A year without Henry Ellenson equals a better team for MarquetteApril 5, 2016, Marquette forward
Henry Ellenson declared for the NBA draft. The extremely talented freshman was off to greener pastures and a Marquette basketball team that missed the NIT was left wondering what was next. Few blamed Ellenson for the decision, though many felt he wasn't ready, myself included. The draft was weak and this was his chance to earn serious money doing what he loves to do. He was slotted to be picked anywhere from 9th to 19th by the time draft day rolled around. My thoughts at the time were he would be unproductive this year in the NBA and probably even spend time in the D-League. I had interviewed
Jonathon Givony of DraftExpress and put those questions to him in May of last year.
The bigger question on the minds of Warrior fans was the void filled by Ellenson's departure. How does one replace that kind of talent and what on earth was Marquette going to do without him in Wojo's third season. The answer, you don't replace him and you get better in the process. Addition by subtraction. That statement is not meant to diminish the talents of Ellenson at all. The reality is the team too often deferred to Henry last year, and didn't grow as a result. Henry took the big shots, Henry got the rebounds, Henry played a lot of minutes, Henry was the face of the team on and off the court. Mostly this was by default, he was the one guy Wojo could rely on consistently.
Would a team this year with Howard, Hauser, Ellenson, Rowsey, Fischer, Wilson and Johnson be lights out? On paper, wow! In reality, I get the feeling guys that have grown so much this year would not have if that lineup were in place. Would the have overcome the urge to defer to the future NBA draft pick? Impossible to know for sure, fans can debate the what if scenarios.
As for Ellenson, he was drafted by the Detroit Pistons with the 18th overall pick. His first year has been one of struggles, not overly surprising to many of us. To date he has appeared in
14 NBA games and scored just 21 points with 12 rebounds in 56 total minutes. He has played more games, sixteen, for the Grand Rapids Drive of the D-League than for the Pistons. His
D-League stats are fairly impressive, averaging over 17 points and 9 rebounds per game. With time, Ellenson will get stronger, develop a better NBA body and hopefully become the player many hope he can become. Critics have already listed him and
others as potential busts, but it seems way to early at this point in his career to make that judgment.
In the end, it appears that the departure was a net positive for both parties. Henry is learning the ropes of professional basketball. Although he is struggling as rookies often do, the MU faithful are certainly hoping for major success for him.
He has enjoyed his first year in the NBA. For Wojo and the Warriors, a year of uncertainty and turned into a year where young guys have filled major roles and likely led this team back to the NCAA tournament for the first time since 2013. Sometimes things have a way of working themselves out just fine.
Source: A year without Henry Ellenson equals a better team for Marquette (http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2017/03/a-year-without-henry-ellenson-equals.html)
Henry Ellenson leaving Marquette is not why Marquette is a better basketball team.
We are a better and deeper basketball team than we were a year ago. Wojo has a year of coaching under his belt and the team is buying in. That's why we're better.
I believe, as I have said before, that the biggest hole in our team now is what we lack because Henry left. The inside power he gave us to rebound and defend (better this year, we hoped) and his scoring could have made us potentially a Top 10 team. His production might have taken away from other team members, but imagine for a moment what we would have been like if we had the scoring power we do now and our opponents had to defend inside against Henry.
We might have put up 150 points a night!
No one begrudges Henry for going after the money and the NBA. Like the author, I wasn't sure he was ready, but the money was there, so he made the right decision for himself. I hope he becomes an all-star and talks us up in the years ahead.
I read the headline and immediately thought 'Chicos'...sure enough
A fair opinion, but I personally thing HE made the young guys around him better by taking the pressure off - having opposing defenses key in on him. HC is a great example. HE made a flawed team much better.
Can you imagine the season HE would have had with some of the shooters this year? wow.
I watched Purdue play Northwestern yesturday. Swanigan was a beast. Add Ellenson to this team and we would be a final four contender.
The big question is would HE bought in to the offense and not hoisted up his own 3's, what was he a 28% guy??
Quote from: wadesworld on March 06, 2017, 06:42:27 AM
Henry Ellenson leaving Marquette is not why Marquette is a better basketball team.
^This
If Henry played within this teams identity and stopped taking the ball up and shooting 3s hen we'd be amazing. If he was still attempting to showcase himself then we would not be better.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on March 06, 2017, 07:51:39 AM
If Henry played within this teams identity and stopped taking the ball up and shooting 3s hen we'd be amazing. If he was still attempting to showcase himself then we would not be better.
