The Wisconsin game was a Top 10 defensive efficiency stinker over the past sixteen seasons. Worse than the Kansas Final 4 game.
JayBee brought this up earlier this season: Marquette's 2FG defense. I looked back at MU's last eight games versus Top 60 teams and saw a same pattern as we saw yesterday versus Wisky: High opponent 2FG%. Over those eight games, opponents shot 185-297 or 62.2%. MU is 2-6 in those games. After half time adjustments, even Fresno figured out the weakness of this defense where they shot 65% on twos in the 2nd half.
A good defense builds from the baseline out. Wojo's builds from the perimeter in. This flaw is a pattern, fix it please.
It's not like they aren't trying. Washington or Nichols would've looked great on this roster but neither worked out. We have bigs coming next year, but it won't happen overnight.
I still think the biggest question is why they saw Reinhardt as a fit. Next year's class looks like lesson learned, but Reinhardt's addition makes you wonder if it really is.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 11, 2016, 10:52:45 AM
It's not like they aren't trying. Washington or Nichols would've looked great on this roster but neither worked out. We have bigs coming next year, but it won't happen overnight.
I still think the biggest question is why they saw Reinhardt as a fit. Next year's class looks like lesson learned, but Reinhardt's addition makes you wonder if it really is.
I do not think they saw it as a fit, but an opportunity to take a very good player that was dropping into their lap.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 11, 2016, 10:52:45 AM
I still think the biggest question is why they saw Reinhardt as a fit. Next year's class looks like lesson learned, but Reinhardt's addition makes you wonder if it really is.
Maybe they thought someone was leaving? Otherwise its questionable where the fit was.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 11, 2016, 09:23:42 AM
A good defense builds from the baseline out. Wojo's builds from the perimeter in. This flaw is a pattern, fix it please.
This.
Additionally many of the errors in D are coachable - Time to hire a consultant if we dont have the staff at the end of the bench to ID the issues and correct the players.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 11, 2016, 10:52:45 AM
It's not like they aren't trying. Washington or Nichols would've looked great on this roster but neither worked out. We have bigs coming next year, but it won't happen overnight.
I still think the biggest question is why they saw Reinhardt as a fit. Next year's class looks like lesson learned, but Reinhardt's addition makes you wonder if it really is.
Yet they had HE last year and it was the same issue. Wojo is a system guy, and he doesn't have the players to play his defensive system (yet). So, at some point, you need to adjust until you do as the eight game streak vs. Top 60 teams shows.
You never, ever give up the baseline. Period.
Back in the day, if you did, you ran laps till you puked.
Never, ever.
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 11, 2016, 12:48:24 PM
You never, ever give up the baseline. Period.
Back in the day, if you did, you ran laps till you puked.
Never, ever.
Yo, Chili sooo true.But, could you dunk?
Marquette efense. No d.
And Eonte
Quote from: bilsu on December 11, 2016, 11:53:04 AM
I do not think they saw it as a fit, but an opportunity to take a very good player that was dropping into their lap.
Honestly I think this is it. We had two scholarships to fill and Reinhardt was a very good player at USC. I think you take the good player when you can get him. I still think his offensive rating progresses towards the mean this season. Not sure about his defense. He looks like a good defender to me but he has the third worst defensive rating on the team.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on December 11, 2016, 03:21:13 PM
Honestly I think this is it. We had two scholarships to fill and Reinhardt was a very good player at USC. I think you take the good player when you can get him. I still think his offensive rating progresses towards the mean this season. Not sure about his defense. He looks like a good defender to me but he has the third worst defensive rating on the team.
He's an average defender but is forced to spend a fair amount of time guarding bigger guys...which turns him into a below average defender.
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 11, 2016, 12:48:24 PM
You never, ever give up the baseline. Period.
Back in the day, if you did, you ran laps till you puked.
Never, ever.
Damn straight and then, after you puked, you ran again and again and again.
Then you had Al busting your chops. Sometimes literally
Quote from: Newsdrms on December 11, 2016, 02:10:20 PM
Yo, Chili sooo true.But, could you dunk?
It's well documented.
