1. First half, my wife of 25 years looks up and says "Wow. I cannot remember the last time I heard you swearing at the refs." 'nuf said.
2. Markus, I believe. No fear. On your way to adding your name to the pantheon of great MU point guards.
3. This was the kind of rebounding game I have been afraid of all year.
4. Duane, I know you didn't score much and missed a couple of dagger shots. Damn, it was nice to have you back tonight. But quit committing dumb, ego fouls. And don't pass the ball to Heldt ever again.
5. A simple thing with a lead down the stretch. Make free throws, win game. Role reversal on free throws tonight and it cost MU.
6. Wojo should have used a timeout earlier. My only complaint about him tonight.
7. Heldt actually played good defense on DelGado. Give the kid props. He stepped up when so many other wouldn't. Active, aggressive, playing without fear.
8. After blowing that late lead, with Fischer and Hauser fouled out, there was no way MU would win in OT. And yet.....
9. Holding leads is apparently a thing this year. How do you hold leads? Have an upperlassman step up and grab the game by the throat.
10. KR was too open and double clutching on his 3's tonight. Weird. Don't think. Shoot.
11. In the end, just enough. Which is enough.
I will be very happy if we don't have to play them again this year.
Is Seton Hall the best rebounding team in the conference? I hope so because I don't want to see anything like that again.
JJJ is absurdly talented and just as absurdly frustrating
Fish with a good game, nice to see him bounce back
Haani was also having a nice bounce back, then seemed to lose it again
Howard fantastic yet again
Katin's FT and offense board made up for that horrid 3 attempt
Obviously Heldt's best game to date at MU
I'm assuming Heisy won't read this thread
What's happenin' fellas, hey?
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 11, 2017, 08:36:52 PM
Is Seton Hall the best rebounding team in the conference? I hope so because I don't want to see anything like that again.
Well they have 2 of the top 3 individual players
SH 27 offensive rebounds, MU 10. That will change with Cain, John, Froling and Hauser. Sam in foul trouble hurt the stats.
KR really hurt team in regulation with taking that three and missing front end, only second miss of year. But made the big ones in OT
Best free throw shooting team and they almost blew it tonight.
JJJ, after two dumb errors, sat last like 10 minutes of regulation. Duane got most minutes, but JJJ with huge three in OT.
Rowsey sat second half on, Howard played a lot and he is a cool customer.
Great win, but have to resolve the big lead keeping. No clue as to why this is happening, can't use the team is young excuse.
Crean sucks
Quote from: jesmu84 on January 11, 2017, 08:38:51 PM
I'm assuming Heisy won't read this thread
He will blame Wojo for JjJ's lackluster performance and offer the two made shots in overtime as proof that Wojo has ruined him. Only he will do it 1000 times.
Quote from: DJOs Jaw on January 11, 2017, 08:35:24 PM
I will be very happy if we don't have to play them again this year.
+1.
Super happy with the result of this one though.
And LOL @ Wojo's floor slap!
Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 08:31:47 PM
1. First half, my wife of 25 years looks up and says "Wow. I cannot remember the last time I heard you swearing at the refs." 'nuf said.
2. Markus, I believe. No fear. On your way to adding your name to the pantheon of great MU point guards.
3. This was the kind of rebounding game I have been afraid of all year.
4. Duane, I know you didn't score much and missed a couple of dagger shots. Damn, it was nice to have you back tonight. But quit committing dumb, ego fouls. And don't pass the ball to Heldt ever again.
5. A simple thing with a lead down the stretch. Make free throws, win game. Role reversal on free throws tonight and it cost MU.
6. Wojo should have used a timeout earlier. My only complaint about him tonight.
7. Heldt actually played good defense on DelGado. Give the kid props. He stepped up when so many other wouldn't. Active, aggressive, playing without fear.
8. After blowing that late lead, with Fischer and Hauser fouled out, there was no way MU would win in OT. And yet.....
9. Holding leads is apparently a thing this year. How do you hold leads? Have an upperlassman step up and grab the game by the throat.
10. KR was too open and double clutching on his 3's tonight. Weird. Don't think. Shoot.
11. In the end, just enough. Which is enough.
Howard seems comfortable scoring or facilitating. It's nice.
I know it probably wasn't in the gameplan/playcall... but why did we have Haani shooting so many FTs at the end of regulation? You have Howard, Rowsey, Katin...90%+ guys
tower's (and my) worries of DR% realized tonight, but without a loss.. whew. We held a huge 55% to 46% eFG% edge. Survived thanks to our shooting.
KR, HC need to clear their minds... we'll need them to knock down big shots.
Markus 2 NBA.. if this helps people recognize one of my skills, great, but my happiness regarding him is his play and demeanor and actions on and off the court. I said it before he hit the court, but we're so fortunate to have him at MU. Good grief. So special.
Thought Matthew on defense held his own in OT - great job. Offense.. guys need to understand they can't flip 'hot' passes to him.
Rowsey - 3 mins.. what's the story? Strictly a Markus and matchup issue?
Quote from: nyg on January 11, 2017, 08:40:17 PM
SH 27 offensive rebounds, MU 10. That will change with Cain, John, Froling and Hauser. Sam in foul trouble hurt the stats.
KR really hurt team in regulation with taking that three and missing front end, only second miss of year. But made the big ones in OT
Best free throw shooting team and they almost blew it tonight.
JJJ, after two dumb errors, sat last like 10 minutes of regulation. Duane got most minutes, but JJJ with huge three in OT.
