usually guys who are not very good. This year's team has 7 RSCI top 100 players and only one is a true freshman. In addition, they have a senior transfer at a position of need who started for 3 years at BYU and began his career at UCLA. May take awhile for the talent to mesh but we should be pretty good by midseason. This isn't your father's Big East, and this year's version looks worse than last's. Hard to imagine 9th place.
nm not worth it.
Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on September 08, 2014, 12:16:54 PM
So basically youre telling me that Mayo shouldn't have been playing in front of Thomas and JJJ shouldn't have gotten a chance. OH and that you completely agree with Buzz's decision to bench Deonte against Xavier because they needed a more defensive minded team? Please, im not even arguing about Derrick but these other instances are inexcusable by a coach.
No, that's not what I'm basically telling you. First of all, Thomas didn't play AHEAD of Mayo. They played side by side, both getting big (starter's) minutes once Todd put some of his bad behavior (suspended for being late, [essentially not showing up] for practice - among other things). Secondly, JJJ got a chance. Whether he deserved more time I can't say. As for the Xavier game, Burton had a great run but was obviously gassed - he was badly beaten consecutive times on D and made a bad decision/play on offense. It was time to be taken out. Since we lost, I guess one can second guess his not returning. That's a fair criticism, but I wouldn't call it "inexcusable" coaching - though that's the kind of hyperbole that gets passed off as analysis here.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on September 08, 2014, 12:48:02 PM
As for the Xavier game, Burton had a great run but was obviously gassed - he was badly beaten consecutive times on D and made a bad decision/play on offense. It was time to be taken out. Since we lost, I guess one can second guess his not returning. That's a fair criticism, but I wouldn't call it "inexcusable" coaching - though that's the kind of hyperbole that gets passed off as analysis here.
Inexcusable? That's just a word choice, and maybe an accurate one. Keeping Burton on the bench certainly was awful coaching, and inexplicable.
And I am not a Buzz-hater. I spent at least half of last season defending him. But his poor decisions wore on me, and not putting Burton back into this game after a couple-minute breather was the creme de la creme of bad coaching.
To this day, I am grateful for the energy and many other positives Buzz brought to the program. (Just as I am grateful for Crean's role in turning around the program.) But Buzz became a bad coach last season.
Just because you want to believe he still was a great coach with few flaws doesn't make it so. One might even argue that thinking along those lines is inexcusable! ;)
Quote from: Lennys Tap on September 08, 2014, 12:48:02 PM
No, that's not what I'm basically telling you. First of all, Thomas didn't play AHEAD of Mayo. They played side by side, both getting big (starter's) minutes once Todd put some of his bad behavior (suspended for being late, [essentially not showing up] for practice - among other things). Secondly, JJJ got a chance. Whether he deserved more time I can't say. As for the Xavier game, Burton had a great run but was obviously gassed - he was badly beaten consecutive times on D and made a bad decision/play on offense. It was time to be taken out. Since we lost, I guess one can second guess his not returning. That's a fair criticism, but I wouldn't call it "inexcusable" coaching - though that's the kind of hyperbole that gets passed off as analysis here.
I was watching that game with my dad. He has coached for close to 30 years now and he was flummoxed when Burton was absent the second half. Called it one of the worst coaching decisions he's ever seen.
I was not flummoxed that he came out. He needed to. I was flummoxed that he did not go back in.
BTW, Sporting News picks MU for 7th in the Big East.
Remember, Marquette has never had a losing season in the Big East. I just can't see us pulling a 5-13 to finish 8-10.
Quote from: tower912 on September 08, 2014, 01:53:43 PM
BTW, Sporting News picks MU for 7th in the Big East.
And that us a perfectly reasonable assessment.
Quote from: tower912 on September 08, 2014, 01:53:43 PM
BTW, Sporting News picks MU for 7th in the Big East.
That seems fair, and warranted considering our team depth and new coach.
Who is Lindy?
What's the complete rankings I've seen the top 4 else where but not all 10.
1. Nova
2. St. John's
3. Gtown
4. Xavier
5-8?
9. Marquette
10. Depaul.
who do they have 5-8.
Quote from: MU82 on September 08, 2014, 01:03:08 PM
Inexcusable? That's just a word choice, and maybe an accurate one. Keeping Burton on the bench certainly was awful coaching, and inexplicable.