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 11, 2016, 12:48:24 PM
You never, ever give up the baseline. Period.
Back in the day, if you did, you ran laps till you puked.
Never, ever.
That is the "old school" way. They now teach (more often than not) to funnel to baseline and rotate over with help rather than give up middle. Our big guys don't rotate quickly enough and when they do, the others with their help as well. Teams that pass well and share end of killing you.
Quote from: Freeport Warrior on December 11, 2016, 03:47:00 PM
That is the "old school" way. They now teach (more often than not) to funnel to baseline and rotate over with help rather than give up middle. Our big guys don't rotate quickly enough and when they do, the others with their help as well. Teams that pass well and share end of killing you.
Close out the baseline, help in the middle.
And follow your shot too.
Oh, and while I'm at it, box out...that's why God gave you an a$$.
I know there are a lot of contributing factors, but if you could pick and only one as the main reason this defense sucks, what would you pick?
-Talent issue
-Staff can't coach defense
-Defensive system sucks
-Players can't figure it out
-Mystery other
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 11, 2016, 12:46:00 PM
Yet they had HE last year and it was the same issue. Wojo is a system guy, and he doesn't have the players to play his defensive system (yet). So, at some point, you need to adjust until you do as the eight game streak vs. Top 60 teams shows.
Next year we'll start to have those guys when we add Cain, John, and Eke. Come 2018-19 I think we'll have the players, the length, and the athleticism to play the way Wojo wants to play. I think he is sticking with his style now because he wants guys like Hauser, Howard, Cheatham, Carter, and Heldt, all of whom will be key members of that team, to be schooled in this style of play rather than just putting a band-aid on for now. I think he has a lot more comfort than Buzz ever did, which is why he can keep drilling this style that will pay off in 2-3 years rather than changing the system annually to suit the talent. I understand the logic that sticking with man will help these kids become better defenders in the future, but it does make it harder to stomach now.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 11, 2016, 12:46:00 PM
Yet they had HE last year and it was the same issue. Wojo is a system guy, and he doesn't have the players to play his defensive system (yet). So, at some point, you need to adjust until you do as the eight game streak vs. Top 60 teams shows.
I want to agree with this, and I'm not anti-Wojo guy, but I think we're still waiting to see what his system is. Can you describe it?
And, I like the idea of a system, but I also like the idea of a coach who adapts his defense to his players (in this case, figuring out how to deal with Fischer in the pick-and-roll) and makes more definitive in-game adjustments.
Quote from: mu03eng on December 11, 2016, 04:02:22 PM
I know there are a lot of contributing factors, but if you could pick and only one as the main reason this defense sucks, what would you pick?
-Talent issue
-Staff can't coach defense
-Defensive system sucks
-Players can't figure it out
-Mystery other
Lack of frontcourt depth. The guys we do have are terrified of picking up fouls so they offer token (at best) resistance.
Quote from: mu03eng on December 11, 2016, 04:02:22 PM
I know there are a lot of contributing factors, but if you could pick and only one as the main reason this defense sucks, what would you pick?
-Talent issue
-Staff can't coach defense
-Defensive system sucks
-Players can't figure it out
-Mystery other
Start a poll, bro. Start a poll
Here is a good article that explains the Duke defense and how to break it down.
http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/devils-in-the-details/
Quote from: mu03eng on December 11, 2016, 04:02:22 PM
I know there are a lot of contributing factors, but if you could pick and only one as the main reason this defense sucks, what would you pick?
-Talent issue
-Staff can't coach defense
-Defensive system sucks
-Players can't figure it out
-Mystery other
1.Size up front.
2.Lack of lateral quickness, almost across the board.
3.Scheme that fails to take these things into account.
4. All players not on the same page. Some stand at the foul line after being picked. Some slide down and help in the lane. Some follow the ball.
We're very good at the fun part (offense) of basketball and very bad at the work part (defense). Long on talent, short on effort.
If we're being honest, this team is a fairly easy read. Insanely good shooting abilities; flawed roster (inside size/strength/paint & rim protection d).
If we're shooting like we can, can compete with anybody.