Rowsey sat second half on, Howard played a lot and he is a cool customer.
Great win, but have to resolve the big lead keeping. No clue as to why this is happening, can't use the team is young excuse.
JJJ scored and gave up 5 points in OT. Bad defense (outside of steals) continues with him
Rowsey couldn't handle the press well. And Howard was playing extremely well
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 08:41:16 PM
tower's (and my) worries of DR% realized tonight, but without a loss.. whew. We held a huge 55% to 46% eFG% edge. Survived thanks to our shooting.
KR, HC need to clear their minds... we'll need them to knock down big shots.
Markus 2 NBA.. if this helps people recognize one of my skills, great, but my happiness regarding him is his play and demeanor and actions on and off the court. I said it before he hit the court, but we're so fortunate to have him at MU. Good grief. So special.
Thought Matthew on defense held his own in OT - great job. Offense.. guys need to understand they can't flip 'hot' passes to him.
Rowsey - 3 mins.. what's the story? Strictly a Markus and matchup issue?
Howard was playing too good to take off the floor. And, yes, this team is going to have to pass the ball to Heldt like Buzz's team did to Otule. When you have made eye contact and he is set. But, the kid sacked up. Hard to be critical.
Can anyone tell me why we didn't try to attack once breaking the press? More than a few times we had 4 on 3 after Howard passed through the press, only to have the other guard hold-up.
Also: F the announcers for straight up dissing MU when they said this game was a must win for SHU because MU is at the bottom of the table. At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 08:41:16 PM
tower's (and my) worries of DR% realized tonight, but without a loss.. whew. We held a huge 55% to 46% eFG% edge. Survived thanks to our shooting.
KR, HC need to clear their minds... we'll need them to knock down big shots.
Markus 2 NBA.. if this helps people recognize one of my skills, great, but my happiness regarding him is his play and demeanor and actions on and off the court. I said it before he hit the court, but we're so fortunate to have him at MU. Good grief. So special.
Thought Matthew on defense held his own in OT - great job. Offense.. guys need to understand they can't flip 'hot' passes to him.
Rowsey - 3 mins.. what's the story? Strictly a Markus and matchup issue?
Did you watch yet?
Rowsey against the press looked like a blind man on roller skates.
It was bad.
Other guys all handled it great
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 08:41:16 PM
Rowsey - 3 mins.. what's the story? Strictly a Markus and matchup issue?
Couldn't bring the ball up effectively under pressure. But yeah, thought he'd get a few minutes in the 2H.
Rineharts quick three off the miss added 30 secs to the game. Just enuff time for seton hall to get back into it. A really horrible decision make or miss. Similar to duane wilsons game losing 3 aginst belmont last year
Quote from: jutaw22mu on January 11, 2017, 08:43:58 PM
Also: F the announcers for straight up dissing MU when they said this game was a must win for SHU because MU is at the bottom of the table. At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.
That was Brian Anderson. He seems to hate every Wisconsin team
Last game with SHU Heldt was the only one banging Delgado. he plays bigger than Fischer on D
Not only did SHU have 27 offensive rebounds...Marquette only had 23 defensive rebounds. That is terrible.
Markus played probably 40 minutes, 22 points, six assists, NO turnovers.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 11, 2017, 08:49:00 PM
Not only did SHU have 27 offensive rebounds...Marquette only had 23 defensive rebounds. That is terrible.
Markus played probably 40 minutes, 22 points, six assists, NO turnovers.
Assuming Markus is a four year player I'm having trouble imaging how good he is going to be. So impressive.
I'm satisfied.
We got a floor slap out of Wojo.
That is all.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 11, 2017, 08:54:23 PM
Assuming Markus is a four year player I'm having trouble imaging how good he is going to be. So impressive.
If less than a four year player, he would be even better.
Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 08:31:47 PM
4. Duane, I know you didn't score much and missed a couple of dagger shots. Damn, it was nice to have you back tonight. But quit committing dumb, ego fouls. And don't pass the ball to Heldt ever again.
5. A simple thing with a lead down the stretch. Make free throws, win game. Role reversal on free throws tonight and it cost MU.
4. Please, Duane, do not shoot 3's. 27% and they are usually not even close. On the other hand, I have a lot more respect for him after tonite's game. Coming off a bad groin, he was the 1st warrior willing to go to the floor to fight for a loose ball. Showed a ton of guts tonight.
5. FT% doesn't matter. Sorry, I couldn't resist. FT% was the ONLY THING that mattered for SH tonite.
Quote from: brandx on January 11, 2017, 09:02:32 PM
5. FT% doesn't matter. Sorry, I couldn't resist. FT% was the ONLY THING that mattered for SH tonite.
No, it's fine. No need to apologize. Idiots like you only prove my point further.
#mubb 54.8% eFG%, Seton Hall 45.8% eFG%. Therefore, Marquette won.
eFG% reigns supreme. Open your eyes.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:13:04 PM
No, it's fine. No need to apologize. Idiots like you only prove my point further.
#mubb 54.8% eFG%, Seton Hall 45.8% eFG%. Therefore, Marquette won.
eFG% reigns supreme. Open your eyes.
I think we saw tonight that dR% can have an impact, too.
Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 09:14:30 PM
I think we saw tonight that dR% can have an impact, too.
Impact? Sure. Reign supreme? Nah.
...and my response was to a guy that said SH's FT's were responsible for the game's outcome. NO.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:19:45 PM
Impact? Sure. Reign supreme? Nah.