And I am not a Buzz-hater. I spent at least half of last season defending him. But his poor decisions wore on me, and not putting Burton back into this game after a couple-minute breather was the creme de la creme of bad coaching.
To this day, I am grateful for the energy and many other positives Buzz brought to the program. (Just as I am grateful for Crean's role in turning around the program.) But Buzz became a bad coach last season.
Just because you want to believe he still was a great coach with few flaws doesn't make it so. One might even argue that thinking along those lines is inexcusable! ;)
To be fair, Buzz has always had a quirky substitution pattern, and we weren't really complaining when it was working.
This past season, it didn't work, and now we all act pissed.
Guess what? Buzz has been acting that way for years, and it always worked. He wasn't going to change last season.
When Buzz was winning, he was eccentric. When he was losing, he was crazy.
Quote from: tower912 on September 08, 2014, 01:47:46 PM
I was not flummoxed that he came out. He needed to. I was flummoxed that he did not go back in.
This says it best.
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on September 08, 2014, 02:22:28 PM
Is he lucky?
Gotta be over 60, huh? I'm guessing most of the young guys didn't get your question.
Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on September 08, 2014, 02:34:54 PM
To be fair, Buzz has always had a quirky substitution pattern, and we weren't really complaining when it was working.
This past season, it didn't work, and now we all act pissed.
Guess what? Buzz has been acting that way for years, and it always worked. He wasn't going to change last season.
When Buzz was winning, he was eccentric. When he was losing, he was crazy.
There is a difference between quirky patterns and foolishness.
Not putting Burton back in that Xavier game really was incredible, and it put an exclamation point on how Buzz coached last season. That, and not even giving Dawson a few consecutive minutes of run-time after Dawson did well against Georgetown. (And I'm not one of those who is certain Dawson will be any good.)
And of course we look at a coach's strategy and behavior differently based upon whether he's winning or losing. That's human nature. Winning, meanwhile, is part of the job description of any coach, let alone one who was making the kind of coin Buzz made.
As that old Vikings fossil Jerry Burns liked to say: We aren't paid to coach and play; we are paid to win.
Quote from: brandx on September 08, 2014, 02:41:44 PM
Gotta be over 60, huh? I'm guessing most of the young guys didn't get your question.
No most of us just don't associate with members of the American First Committee.
Quote from: madhouse on September 08, 2014, 02:06:25 PM
Who is Lindy?
The triple lindy is one of the most difficult dives.
Quote from: MU82 on September 08, 2014, 02:52:14 PM
There is a difference between quirky patterns and foolishness.
Not putting Burton back in that Xavier game really was incredible, and it put an exclamation point on how Buzz coached last season. That, and not even giving Dawson a few consecutive minutes of run-time after Dawson did well against Georgetown. (And I'm not one of those who is certain Dawson will be any good.)
And of course we look at a coach's strategy and behavior differently based upon whether he's winning or losing. That's human nature. Winning, meanwhile, is part of the job description of any coach, let alone one who was making the kind of coin Buzz made.
As that old Vikings fossil Jerry Burns liked to say: We aren't paid to coach and play; we are paid to win.
You're not wrong, but remember when "everybody" hated Trent Lockett, but Buzz stuck with him? Remember how that paid off in the tourny?
Sometimes we get pissed about (insert coaching decision), but the reality is that the coach knows way more than we do.
I'm not saying Buzz is infallible, and your gripes realistic. However, some people are act like Buzz is some sort of lunatic that can't coach. Well, he was doing the same things the previous 3 years, and "everybody" thought he was quirky and brilliant. 1 bad season and now the dude was an idiot? I'm not sure it works like that.
Someone earlier brought up the unknown of Wojo as a game coach.
Just wondering -- did Wojo ever fill in for Coach K as HC during his time as an assistant?
After a thorough scouring of the interwebs (i.e., 5-min google search), the only games it shows Coach K missing was his back surgery in 94-95.
IIRC, Wojo was a player that year.
Quote from: mu03eng on September 08, 2014, 02:53:37 PM
No most of us just don't associate with members of the American First Committee.
So are you going to make everything political now? I really could care less about your views. Don't even know what the hell you'ree babbling about. The nickname came from his aviation exploits - not from his political views.
My question was whether younger people on this board happened to know where the phrase "lucky Lindy" came from.
Maybe you and chicos can just PM each other and snicker together like little girls.
Quote from: brandx on September 08, 2014, 11:04:09 AM
Probably the first time we lose to a team we were "supposed" to beat.