Unfortunately, the d is poor & the amount of open looks & more importantly uncontested or very lightly contested shots at the rim may often dictate that we must burn the nets offensively to have a chance.
74.2% = unblocked at the rim shooting for our opponents... 30% of their attempts are at the rim. Both of those improving would go along way to help our d (nh)
But, giving up interior points should be a surprise. We knew the roster was flawed coming in
Surprises: just HOW great our shooting is & out def reb (thanks JjJ, Sam, Haanif, etc for stepping up!)
Need to get hot at the right times. 11-7 is possible. 7-11 is possible. Entertainment is guaranteed
Just watched the game.
Defense is severely lacking. We know this.
But I thought Katin showed something on Saturday, and I don't mean just threes (finally).
He played angry. He played physical. He played with passion.
I wouldn't be surprised if he starts over JJJ, who just can't seem to bring it defensively.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on December 11, 2016, 05:40:39 PMHere is a good article that explains the Duke defense and how to break it down.
http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/devils-in-the-details/ (http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/devils-in-the-details/)
Thanks for the link. There are only so many ways to guard the pick and roll. In most cases, Luke isn't quick enough to switch and defend the ball handler rolling to the basket (usually a guard or small forward). That's not unusual; how many big men can guard smaller, quicker players? Wojo has a few options:
1) Luke sticks close to his man (the screener) and doesn't offer any help defending the ball handler. The on-ball defender goes under the screen and picks up the ball handler rolling to the basket. A couple risks here. Good shooters can use the screen to step back for a three or jumper. Or they can use the screen to get a quick step on the way to the basket and draw contact on the drive. Other defenders may need to help.
2) Luke can hedge right as the screen takes place, sliding out to move the ball handler away from the path to the hoop. Once the on-ball defender picks up the ball handler again, Luke can recover to his man. The risk is that Luke or the on-ball defender don't react quickly enough — a breakdown that opens all kinds of offensive options.
3) As the screener comes to set a pick, Luke can trap or double-team the ball handler with the on-ball defender. The intent is to get the offense out of rhythm. The risk is the screener cutting to the basket undefended.
There are other variants, of course. But good man-to-man defense with Luke hedging isn't a complicated concept. It shouldn't be beyond this team. I think it's more an issue of execution — recognizing the screen, communicating what's happening and who should be doing what, then hustling to get in the right position. Hopefully that's something the team can improve on. And soon.
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 11, 2016, 03:36:40 PM
It's well documented.
But a bit sketchy on the details. For instance, did you favor the Glazed Cruller or the Chocolate Iced when dunking.
Man-to-man defense is simple in concept (guard your man) but is difficult to execute (go around a screen or switch).
Some of the best defense I can recall was the Amigos... those guys had this intuition about them that not only did each of them seemingly know immediately whether they were going to switch or not, their partner knew exactly what they were doing most of the time too. That's the problem I've seen with MU's defense over the last few years... our players are not committing to/against the switch when the pick is set, and that momentary indecision is all it takes to freeze their partner and allow for an open lane (or look). Rarely did the Amigos let someone open on a pick... sometimes the best decision was to switch into a big mismatch, but even having Dominique in Hibbert's or Harangody's face (read: crotch) was much more effective defensively than watching those guys hang on the rim.
Unfortunately, intuition cannot be taught. But what's even more unfortunate is that the alternative - zone - requires even more intuition to be effective at the D-I level.
Part of this is likely a matter of emphasis. We see Wojo pull players out of the game after a turnover or a bad shot. What about sitting someone after a blown assignment or not helping soon enough? I expect a lot more emphasis on defense after the Wisconsin debacle.
Quote from: Marcus92 on December 12, 2016, 11:30:25 AM
Part of this is likely a matter of emphasis. We see Wojo pull players out of the game after a turnover or a bad shot. What about sitting someone after a blown assignment or not helping soon enough? I expect a lot more emphasis on defense after the Wisconsin debacle.
Why do you think WI is the magic inflection point? The defensive mistakes have been the same all year.
Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 12, 2016, 11:49:09 AM
Why do you think WI is the magic inflection point? The defensive mistakes have been the same all year.