...and my response was to a guy that said SH's FT's were responsible for the game's outcome. NO.
No one stat is responsible for a game's outcome. Maybe stating the obvious.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=400919677
I am not as wedded to the eFG% as JB, but I also cannot deny there is a strong correlation.
Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 09:25:00 PM
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=400919677
I am not as wedded to the eFG% as JB, but I also cannot deny there is a strong correlation.
There's also a strong correlation between scoring more points than the other team and winning. But hey, I"m no stats guy :)
More seriously, of course eFG% reigns supreme. It gets the heaviest weighting (40%) of the 4 factors. And is it any surprise that the the team who has more points often has the highest eFG%? I'm so tired of this "point" being made.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:13:04 PM
No, it's fine. No need to apologize. Idiots like you only prove my point further.
#mubb 54.8% eFG%, Seton Hall 45.8% eFG%. Therefore, Marquette won.
eFG% reigns supreme. Open your eyes.
54.8% means nada if SH is an average shooting FT team. They still would have had a 45.8% eFG% and won. They lost because they missed too many FTs.
My argument with you is not over the use of advanced stats - they tell us way, way, way more than the traditional stats. It is the belief that they are the only thing that matters that I disagree with. Sometimes, really, all you have to do is watch the game to know why a team won or lost.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 11, 2017, 09:21:35 PM
No one stat is responsible for a game's outcome. Maybe stating the obvious.
Correlation of eFG% advantage is enormous compared to any other. You're either not familiar with the facts, or... well, I won't say it.
Let's go this way with it.. I've preached this for many years... but.. this season.. in MU games.. the team with the best eFG% has won what percent of games? What other stat can you say the same, or better, for?
Answer my questions, and you will learn.
Quote from: brandx on January 11, 2017, 09:27:31 PM
54.8% means nada if SH is an average shooting FT team. They still would have had a 45.8% eFG% and won. They lost because they missed too many FTs.
My argument with you is not over the use of advanced stats - they tell us way, way, way more than the traditional stats. It is the belief that they are the only thing that matters that I disagree with. Sometimes, really, all you have to do is watch the game to know why a team won or lost.
Go into a psych ward. You're stupid and/or mentally ill. If you think that game was decided by FT%, you're out of your flipping mind.
Quote from: brandx on January 11, 2017, 09:27:31 PM
54.8% means nada if SH is an average shooting FT team. They still would have had a 45.8% eFG% and won. They lost because they missed too many FTs.
That's not why they lost.
Quote from: jutaw22mu on January 11, 2017, 08:43:58 PM
At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.
That's what I like to hear ... from you and everybody else!
Welcome to the light side of the Force.
BTW, Seton Hall shot a higher FT% tonight than their season average.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:28:51 PM
Correlation of eFG% advantage is enormous compared to any other. You're either not familiar with the facts, or... well, I won't say it.
Let's go this way with it.. I've preached this for many years... but.. this season.. in MU games.. the team with the best eFG% has won what percent of games? What other stat can you say the same, or better, for?
Answer my questions, and you will learn.
I didn't say eFG% wasn't an extremely important and indicative stat. I merely said it is not the only one to look at.
Don't be such a condescending douche.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:28:51 PM
this season.. in MU games.. the team with the best eFG% has won what percent of games? What other stat can you say the same, or better, for?
Points scored?
Quote from: jutaw22mu on January 11, 2017, 08:43:58 PM
Also: F the announcers for straight up dissing MU when they said this game was a must win for SHU because MU is at the bottom of the table. At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.
Was at the game and didn't hear that. Wow.
Quote from: MuEagle1090 on January 11, 2017, 09:48:16 PM
Was at the game and didn't hear that. Wow.
They said that Seton Hall viewed it as a must win. It really wasn't that insulting.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 11, 2017, 09:43:51 PM
I didn't say eFG% wasn't an extremely important and indicative stat. I merely said it is not the only one to look at.
Don't be such a condescending douche.
I merely said eFG% reigns supreme (extremely important and indicative). Consider what you replied to.
The hypocrisy is unreal and an apology is in order.
Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 08:31:47 PM2. Markus, I believe. No fear. On your way to adding your name to the pantheon of great MU point guards.
No way this kid's only 17. He played like a senior tonight.Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 08:31:47 PM3. This was the kind of rebounding game I have been afraid of all year.
I'm still stunned about this. Seton Hall's 27 offensive boards is staggering. But we still found a way to win. I'll take good shooting over poor shooting and awesome offensive rebounding any day. Winning the turnover battle 19-12 doesn't hurt, either.Quote from: tower912 on January 11, 2017, 08:31:47 PM11. In the end, just enough. Which is enough.
Glad to be at 2-2 in conference. 8 more wins to go.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:29:50 PM
Go into a psych ward. You're stupid and/or mentally ill. If you think that game was decided by FT%, you're out of your flipping mind.
I may be stupid. I may be crazy.
But at least I am not a condescending jerk.
Quote from: brandx on January 11, 2017, 09:55:42 PM
I may be stupid. I may be crazy.
But at least I am not a condescending jerk.
Congrats, dipsh1t!
How was Delgado shooting 80% from the FT line at one point tonight, when he is a career 50% FT shooter?
Statistic irregularities are unprecedented until they inevitably happen.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:49:54 PM
I merely said eFG% reigns supreme (extremely important and indicative). Consider what you replied to.
The hypocrisy is unreal and an apology is in order.