I don't think that that'll happen, mostly, because - as the Lindy prediction illustrates - Marquette just won't be in that situation very often.
Now if you're talking about teams that Scoopers will think we're supposed to beat, we'll have lots of those.
I have not followed Carlino's career so I have no idea if he is a clutch player. However, besides him there is no known player on this team that has the ability to hit a clutch shot when the game is on the line. That was one of the problems last year until Mayo came on at the end of the season and of course he is now gone. There is no reason to believe this team will win the majority of close games this year. Maybe someone will step up, but the odds are against it.
Quote from: bilsu on September 08, 2014, 07:42:29 PM
I have not followed Carlino's career so I have no idea if he is a clutch player. However, besides him there is no known player on this team that has the ability to hit a clutch shot when the game is on the line. That was one of the problems last year until Mayo came on at the end of the season and of course he is now gone. There is no reason to believe this team will win the majority of close games this year. Maybe someone will step up, but the odds are against it.
Prior to his senior year, Jamil had hit big shots. MSG. Davidson game.
Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on September 08, 2014, 03:37:39 PM
You're not wrong, but remember when "everybody" hated Trent Lockett, but Buzz stuck with him? Remember how that paid off in the tourny?
Sometimes we get pissed about (insert coaching decision), but the reality is that the coach knows way more than we do.
I'm not saying Buzz is infallible, and your gripes realistic. However, some people are act like Buzz is some sort of lunatic that can't coach. Well, he was doing the same things the previous 3 years, and "everybody" thought he was quirky and brilliant. 1 bad season and now the dude was an idiot? I'm not sure it works like that.
That's a great point about Lockett. I freely admit to being one of those wondering why he was getting so much playing time. BUT ...
By midseason, I really started appreciating Lockett and could see exactly what he brought and why Buzz liked him. Any intelligent fan could see it by then. And we were winning, thanks in great part to Lockett. So in that case, Buzz made a decision, stuck with it because he felt it would be the right thing long-term, stuck with it more because it worked, and the whole team benefited.
Compare that to last season. By midseason, it became obvious that a certain player was at best a 10-15 mpg guy. And we were losing, thanks in great part to the shortcomings of a certain player. So in that case, Buzz made a decision, stuck with it because he felt he had to for some reason, stuck with it more despite it being an unmitigated disaster, and the whole team paid the price.
I have nothing against quirky coaching ... as long as it works. Good coaches have the ability to recognize when something isn't working and try something. Anything. Even change for the sake of change.
OK, I'm done with this now. Don't want to start sounding like another poster or three who beat a subject to death.
We were 9-6 in the Big East. The wheels came off at the end with two of the games being double overtime losses. The inability to win close games is what did last year's team in.
Quote from: bilsu on September 08, 2014, 08:16:07 PM
We were 9-6 in the Big East. The wheels came off at the end with two of the games being double overtime losses. The inability to win close games is what did last year's team in.
I thought the wheels came off early. It was 25 games into the season before we got a 3 game winning streak. And we only had four 2-game winning streaks, each of which included patsies. It was a season where we were never played well and we were never even on the bubble for the NCAAs.
Quote from: bilsu on September 08, 2014, 08:16:07 PM
We were 9-6 in the Big East. The wheels came off at the end with two of the games being double overtime losses. The inability to win close games is what did last year's team in.
Im not sure the wheels were ever on. Blew it against SDSU arizona st NEWMexico
Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on September 08, 2014, 01:09:15 PM
I was watching that game with my dad. He has coached for close to 30 years now and he was flummoxed when Burton was absent the second half. Called it one of the worst coaching decisions he's ever seen.
Not a terrible coaching decision at all if your objective is to lose the game. In fact, keeping Burton on the bench was about the best thing Buzz could do to ensure we lost, and essentially hasten his departure from MU.
Quote from: tower912 on September 08, 2014, 07:44:55 PM
Prior to his senior year, Jamil had hit big shots. MSG. Davidson game.
Funny how that worked when he had serviceable guards around him...
Quote from: Ners on September 08, 2014, 10:45:06 PM
Funny how that worked when he had serviceable guards around him...
So Blue made him better but Gardner didn't?
Quote from: MU82 on September 08, 2014, 07:51:05 PM
That's a great point about Lockett. I freely admit to being one of those wondering why he was getting so much playing time. BUT ...