This.
Quote from: bilsu on March 06, 2017, 07:03:03 AM
I watched Purdue play Northwestern yesturday. Swanigan was a beast. Add Ellenson to this team and we would be a final four contender.
Yup.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on March 06, 2017, 07:51:39 AM
If Henry played within this teams identity and stopped taking the ball up and shooting 3s hen we'd be amazing. If he was still attempting to showcase himself then we would not be better.
He did this because he had to. Look at who our next best offensive option was until the last 6 or 7 games of the regular season. The 2nd best scoring option last year can't even get on the floor this year. A tough Hank shot was a better option than an open perimeter shot for just about anybody last year.
Quote from: wadesworld on March 06, 2017, 07:57:41 AM
He did this because he had to. Look at who our next best offensive option was until the last 6 or 7 games of the regular season. The 2nd best scoring option last year can't even get on the floor this year. A tough Hank shot was a better option than an open perimeter shot for just about anybody last year.
Nothing you stated changes what I said. If he still wanted to showcase himself we'd be below average, if he played with the identity of this team we'd be fantastic.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on March 06, 2017, 08:04:04 AM
Nothing you stated changes what I said. If he still wanted to showcase himself we'd be below average, if he played with the identity of this team we'd be fantastic.
I don't know about below average, but we wouldn't be in better shape than we're in right now.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on March 06, 2017, 08:04:04 AM
Nothing you stated changes what I said. If he still wanted to showcase himself we'd be below average, if he played with the identity of this team we'd be fantastic.
I think you are both right. Henry absolutely had to be the man last year as the by far most talented man on an extremely inexperienced roster. There was no Markus, Rowsey, Katin, or Hauser to take pressure off him, and he carried us to far more wins than we would have had otherwise.
But if he still had the same usage this year while shooting 29% for 3P? Sure, we wouldn't be as good. IMO that wouldn't have happened with so many other good options drawing some of the focus off Henry. I suspect it would have only helped him, and he would greatly helped the team at the 4.
The only drawback would have been that Sam wouldn't have gotten the minutes he did, and perhaps that wouldn't have left us in as strong a position to recruit Joey as well.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on March 06, 2017, 07:51:39 AM
If Henry played within this teams identity and stopped taking the ball up and shooting 3s hen we'd be amazing. If he was still attempting to showcase himself then we would not be better.
This is exactly right. I tend to think we'd be better with him, but he would have had to accept a lesser offensive role. I'm not sure how willing he'd have been to do that.
Also, with Ellenson, Reinhardt would not be here. Would Henry make us that much better than Katin does? Different players for sure, but I'm not convinced he would.
Henry would have worked on his shot and wouldn't have had to shoot as much on this team. I'd be willing to bet that his 3p shooting% would have been in the high 30s. Would not be surprised if his raw scoring numbers went down. His rebounding and rim protection would have made us a top 20 team.
Good point about Sam, he just wouldn't have seen anywhere near the same number of minutes. And what about Reinhardt?
If Henry stayed, would Wojo have kept Wally on the team? Would we have gotten Harry Froling as a transfer, if we didn't have that 13th scholarship available to cover his second semester?
I like what Katin has brought to the table. But to suggest we're better with Katin this year than we would've been if a sophomore year Hank was on the roster instead is laughable.
Another guy whose development may have been hindered if Henry was here is Heldt.
I think it's important to realize that having Henry makes this a completely different team. Anyone thinking he wouldn't be our highest usage player is delusional. He'd also be our highest minutes played player, which would take minutes from Sam and Heldt. We wouldn't be as good a three point shooting team with him here.
We'd possibly be better from 2, likely be better rebounding, but wouldn't necessarily be any better defensively. I most likely think adding him would make us better, but it's really tough to say because the team wouldn't be remotely similar.
How ridiculous would this team be if Henry would have replaced Luke this year?
All 5 positions on the floor with the ability to hit the 3? That would be nasty.
... With that being said, Marquette is going to drive coaches crazy next year when we put Froling on the floor at the 5.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on March 06, 2017, 07:51:39 AM
If Henry played within this teams identity and stopped taking the ball up and shooting 3s hen we'd be amazing. If he was still attempting to showcase himself then we would not be better.
100% correct, Bags.
Quote from: brewcity77 on March 06, 2017, 09:07:06 AM
This is exactly right. I tend to think we'd be better with him, but he would have had to accept a lesser offensive role. I'm not sure how willing he'd have been to do that.