And I didn't disagree with you. I just said it's not the one and only stat to consider
Agreed - I'll be waiting for your apology for being a condescending douche. :)
Quote from: rocky_warrior on January 11, 2017, 09:26:31 PM
There's also a strong correlation between scoring more points than the other team and winning. But hey, I"m no stats guy :)
More seriously, of course eFG% reigns supreme. It gets the heaviest weighting (40%) of the 4 factors. And is it any surprise that the the team who has more points often has the highest eFG%? I'm so tired of this "point" being made.
Please don't forget the importance of the will to win and bellyfire.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 11, 2017, 10:02:02 PM
And I didn't disagree with you. I just said it's not the one and only stat to consider
Agreed - I'll be waiting for your apology for being a condescending douche. :)
Look back at the thread. nooope
Hey Jay Bee,
Pre-season I recall you saying reducing our TO% would be one of the keys to improving this season, with a particular call out on the importance of this for Haanif. How rare is it to see the kind of huge improvement he has made over the prior year?
Seton Hall had 8 more field goal attempts (71) than Marquette (63), yet we still made 2 more field goals for the game. Offensive rebounds aren't nearly as valuable if you can't put them in the basket. Seton Hall further reduced the value of those 27 offensive boards by turning the ball over 19 times (to just 12 for MU).
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 10:05:53 PM
Look back at the thread. nooope
I did. Your initial response was condescending and douchey. Nothing more to talk about.
Quote from: TSmith34 on January 11, 2017, 10:08:14 PM
Hey Jay Bee,
Pre-season I recall you saying reducing our TO% would be one of the keys to improving this season, with a particular call out on the importance of this for Haanif. How rare is it to see the kind of huge improvement he has made over the prior year?
It's a great question and his improvement that you recognize is so important. His eFG% is down to 48.6% after an impressive 54.3% last year. His usage is similar year over year, but the offensive efficiency is up to 113 vs. 101 last year because of the turnover rate...24.4% last year, an impressive 13.4% this year. He takes the same % of shots while on the floor.. puts the ball on the floor a lot... but that turnover rate has dropped.
To me, Haanif presents an opportunity to this team.. where he's performed vs. where he CAN perform. His focus has probably (and as should be) more on defense and defensive rebounding.. and he's been good on the D-boards.
Definitely in conference play there are concerns. Something seems off.
But, to your question, the decline in his TO% is very important. MU's TO rate is 17.0% of about #60 in the nation this year (18.5% in conf) vs 20.0% and #292 last year (20.7% in conf). Our offense is wonderful. His has improved. Defense is a challenge. His has improved.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 11, 2017, 10:13:09 PM
I did. Your initial response was condescending and douchey. Nothing more to talk about.
You interjected yourself into a conversation that you had nothing to do with to opine. FOH.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 11, 2017, 09:30:01 PM
That's not why they lost.
Of course it is not the only reason they lost - but when you miss 40% of your FTs (and there were lots of fouls called on MU) in what turns out to be a one possession game, it is flat out ignorant to say it has no effect.
Quote from: brandx on January 11, 2017, 10:26:43 PM
Of course it is not the only reason they lost - but when you miss 40% of your FTs (and there were lots of fouls called on MU) in what turns out to be a one possession game, it is flat out ignorant to say it has no effect.
When it's less than a point, it means you also must point out every single empty possession, and then some
I see the stats. So tell me if I'm crazy. But our rebounding woes tonight seemed more like them being extremely good at rebounds than us being bad at them. Maybe I'm crazy but I thought Luke was being a lot more aggressive on the glass tonight.
Also, at lease in the first half, Marquette played the best help defense I have seen all season.
I really like Heldt. He understands that basketball is a contact sport.
Quote from: jesmu84 on January 11, 2017, 08:41:02 PM
Howard seems comfortable scoring or facilitating. It's nice.
I know it probably wasn't in the gameplan/playcall... but why did we have Haani shooting so many FTs at the end of regulation? You have Howard, Rowsey, Katin...90%+ guys
I believe Hanni's FT% is like 84%, so he's not to shabby either, although last night.....
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 11, 2017, 11:12:35 PM
I see the stats. So tell me if I'm crazy. But our rebounding woes tonight seemed more like them being extremely good at rebounds than us being bad at them. Maybe I'm crazy but I thought Luke was being a lot more aggressive on the glass tonight.
Also, at lease in the first half, Marquette played the best help defense I have seen all season.
That is a really good point. Very few complaints about the defense.... until the shot went up. No one has even mentioned the defense. And Matt's was really good in OT.
Quote from: jesmu84 on January 11, 2017, 08:43:54 PM
Can anyone tell me why we didn't try to attack once breaking the press? More than a few times we had 4 on 3 after Howard passed through the press, only to have the other guard hold-up.
Excellent question. Wojo commented earlier in the season that we should welcome the press because it is a chance to attack the defense, but that sure ain't the way they are going about it.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:34:51 PM
BTW, Seton Hall shot a higher FT% tonight than their season average.
Yeah! They did that when we played them there too. Why is that?
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 12, 2017, 06:30:23 AM
Yeah! They did that when we played them there too. Why is that?
We need to get an assistant to specialize in FT defense.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 12, 2017, 06:30:23 AM
Yeah! They did that when we played them there too. Why is that?
It was a marginal difference. Maybe we should look into what DePaul is doing, they held them to 50% from the line.