I don't know that it will be, but this is a good opportunity for it to happen. 2 games in 18 days is a lot of practice time to work on the kinks. I'd imagine defense will be the focus.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on December 12, 2016, 11:53:49 AM
I don't know that it will be, but this is a good opportunity for it to happen. 2 games in 18 days is a lot of practice time to work on the kinks. I'd imagine defense will be the focus.
I agree, have to try something different. Al played man mostly, but since Bernard Toone could not play D, they played a zone against NC and won a championship.
Bernard played zone in high school and never learned how to guard a sole. But great shooter, much like Sam.
Quote from: Marcus92 on December 12, 2016, 11:30:25 AM
Part of this is likely a matter of emphasis. We see Wojo pull players out of the game after a turnover or a bad shot. What about sitting someone after a blown assignment or not helping soon enough? I expect a lot more emphasis on defense after the Wisconsin debacle.
Reinhardt got beat baseline pretty badly and Wojo pulled him right away. Personally, it is easier for me to see a turnover or bad shot versus blown defensive assignment. So he may be doing that and just tougher to tell.
Marquette's defense is like another oxymoron:
Pretty Ugly
Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on December 12, 2016, 11:49:09 AMWhy do you think WI is the magic inflection point? The defensive mistakes have been the same all year.
Because it wasn't just Marquette's worst defensive performance this season. As Dr. Blackheart pointed out, it was the worst in more than a decade. If that doesn't get the team's attention, I don't know what will.
Quote from: Marcus92 on December 12, 2016, 12:32:59 PM
Because it wasn't just Marquette's worst defensive performance this season. As Dr. Blackheart pointed out, it was the worst in more than a decade. If that doesn't get the team's attention, I don't know what will.
In addition, that was MU's last real test before BE play begins. MU has now played 5 games against "Power 6" schools on the season - a tourney team, a bubble team, 2 NIT teams and a bad Vandy team.
MU is 2-3 in those games and has allowed an average of 80 ppg, allowed at least 40 points in a half in all of those games and gave up 50+ points in a half twice. Those 5 opponents shot a combined 49.3% from the floor. That's awful defense.
Those are the games that should give us a decent idea of how MU will fair in conference play and it isn't looking good. I'm not ready to give up on the season but at this point, I'd be more surprised to see 10 BE wins than 10 BE losses.
Quote from: HoopsterBC on December 12, 2016, 12:00:26 PM
I agree, have to try something different. Al played man mostly, but since Bernard Toone could not play D, they played a zone against NC and won a championship.
Bernard played zone in high school and never learned how to guard a sole. But great shooter, much like Sam.
Zone would kill our offense and turn us from a surprisingly decent rebounding team into a bad rebounding team. Gotta make tweaks to the man to man.
Quote from: Marcus92 on December 12, 2016, 12:32:59 PM
Because it wasn't just Marquette's worst defensive performance this season. As Dr. Blackheart pointed out, it was the worst in more than a decade. If that doesn't get the team's attention, I don't know what will.
Makes sense & I hope for this as well.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 12, 2016, 12:54:57 PM
In addition, that was MU's last real test before BE play begins. MU has now played 5 games against "Power 6" schools on the season - a tourney team, a bubble team, 2 NIT teams and a bad Vandy team.
MU is 2-3 in those games and has allowed an average of 80 ppg, allowed at least 40 points in a half in all of those games and gave up 50+ points in a half twice. Those 5 opponents shot a combined 49.3% from the floor. That's awful defense.
Those are the games that should give us a decent idea of how MU will fair in conference play and it isn't looking good. I'm not ready to give up on the season but at this point, I'd be more surprised to see 10 BE wins than 10 BE losses.
If you go by KenPom's ranking of GAMES...
We are 1-2 in A games
We are 1-1 in B games
We are 5-0 in the rest
So you could say we go
4-7 in future A games
2-2 in future B games
5-0 in in the rest
That's 18-10, 9-9 in conf. That's right on the bubble which is right where we all thought we would be.
Quote from: The Lens on December 12, 2016, 01:18:27 PM
If you go by KenPom's ranking of GAMES...