By midseason, I really started appreciating Lockett and could see exactly what he brought and why Buzz liked him. Any intelligent fan could see it by then. And we were winning, thanks in great part to Lockett. So in that case, Buzz made a decision, stuck with it because he felt it would be the right thing long-term, stuck with it more because it worked, and the whole team benefited.
Compare that to last season. By midseason, it became obvious that a certain player was at best a 10-15 mpg guy. And we were losing, thanks in great part to the shortcomings of a certain player. So in that case, Buzz made a decision, stuck with it because he felt he had to for some reason, stuck with it more despite it being an unmitigated disaster, and the whole team paid the price.
I have nothing against quirky coaching ... as long as it works. Good coaches have the ability to recognize when something isn't working and try something. Anything. Even change for the sake of change.
OK, I'm done with this now. Don't want to start sounding like another poster or three who beat a subject to death.
You're not wrong at all.
Buzz isn't infallible, and he needed to figure out how to get more production out of the PG position. I think that's totally fair.
I'm just saying in general, fans liked Buzz's rotations when they were winning (me included), but then certain fans call him an idiot and say he's one of the worst in D1 after 1 bad season. He wasn't doing anything different last season. Same guy. Same theories. Same quirkiness. He didn't forget how to coach. His decisions just didn't work out. It happens.
Quote from: Johnny Basketball on September 08, 2014, 09:02:10 PM
Im not sure the wheels were ever on. Blew it against SDSU arizona st NEWMexico
We also had key players out or playing through severe illness in two of those three games, and we still barely lost.
If they had played/been 100%, and IF we had won those two games, the season might have turned our far differently.
They didn't, we didn't and the season was what it was. We weren't that far away from a respectable season...we really weren't. Despite all the BS about Buzz suddenly becoming stupid/trying to throw games.
Back to being underdogs.
I accept it!
Quote from: PistolPete on September 08, 2014, 10:26:59 AM
Well, unlike last year, you'd presume Coach will have his five best players on the court.
If you mean "most talented per recruting rankings," I will remind you that those are the players that don't have a great deal of experience.
Quote from: tower912 on September 09, 2014, 05:13:11 AM
So Blue made him better but Gardner didn't?
Anybody would have made Jamil (and Gardner) better last season than Derrick Wilson and Jake Thomas at the Guard position. Buzz threw away the senior years of our two best players by being a horses a$$ and playing two scrubs more minutes than any other players on the team. As I've said before - there is a reason Jamil and Davante didn't have 1 word of thanks for Buzz on Senior Day, while thanking every other coach and support staff. Wouldn't surprise me for a bit if they both went to Buzz and asked him to change the backcourt...and he wouldn't/didn't...and it continued to make it a miserable senior year for them and the team.
Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on September 09, 2014, 10:13:20 AM
If you mean "most talented per recruting rankings," I will remind you that those are the players that don't have a great deal of experience.
How do you get experience? By getting playing time! There is no doubt in my mind that we could have rolled out our freshman for big minutes last year and do no worse than what we witnessed on the court by our experienced players. Buzz checked out and had no vested interest in giving them the playing time they should have received.
Quote from: Wojo'sMojo on September 09, 2014, 08:28:15 PM
How do you get experience? By getting playing time! There is no doubt in my mind that we could have rolled out our freshman for big minutes last year and do no worse than what we witnessed on the court by our experienced players. Buzz checked out and had no vested interest in giving them the playing time they should have received.
+1.
There really is no rebuttal. Thankfully Sultan didn't choose to try to come up with a lame one. But as we were told last season by Sultan and a handful of others...things could have gotten much worse if we played the freshman. LOL. Right. We missed the NI freaking T.
Quote from: Ners on September 09, 2014, 07:53:10 PM
Anybody would have made Jamil (and Gardner) better last season than Derrick Wilson and Jake Thomas at the Guard position. Buzz threw away the senior years of our two best players by being a horses a$$ and playing two scrubs more minutes than any other players on the team. As I've said before - there is a reason Jamil and Davante didn't have 1 word of thanks for Buzz on Senior Day, while thanking every other coach and support staff. Wouldn't surprise me for a bit if they both went to Buzz and asked him to change the backcourt...and he wouldn't/didn't...and it continued to make it a miserable senior year for them and the team.
Jamil had the ball plenty. Even played PG quite a bit.
He sucked.
He was supposed to be our senior leader and our best player coming back, but he didn't take charge.