If anything was shown tonight, it's the importance of eFG%. We lost free throw rate (much of the game they had made more than we had shot despite a pedestrian percentage) and got slaughtered on the boards. We did win the turnover margin, though that's no surprise considering they extended 17 more possessions via the offensive glass than we did, giving them more chances to turn it over.
But that eFG% made the difference. It kept us in when we were getting soundly beat in other categories. And anyone mentioning FT%, all I can say is LOL. Seton Hall shot 61.8% at the line. Above their average, but terrible, and those free throws kept them in it. It wasn't the percentage, it was getting to the line. We shot 71.4%, nearly 10 percentage points higher, and almost 10% below our season average, and still won the game. Free throw percentage is pretty much meaningless. This game proves it.
During one of the timeouts they showed on TV, Wojo was exhorting his players to look for the opportunistic offensive rebound, as SHU wasn't blocking out. What does KR do a few minutes later? Amazing what happens when you do what the coach tells you.
Quote from: tower912 on January 12, 2017, 07:07:43 AM
During one of the timeouts they showed on TV, Wojo was exhorting his players to look for the opportunistic offensive rebound, as SHU wasn't blocking out. What does KR do a few minutes later? Amazing what happens when you do what the coach tells you.
I thought we weren't allowed to make judgments based on TV huddle segments.
In all seriousness good game - they really needed this one....let's go get Depaul
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 08:41:16 PM
Thought Matthew on defense held his own in OT - great job. Offense.. guys need to understand they can't flip 'hot' passes to him.
I have seen this posted a few times related to this game. I watched the game on TV and this was less Matt and more Duane and from Duane's reaction I think he agreed. The pass came as Duane was moving to the middle of the paint after Heldt was posting towards the wing. Duane throws a no look hot pass from 7-8 ft away that runs parallel to matt's shoulders as he is starting to move in for a rebound.
Personally, I think Matt is showing vast improvement game over game year over year. He still has a few struggles but he is starting to play within his body. Hopefully, we see him break out (for him) next year.
Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on January 12, 2017, 07:25:41 AM
I thought we weren't allowed to make judgments based on TV huddle segments.
In all seriousness good game - they really needed this one....let's go get Depaul
I hope we take them seriously; if we drop this one we could be 2-6 after our first 8 games.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 12, 2017, 07:32:55 AM
I hope we take them seriously; if we drop this one we could be 2-6 after our first 8 games.
Thanks, eeyore.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 12, 2017, 07:32:55 AM
I hope we take them seriously; if we drop this one we could be 2-6 after our first 8 games.
There are no trap games, if the next game is the most important of the season.
Quote from: jutaw22mu on January 11, 2017, 08:43:58 PM
Also: F the announcers for straight up dissing MU when they said this game was a must win for SHU because MU is at the bottom of the table. At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.
Fantastic ta have smart broads on dis board who can aren't too priss ta cuss, hey?
Quote from: TSmith34 on January 11, 2017, 10:08:14 PM
Hey Jay Bee,
Pre-season I recall you saying reducing our TO% would be one of the keys to improving this season, with a particular call out on the importance of this for Haanif. How rare is it to see the kind of huge improvement he has made over the prior year?
Not Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.
Considering various 2/3 players for Marquette over the years:
- Vander Blue: Fr 22.3 / So 23.0 / Jr 18.6
- Darius Johnson-Odom: So 18.1 / Jr 15.3 / Sr 15.8
- Jerel McNeal: Fr 29.1 / So 25.5 / Jr 19.5 / Sr 17.1
- Wes Matthews: Fr 23.3 / So 20.9 / Jr 16.3 / Sr 16.0
Not a big list, I know. Some guys just stay kind of static (Jimmy and Jae were always exceptional at TORate, some like Mayo and Jamil were always just kind of average) while others wait until their senior year to see the most improvement (Novak and Gardner), but when it came to wings, it usually seemed like if a big jump was in the making, it was usually from sophomore to junior years.
Of everyone I looked at, Cheatham's 11 percentage point jump is the biggest single-year improvement. The closest to that was Gardner's 8.7% improvement from his junior to senior years. Now granted, I only looked at a handful of Marquette players over the past 10-15 years, so my sample size is pretty small, but I am willing to wager that while Cheatham's improvement may not be historic level type stuff, it's still way above the norm.
Quote from: tower912 on January 12, 2017, 07:07:43 AMDuring one of the timeouts they showed on TV, Wojo was exhorting his players to look for the opportunistic offensive rebound, as SHU wasn't blocking out. What does KR do a few minutes later? Amazing what happens when you do what the coach tells you.
On a slightly related note, there was one timeout where Wojo was so upset, he smashed his white board on his lap and someone from the staff had to get him a new one. My seats are in the upper deck, so I couldn't hear anything he was saying — but would have loved to be in that huddle. I don't think anybody can accuse Wojo of a lack of passion.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 12, 2017, 07:56:54 AMNot Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.
Considering various 2/3 players for Marquette over the years:
- Vander Blue: Fr 22.3 / So 23.0 / Jr 18.6
- Darius Johnson-Odom: So 18.1 / Jr 15.3 / Sr 15.8
- Jerel McNeal: Fr 29.1 / So 25.5 / Jr 19.5 / Sr 17.1
- Wes Matthews: Fr 23.3 / So 20.9 / Jr 16.3 / Sr 16.0
Not a big list, I know. Some guys just stay kind of static (Jimmy and Jae were always exceptional at TORate, some like Mayo and Jamil were always just kind of average) while others wait until their senior year to see the most improvement (Novak and Gardner), but when it came to wings, it usually seemed like if a big jump was in the making, it was usually from sophomore to junior years.