We are 1-2 in A games
We are 1-1 in B games
We are 5-0 in the rest
So you could say we go
4-7 in future A games
2-2 in future B games
5-0 in in the rest
That's 18-10, 9-9 in conf. That's right on the bubble which is right where we all thought we would be.
That's actually 18-12 which would likely be on the back end of the bubble heading into the BET.
Regardless, I'll ask this question: What 4 "A Games" is MU going to win?
Quote from: The Lens on December 12, 2016, 01:18:27 PM
If you go by KenPom's ranking of GAMES...
We are 1-2 in A games
We are 1-1 in B games
We are 5-0 in the rest
So you could say we go
4-7 in future A games
2-2 in future B games
5-0 in in the rest
That's 18-10, 9-9 in conf. That's right on the bubble which is right where we all thought we would be.
Thanks for posting that Lens.
Looks like what I felt. I predicted 19-11. I see us getting a surprise win over someone in there.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 12, 2016, 01:33:50 PM
That's actually 18-12 which would likely be on the back end of the bubble heading into the BET.
Regardless, I'll ask this question: What 4 "A Games" is MU going to win?
I think we go 4-0 in B games and 2-9 in the A games. We get a W vs maybe butler and maybe one vs creighton?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 12, 2016, 01:33:50 PM
That's actually 18-12 which would likely be on the back end of the bubble heading into the BET.
Regardless, I'll ask this question: What 4 "A Games" is MU going to win?
I'm assuming the A games are 8 games vs. Butler, X, Nova, Creighton, then on the road vs. SHU, GT and PC?
If so I'll go....Butler at home. PC and Georgetown on the road. Then one of X and Creighton at home.
Also think we could win at SHU. any combination of 4 from those 6 games. Don't think we win at CU, at X, at Butler or either against Nova.
Quote from: The Lens on December 12, 2016, 01:18:27 PM
If you go by KenPom's ranking of GAMES...
We are 1-2 in A games
We are 1-1 in B games
We are 5-0 in the rest
So you could say we go
4-7 in future A games
2-2 in future B games
5-0 in in the rest
That's 18-10, 9-9 in conf. That's right on the bubble which is right where we all thought we would be.
besides the addition error that Merritt's pointed out I think it is a fair projection. I predicted 18-12 (9-9) at the beginning of the season and I'm sticking with that. I think stealing an extra B game is not totally outside the realm of possibility.
Quote from: Marcus92 on December 12, 2016, 12:32:59 PM
Because it wasn't just Marquette's worst defensive performance this season. As Dr. Blackheart pointed out, it was the worst in more than a decade. If that doesn't get the team's attention, I don't know what will.
That's not what Blackheart said. It was a Top 10 worst defensive game.
This game wasn't even the worst defensive effort for Wojo's MU teams.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 12, 2016, 02:25:21 PMThat's not what Blackheart said. It was a Top 10 worst defensive game.
This game wasn't even the worst defensive effort for Wojo's MU teams.
Whoops. Thanks for the correction. I was obviously scanning too fast.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 12, 2016, 02:25:21 PM
This game wasn't even the worst defensive effort for Wojo's MU teams.
So things are looking up!!!
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 12, 2016, 01:33:50 PM
That's actually 18-12 which would likely be on the back end of the bubble heading into the BET.
Regardless, I'll ask this question: What 4 "A Games" is MU going to win?
I look at it differently than the A/B games, and rather as there being three tiers in the league:
Tier 1: Villanova, Creighton, Butler
Tier 2: Xavier, Providence, Seton Hall
Tier 3: Georgetown, DePaul, St. John's
Go 6-0 against Tier 3, 3-3 against Tier 2, and 1-5 against Tier 1 and you get to 10 wins.
As far as A/B games, Tier 3 has one A game (@ GT) and two B games (GT, @ SJU). Tier 2 has four A games (XU, @ XU, @ SHU, @ PC). Tier 3 has six A games. I think we can beat Georgetown away, Xavier at home, and get 2/3 against Villanova, Creighton, and Butler at the BC.
MU will finish 7-11 in conference. The best wins will be two against either Providence, Xavier or Hall. There will also a loss against G-Town, DePaul or St John's.