He was soft, passive and ineffective. He was the single biggest disapointment because he has talent and he wasted it. Gardner was largely able to overcome our bad guards and still contribute a lot offensively. Jamil failed.
I find it pretty humorous, Ners, that you can defend what Jamil did last season but you attack Blue every chance you get. Blue was a superduperstar in his last year at MU compared to what Jamil did his last year at MU.
Quote from: MU82 on September 09, 2014, 11:26:55 PM
Jamil had the ball plenty. Even played PG quite a bit.
He sucked.
He was supposed to be our senior leader and our best player coming back, but he didn't take charge.
He was soft, passive and ineffective. He was the single biggest disapointment because he has talent and he wasted it. Gardner was largely able to overcome our bad guards and still contribute a lot offensively. Jamil failed.
I find it pretty humorous, Ners, that you can defend what Jamil did last season but you attack Blue every chance you get. Blue was a superduperstar in his last year at MU compared to what Jamil did his last year at MU.
Dam straight
Alright guys...Which one if you updated Brents Wikipedia page?
Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on September 10, 2014, 12:31:24 AM
Alright guys...Which one if you updated Brents Wikipedia page?
Lol, seems to be spot on to me!
Quote from: Johnny Basketball on September 09, 2014, 11:36:38 PM
Dam straight
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/CataractDam.JPG/220px-CataractDam.JPG)
Quote from: MU82 on September 09, 2014, 11:26:55 PM
Jamil had the ball plenty. Even played PG quite a bit.
He sucked.
He was supposed to be our senior leader and our best player coming back, but he didn't take charge.
He was soft, passive and ineffective. He was the single biggest disapointment because he has talent and he wasted it. Gardner was largely able to overcome our bad guards and still contribute a lot offensively. Jamil failed.
I find it pretty humorous, Ners, that you can defend what Jamil did last season but you attack Blue every chance you get. Blue was a superduperstar in his last year at MU compared to what Jamil did his last year at MU.
So why was Jamil soft, passive and ineffective as a senior - when even his detractors last year (Tower) have said he was clutch as a junior? Jamil hit virtually just as many clutch shots down the stretch as Vander did in the Elite 8 season. Vander had a few signature games - Butler comes to mind. He wasn't a super duper star at all his last year at MU. He was a good college guard. Was he even 1st team All Big East?
Blue always had the benefit of playing around very talented guys at every other position on the floor - in every one of his years. What Gardner and Jamil got to play around last season was a joke...and it didn't have to be. I mean really Buzz? Starting lineup of Derrick, Jake, Juan, Jamil, Otule? Gee 82 - you are an opposing coach, who are you trying to take away?
Leadership and taking charge can't overcome, being on the floor with 4 totally inept offensive players around you. That's what is damn straight.
Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on September 10, 2014, 12:31:24 AM
Alright guys...Which one if you updated Brents Wikipedia page?
I know! I know! Only one user here has touched that IP address. I won't tell though.
Quote from: Ners on September 10, 2014, 08:09:29 AM
Jamil hit virtually just as many clutch shots down the stretch as Vander did in the Elite 8 season.
Keep telling yourself that, keep revising history.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on September 10, 2014, 08:06:16 PM
I know! I know! Only one user here has touched that IP address. I won't tell though.
Someone with those skills should update Bill Scholl's wiki page.
Quote from: MU82 on September 09, 2014, 11:26:55 PM
Jamil had the ball plenty. Even played PG quite a bit.
He sucked.
He was supposed to be our senior leader and our best player coming back, but he didn't take charge.
He was soft, passive and ineffective. He was the single biggest disapointment because he has talent and he wasted it. Gardner was largely able to overcome our bad guards and still contribute a lot offensively. Jamil failed.
I find it pretty humorous, Ners, that you can defend what Jamil did last season but you attack Blue every chance you get. Blue was a superduperstar in his last year at MU compared to what Jamil did his last year at MU.
Jamil was placed in a bad position by having to try and become a point guard part way through his senior year. Another thing in a list of crap Buzz blew last year. It was a disservice to Jamil who deserved to play his natural position in his senior year. Of course he didn't play well at the point....he's not a point. Seemed to throw his whole year off even after they gave up on the idea. Jamil got screwed!
I believe MU will be a better offensive team this year and will have more ability to get steals, which will lead to fast breaks. I also believe they will be worse at defense and rebounding. Until someone steps up to show they can hit the clutch shot, we will again have trouble winning close games.