Of everyone I looked at, Cheatham's 11 percentage point jump is the biggest single-year improvement. The closest to that was Gardner's 8.7% improvement from his junior to senior years. Now granted, I only looked at a handful of Marquette players over the past 10-15 years, so my sample size is pretty small, but I am willing to wager that while Cheatham's improvement may not be historic level type stuff, it's still way above the norm.
Great post. Hannif has been a difference-maker. Some, however, will look only at his scoring average or shooting percentage and give him (or the coaching staff) no credit for improving his game.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 12, 2017, 07:36:53 AM
Fantastic ta have smart broads on dis board who can aren't too priss ta cuss, hey?
I know you are still stuck in the 60s but broad has moved out of favor as an appropriate term for women.
Quote from: brandx on January 11, 2017, 10:26:43 PM
Of course it is not the only reason they lost - but when you miss 40% of your FTs (and there were lots of fouls called on MU) in what turns out to be a one possession game, it is flat out ignorant to say it has no effect.
You said: "They lost because they missed too many FTs."
Now you say: "Of course it is not the only reason they lost."
So which is it?
And no one said "it had no effect." Everything has an effect. The issue is how big of an effect in the grand scheme of things
Quote from: jutaw22mu on January 11, 2017, 08:43:58 PM
Also: F the announcers for straight up dissing MU when they said this game was a must win for SHU because MU is at the bottom of the table. At the end of the year MU will be above SHU on the table.
Marquette is the bottom of the table until they prove otherwise. Three years in this conference and they haven't done a damn thing to say otherwise. You don't magically get respect, you have to earn it.
That said, I believe that this team is starting to earn it. Keep shoring up the defense and it will be even more fun.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 09:57:38 PM
Congrats, dipsh1t!
Jaybee, I think everyone here really appreciates your insights and contribution to this board.
But I don't understand why you always have to stoop to insults. You do it so quickly. Relax, brotha.
Quote from: Marcus92 on January 12, 2017, 08:09:34 AM
Great post. Hannif has been a difference-maker. Some, however, will look only at his scoring average or shooting percentage and give him (or the coaching staff) no credit for improving his game.
I agree.
I think those that are down on HC point to that he hasn't improved his shot-making ability.
He still only uses his left-hand and still has no mid-range game.
But, these things take time. He has had several nice assists over the last few games off of his drive, which was something he didn't do last year. It is something the coaches have stressed with him and shows he is putting in the work needed.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 12, 2017, 08:47:04 AM
You said: "They lost because they missed too many FTs."
Now you say: "Of course it is not the only reason they lost."
So which is it?
And no one said "it had no effect." Everything has an effect. The issue is how big of an effect in the grand scheme of things
It's both. Seems simple enough to understand.
If Markus hits a buzzer beater the next game, it will be the reason the game is won. That is why the term "game-winner" is used. I would hope that anybody hearing that "Markus hit the game winner" would be smart enough not to discount whatever happened in the previous 39:59 and how all players on the floor affected the outcome.
A simple comparison is Malcolm Butler's interception in the Super Bowl. It was the reason that NE won. If he doesn't make THAT play, they lose . That does not mean that the rest of the game and every play preceding the interception didn't affect the outcome.
I have no argument with any of JB's stats. What I differ with is that a stat tells you
everything you need to know.
Quote from: Marcus92 on January 12, 2017, 08:04:07 AM
On a slightly related note, there was one timeout where Wojo was so upset, he smashed his white board on his lap and someone from the staff had to get him a new one. My seats are in the upper deck, so I couldn't hear anything he was saying — but would have loved to be in that huddle. I don't think anybody can accuse Wojo of a lack of passion.
One thing I've noticed, and maybe it's because we are a better team, but I feel Wojo has been much better with his body language on the sidelines this year compared to when he started. He would be very demonstrative when we did something negatively. He still does it, but far less frequently and expressive.
I always thought that may have had a negative impact on the team. He is still demonstrative in positive ways and usually one of the first to meet the players on their way to the huddle to fire them up or on a big possession. One of the non x&os way I think he's grown as a coach since he started.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 12, 2017, 07:56:54 AM
Not Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.
Thanks Brew. Great information, that was what I was wondering about.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 12, 2017, 06:59:28 AM
Free throw percentage is pretty much meaningless. This game proves it.
I will defer to you, JB and the rest of the analytics guys.
Yet even if I 100% agree that FT pct is a meaningless stat, I sure would have liked to have seen Haani ice the game at the end of regulation by making 2 FTs.
Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?
Quote from: MU82 on January 12, 2017, 10:27:59 AM
I will defer to you, JB and the rest of the analytics guys.
Yet even if I 100% agree that FT pct is a meaningless stat, I sure would have liked to have seen Haani ice the game at the end of regulation by making 2 FTs.
Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?
I agree. And I understand the point that rate is much more important than make rate -- it's the old "make more free throws than the other team shoots" Buzzism. But for end of game situations, it sure is nice having three guys making them at greater than 93%, and JJJ and HC ('cpet last night) have excellent averages as well.
Quote from: MU82 on January 12, 2017, 10:27:59 AM
I will defer to you, JB and the rest of the analytics guys.
Yet even if I 100% agree that FT pct is a meaningless stat, I sure would have liked to have seen Haani ice the game at the end of regulation by making 2 FTs.