You can't routinely give up 40-50 points a half in this league and expect to do much.
Quote from: Badgerhater on December 12, 2016, 03:25:19 PM
MU will finish 7-11 in conference. The best wins will be two against either Providence, Xavier or Hall. There will also a loss against G-Town, DePaul or St John's.
You can't routinely give up 40-50 points a half in this league and expect to do much.
i have confidence in wojo. I think this team will buy in to playing some D
Quote from: GoldenEagles32 on December 12, 2016, 03:58:50 PM
i have confidence in wojo. I think this team will buy in to playing some D
What gives you that confidence? I want to believe, but I'm not convinced he can get them to play the style he wants. If he can't, will he be able to switch to a style that they can/will do?
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 12, 2016, 03:18:10 PM
I look at it differently than the A/B games, and rather as there being three tiers in the league:
Tier 1: Villanova, Creighton, Butler
Tier 2: Xavier, Providence, Seton Hall
Tier 3: Georgetown, DePaul, St. John's
Go 6-0 against Tier 3, 3-3 against Tier 2, and 1-5 against Tier 1 and you get to 10 wins.
As far as A/B games, Tier 3 has one A game (@ GT) and two B games (GT, @ SJU). Tier 2 has four A games (XU, @ XU, @ SHU, @ PC). Tier 3 has six A games. I think we can beat Georgetown away, Xavier at home, and get 2/3 against Villanova, Creighton, and Butler at the BC.
I see 4 tiers personally
Tier 1: Creighton and Nova (Unbeatable)
Tier 2: Butler and Xavier (Good but beatable)
Tier 3: Seton Hall, Providence, Georgetown (Average but loseable)
Tier 4: St. John's and Depaul (Bad)
How I see us doing:
Tier 1: 0-4
Tier 2: 1-3
Tier 3: 4-2
Tier 5: 4-0
I think the jury is still out on Xavier and Butler. I feel 1-3 right now but I could see us stealing another game in there. We also seem to have Providence's number. If we can sweep them and Georgetown and steal one against Seton Hall, that would get us to 10.
I don't see us having a prayer to beat Nova or Creighton.
Unfortunately, I could see us dropping 1 to St. John's or Depaul. That happens and its over.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on December 12, 2016, 04:40:49 PM
Tier 1: Creighton and Nova (Unbeatable)
Unfortunately, I could see us dropping 1 to St. John's or Depaul. That happens and its over.
Creighton and Villanova are no more "unbeatable" for us than we are for DePaul and St. Johns.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 12, 2016, 04:59:22 PM
Creighton and Villanova are no more "unbeatable" for us than we are for DePaul and St. Johns.
I don't think either of them are unbeatable, maybe I'm a homer but I think we could steal one from either at home. That said, I think we will have a tougher time with Creighton. Just too strong inside with Patton and Huff. Villanova can be drawn into a three-point shooting contest. If we happen to be the hotter team beyond the arc, beating them is possible.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 12, 2016, 04:59:22 PM
Creighton and Villanova are no more "unbeatable" for us than we are for DePaul and St. Johns.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/Fjr6v88OPk7U4/giphy.gif)
Do I really need to spell out that by "unbeatable" I mean "they are very good and will beat us 9 out of 10 times."
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on December 12, 2016, 05:20:41 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/Fjr6v88OPk7U4/giphy.gif)
Do I really need to spell out that by "unbeatable" I mean "they are very good and will beat us 9 out of 10 times."
Well...to be fair, as we play them four times, that gives us about a 40% chance of getting a game off one of them.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/ToMjGpKniGqRNLGBrhu/giphy.gif)
Why don't we just fookin' chuck dis season and start da off season threads right now, hey?
Preseason, MU was picked for 7th place. Seems about right with their body of work so far. To hit the NCAAs, they need to hit 5th, which means team defense needs to improve markedly. In a span over the past two seasons, Wojo's teams haven't shown it can defend the paint versus Top 60 teams when in the man.