Us "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?
Here is how I usually put it.
It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.
However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose. The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 12, 2017, 10:32:52 AM
Here is how I usually put it.
It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.
However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose. The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.
EDIT:
Mostly agree with your perspective. FTR is about 5% important. It matters in close games, like, say, a five-minute overtime period.
SHU shot 3-8 in OT from the charity stripe. Free throws were important last night in the OT win.
Also, the FTR stats for the OT period were MU at 200% and SHU at 133%. Sample size, but also more substantial when the OT rates are 4x a season average. Well, MU also shot 63% eFG% in OT and won the TO battle decisively.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C1-wNzNXEAAb1a9.jpg)
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 12, 2017, 10:32:52 AM
Here is how I usually put it.
It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.
However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose. The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.
WRecency bias? When a guy misses 2 FTs with 16 seconds to go and the other team then score to tie the game and put it into OT. I guess I would put that into a realm well beyond "recency bias". Sure, yopu could say MU should have played better defense in those final 16 seconds, but.......
Quote from: MU82 on January 12, 2017, 10:27:59 AMUs "old-schoolers" are allowed to say that without being told how stupid we are, right?
You'd always rather make them than miss them, and individual free throws can be incredibly important to the outcome of a game that is decided by one or two points. The reason the percentage is meaningless isn't because of individual outcomes, but rather because of statistical significance.
If FT percentage over the course of the game mattered, Marquette should have won handily with a 10% edge in free throws. Hell, if we played to form, we shoot 20% better on the year than SHU from the stripe, so it shouldn't be even close.
Where free throws matter is how frequently you get to the line. Whether you're a great free throw shooting team like we are or terrible like SHU, getting to the line is still offensively efficient. When MU gets two free throws in a trip, they average 1.618 ppp, which is great. When SHU gets two free throws, they average 1.222 ppp. Even though SHU is terrible at the line, if they were averaging 1.222 ppp this season, they would have a top-5 offense.
So free throw percentage, not so important. Getting to the line, however, is important. It's a big part of why they stayed with us last night, holding a 24-12 edge in free throw attempts until the final minute of regulation. Doesn't matter that we outshot them percentage wise at the line, their raw number of attempts overwhelmed us. In a similar fashion, their offensive rebounds gave them 8 more shot attempts than we had, so even though we killed them in eFG%, their sheer volume of attempts kept it close.
At the end of the game, when you're tied, or leading by 1-3 points at the line, can a single free throw swing the balance? Absolutely. However of far more importance is what happened to get to that point, and team FT% over the course of a season or game has virtually no impact on those snapshot moments (as evidenced by 82.7% FT shooter Haanif Cheatham going 3/6 at the stripe in the final minute).
Quote from: Nukem2 on January 12, 2017, 10:38:08 AM
WRecency bias? When a guy misses 2 FTs with 16 seconds to go and the other team then score to tie the game and put it into OT. I guess I would put that into a realm well beyond "recency bias". Sure, yopu could say MU should have played better defense in those final 16 seconds, but.......
Recency bias. Plays made toward the end of the game are considered more crucial in people's minds even though in the grand scheme of things it made up only a small portion of the game played.
Haanif's missed free throws may have been the most *recent* reason the game went into overtime, but over the course of the game it was a pretty small reason.
Another indicator why free throw percentage doesn't matter, but free throw rate does. This season, Marquette has made 80.9% of their free throws, which is 3rd in the country, and scored 241 points in 16 games, an average of 15.06 ppg. Seton Hall has made 61.1% of their free throws, which is 340th in the country, and scored 239 points in 16 games, an average of 14.94 ppg. Despite being a MUCH better team at the line, we score virtually the same amount because what matters isn't the percentage, but how often you get there.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 12, 2017, 10:40:55 AM
Recency bias. Plays made toward the end of the game are considered more crucial in people's minds even though in the grand scheme of things it made up only a small portion of the game played.
Haanif's missed free throws may have been the most *recent* reason the game went into overtime, but over the course of the game it was a pretty small reason.
It's not just recency bias - it's whether you believe in clutch/choke in key situations. I'm doubtful (but open) that some people actually get better (clutch) in key situations, but I'm convinced that many get worse (choke).
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 12, 2017, 10:53:33 AM
Another indicator why free throw percentage doesn't matter, but free throw rate does. This season, Marquette has made 80.9% of their free throws, which is 3rd in the country, and scored 241 points in 16 games, an average of 15.06 ppg. Seton Hall has made 61.1% of their free throws, which is 340th in the country, and scored 239 points in 16 games, an average of 14.94 ppg. Despite being a MUCH better team at the line, we score virtually the same amount because what matters isn't the percentage, but how often you get there.
Yeah, I heard coach K many time mention he wants his team to make more FT than the other team Attempts.
Quote from: Dr. Vinnie Boombatz on January 12, 2017, 10:32:52 AM
Here is how I usually put it.
It is always better to hit free throws than not hit free throws.
However over the course of a game, free throw percentage is NOT usually a reason why teams win or lose. The end of the game stuff is highlighted due to recency bias, but there are much more important factors throughout a game that lead to teams winning or losing.
Once again, I agree with you - over the course of the game.
But, FT% factors in very highly in end of game situations - it is quite often why a team wins or loses a game. I'm sure if JB ran his same stats for only the last 3 minutes, those stats would show a different result.
We could say a turnover is a turnover - that a TO in the middle of the 1st half is just as important as a TO when your team is down by 1 point with 10 seconds remaining. Stat-wise, they are identical. We all know better.
Quote from: brandx on January 12, 2017, 01:18:57 PM
Once again, I agree with you - over the course of the game.
But, FT% factors in very highly in end of game situations - it is quite often why a team wins or loses a game. I'm sure if JB ran his same stats for only the last 3 minutes, those stats would show a different result.
We could say a turnover is a turnover - that a TO in the middle of the 1st half is just as important as a TO when your team is down by 1 point with 10 seconds remaining. Stat-wise, they are identical. We all know better.
But it doesn't and last night proves it. Cheatham went to the line shooting 82.7% on the season coming into that final minute and went 3/6. How does free throw percentage matter there? If free throw percentage mattered, he'd have gone 5/6 and we walk out winners in regulation. Did that happen? No, we all know better.
And to the turnover point, so a turnover with 10 seconds remaining, trailing by 1, when the opponent doesn't score after is more important than the first half turnover that results in a made three at the other end? One cost you zero points, one cost you three. Tell me, which had more impact on the game?
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 11, 2017, 10:21:25 PM
You interjected yourself into a conversation that you had nothing to do with to opine. FOH.
Yes, it sure must be stunning that someone would comment on a piece of a conversation on a public internet message board. That never happens.
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 12, 2017, 02:30:31 PM
Yes, it sure must be stunning that someone would comment on a piece of a conversation on a public internet message board. That never happens.
He's the old man in the neighborhood yelling to get off his lawn - conveniently forgetting that parks are made out of grass. For people to walk and play on.
Maybe he's got his precious stats laying all over the grass and doesn't want them stepped on.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 12, 2017, 07:56:54 AM
Not Jay Bee, but what's impressed me isn't just the degree of improvement by Haanif (24.4% last year, 13.4% this year), but when he did it. Improving by 11% is massive, especially with no real change in usage. However most of the players I've looked back at don't see their improvements until their junior year.
The improvement is impressive. I will point out however is that Haani changed positions from last year where he played PG in a major conference, a position he never played in his life. These others played the same position year to year. While the usage % is comparable, the context isn't.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 12, 2017, 10:40:18 AM
You'd always rather make them than miss them, and individual free throws can be incredibly important to the outcome of a game that is decided by one or two points. The reason the percentage is meaningless isn't because of individual outcomes, but rather because of statistical significance.
If FT percentage over the course of the game mattered, Marquette should have won handily with a 10% edge in free throws. Hell, if we played to form, we shoot 20% better on the year than SHU from the stripe, so it shouldn't be even close.
Where free throws matter is how frequently you get to the line. Whether you're a great free throw shooting team like we are or terrible like SHU, getting to the line is still offensively efficient. When MU gets two free throws in a trip, they average 1.618 ppp, which is great. When SHU gets two free throws, they average 1.222 ppp. Even though SHU is terrible at the line, if they were averaging 1.222 ppp this season, they would have a top-5 offense.
So free throw percentage, not so important. Getting to the line, however, is important. It's a big part of why they stayed with us last night, holding a 24-12 edge in free throw attempts until the final minute of regulation. Doesn't matter that we outshot them percentage wise at the line, their raw number of attempts overwhelmed us. In a similar fashion, their offensive rebounds gave them 8 more shot attempts than we had, so even though we killed them in eFG%, their sheer volume of attempts kept it close.
At the end of the game, when you're tied, or leading by 1-3 points at the line, can a single free throw swing the balance? Absolutely. However of far more importance is what happened to get to that point, and team FT% over the course of a season or game has virtually no impact on those snapshot moments (as evidenced by 82.7% FT shooter Haanif Cheatham going 3/6 at the stripe in the final minute).
Sounds like you guys are all trying to argue with me - but I am not arguing your points.
My point was that making or missing free throws late decides a lot of games. Missing 2 free throws is not the same when it happens at the end of the game as opposed to happening in the 1st half of a game - even though, statistically, it all goes into the same bag.
Stats don't tell the entire story.
Quote from: brandx on January 13, 2017, 12:25:46 AM
Sounds like you guys are all trying to argue with me - but I am not arguing your points.
My point was that making or missing free throws late decides a lot of games. Missing 2 free throws is not the same when it happens at the end of the game as opposed to happening in the 1st half of a game - even though, statistically, it all goes into the same bag.
Stats don't tell the entire story.
Actually, I wasn't talking to you at all there, that was specifically addressed to 82, and also wasn't meant to be argumentative.
However you specifically said this:
Quote from: brandx on January 12, 2017, 01:18:57 PMBut, FT% factors in very highly in end of game situations - it is quite often why a team wins or loses a game.
That's patently false. If FT% decided games, Cheatham would've gone 5/6 and we win in regulation. He didn't. And as mentioned by others, those one point shot misses are less impactful on the outcome than the 40 or so empty possessions we had in the rest of the game from turnovers and missed field goals.
I would suggest you read the entirety of the post you quoted. Particularly the last paragraph. I really don't think I'm arguing with you at all, however I do think you're guilty of some poor word choices that undermine your argument.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 12, 2017, 07:19:41 PM
The improvement is impressive. I will point out however is that Haani changed positions from last year where he played PG in a major conference, a position he never played in his life. These others played the same position year to year. While the usage % is comparable, the context isn't.
Agreed, it certainly is to his benefit to have two bona fide PGs to bring the ball up the court and not be tasked as much with starting the offense