That is the most disconcerting, especially as his defense is designed to push the perimeter due to the unbalanced roster. The ability to recover and rotate is not there. Team defense is an attitude, but if protecting the paint is not the number one priority, you get a mediocre result, which is a shame with this offense.
"Who plays here? The toughest"
https://youtu.be/_nf7SuRwIfE
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 11, 2016, 12:48:24 PM
You never, ever give up the baseline. Period.
Back in the day, if you did, you ran laps till you puked.
Never, ever.
I know. I scream that every time we don't beat the man to the spot and pick up a bad foul.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 11, 2016, 04:06:29 PM
Next year we'll start to have those guys when we add Cain, John, and Eke. Come 2018-19 I think we'll have the players, the length, and the athleticism to play the way Wojo wants to play. I think he is sticking with his style now because he wants guys like Hauser, Howard, Cheatham, Carter, and Heldt, all of whom will be key members of that team, to be schooled in this style of play rather than just putting a band-aid on for now. I think he has a lot more comfort than Buzz ever did, which is why he can keep drilling this style that will pay off in 2-3 years rather than changing the system annually to suit the talent. I understand the logic that sticking with man will help these kids become better defenders in the future, but it does make it harder to stomach now.
THIS
... is also why Hauser was guarding Hayes. Not for this game, but for the experience he gains which will be valuable for the next 3.5 years.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on December 12, 2016, 04:40:49 PM
I see 4 tiers personally
Tier 1: Creighton and Nova (Unbeatable)
Tier 2: Butler and Xavier (Good but beatable)
Tier 3: Seton Hall, Providence, Georgetown (Average but loseable)
Tier 4: St. John's and Depaul (Bad)
How I see us doing:
Tier 1: 0-4
Tier 2: 1-3
Tier 3: 4-2
Tier 5: 4-0
I think the jury is still out on Xavier and Butler. I feel 1-3 right now but I could see us stealing another game in there. We also seem to have Providence's number. If we can sweep them and Georgetown and steal one against Seton Hall, that would get us to 10.
I don't see us having a prayer to beat Nova or Creighton.
Unfortunately, I could see us dropping 1 to St. John's or Depaul. That happens and its over.
I would swap DePaul and Gtown and MU would be in Tier 3 average but loseable.
MU currently ranks 5th in the conference right now. They are behind Nova, Creighton, X, and Butler. I place them in the same group as SHU, PC, and Georgetown. They are well ahead of SJU and DPU.
The defense is not good, but the offense is good enough to keep us in most games. The offense is currently at an elite level (top 20). MU has the profile of a team that *should* win their first NCAA game and *could* make the S16.
Also, since there is so much discussion of prediction, I'm working on some monte carlo simulations for the team. Pomeroy's switch to Adjusted Efficiency Margin rankings instead of pythagorean rankings means I have to redo the prediction model.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on December 12, 2016, 05:20:41 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/Fjr6v88OPk7U4/giphy.gif)
Do I really need to spell out that by "unbeatable" I mean "they are very good and will beat us 9 out of 10 times."
Nice "sigh" - an homage to Chico?
But seriously, we will be no more (likely less) of a home underdog to Nova and Creighton than DePaul and St. Johns will be to us.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on December 13, 2016, 08:38:53 AM
MU currently ranks 5th in the conference right now. They are behind Nova, Creighton, X, and Butler. I place them in the same group as SHU, PC, and Georgetown. They are well ahead of SJU and DPU.
The defense is not good, but the offense is good enough to keep us in most games. The offense is currently at an elite level (top 20). MU has the profile of a team that *should* win their first NCAA game and *could* make the S16.
Also, since there is so much discussion of prediction, I'm working on some monte carlo simulations for the team. Pomeroy's switch to Adjusted Efficiency Margin rankings instead of pythagorean rankings means I have to redo the prediction model.
When I read the words "Monte Carlo Simulation"
(http://a.fod4.com/misc/swansonsmile.gif)
Quote from: mu03eng on December 13, 2016, 10:25:58 AM
When I read the words "Monte Carlo Simulation"
(http://a.fod4.com/misc/swansonsmile.gif)
Hmmm.... MCSes makes me think of bacon, too. Get out of my head.