Brew, right on! This becomes coaching and whether Wojo was ready to call out what would have been our best player and make him play within our system would have been interesting. Would Wojo, for example, been willing to bench Henry for an extended period of time, like he has done with several of our "name" players if Henry loaded up a three at the wrong time or under the wrong circumstance? Or if he was out of position?
I think he would have. There is a maturity in him as a coach that I think is impressive that shows he is a take no prisoners guy. But reigning Henry in with a much more talented team this year would not have been easy.
Wasn't hanks defense at best, flat out horrible?
I can't remember him being a big defensive presence, but then again my memory is getting bad.
Quote from: blikemike2 on March 06, 2017, 07:04:02 AM
The big question is would HE bought in to the offense and not hoisted up his own 3's, what was he a 28% guy??
And where does Wally fit into this scenario?
I doubt we would have Katin if we still had Henry. Kind of an either/or, IMO. What we would have is size at the 4. I have now seen Henry up close 3 times this year in the NBDL. He has gotten more muscular. He takes fewer 3's, rarely forcing in the last two games. He is still pushed around by muscular 6'8 guys. And he has not improved at guarding 6'8 guys in space. So, if Henry were here, MU would have a legit stretch 4. Sam would have split time at the 3 and the 4. I doubt KR comes. I can think of a couple of games where is defensive rebounding would have made a difference. I can think of others where is poor 3 pt shooting would have been a problem. IMO, his absence has cost us 2 wins.
The guy would have been, by a pretty dang significant margin, our best player. Hands down.
If Henry stayed, my assumption is that Wally would have stayed as well and Katin wouldn't have been an option.
Wojo's strategy and game-planning would have been very different with Henry still in the fold. HE obviously would have been the focal point of the offense and MU, for better or worse, would not have had the same balance offensively. The big question would be whether HE's offensive usage was so high last season because it needed to be or because he was "showcasing his skills." If HE bought into the team-first, move-the-ball philosophy (not hard to believe), MU would have been a bear offensively, in addition to having a bigger team and a better rebounding team (especially when it comes to the easy boards).
In terms of other players' development, Hauser and Katin averaged a combined 52.5 min/gm this season (1496 total minutes, KR missed 3 games). You figure HE would get 34ish minutes which would have left about 18ish/game for Hauser, about 8 less than he averaged without HE. Then again, it's reasonable to believe that Hauser have also taken some of Heldt's 12.8 min/gm with HE being the only big on the floor during some stretches. With HE still around, I don't think Hauser's minutes would have decreased all that dramatically but Heldt potentially would have seen his minutes cut in half.
It should also be noted that KT and Hauser average a combined 15.3 FGA/gm. HE alone averaged 13.2 in his only season at MU. HE's shots may have decreased slightly but I don't see it dropping below 12. That likely means fewer shots for Hauser as well as guards like Rowsey and Howard. HE was not nearly as efficient a scorer as those guys so it's reasonable to believe that, despite adding a dynamic offensive player, MU's offensive would have been less efficient. Then again, if HE was surrounded by shooters, it's reasonable to believe that his efficiency would have increased at a decent clip.
In conclusion, I believe that the team would have been better with HE (not going out on a big limb there). A talent like HE could have made the difference in several hard luck losses this season, especially when MU hit an offensive drought or when it came down to hauling in a critical rebound. With HE, I picture MU being similar to Butler this season - 23-7, 2nd in the BE, a top 12-20 team for a bulk of the season and eyeing a 3-seed.
I would say his defense on the perimeter was bad. I wouldn't say in the paint it was horrible. He blocked shots. He rebounded. He altered shots. Yeah, if he is guarding essentially a 6'6"-6'7" super athletic Big East wing player on the perimeter he got beat just about every time.
Good discussion if we get KR or Froling if he stays. Does Wally stay and become another useless or limited hustle player? What influences Cohen and Carters decision to stay or go?
Myself, I think we are a better team with a huge presence of HE. Add to that the sniping ability of Rowsey, Howard, and Hauser. I guess this article makes me think would we be better with a front line of Fischer, Hauser . . . .or Fisher - 5, HE - 4, Hauser -3. I would take the latter.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on March 06, 2017, 01:26:06 PM
If Henry stayed, my assumption is that Wally would have stayed as well and Katin wouldn't have been an option.
Wojo's strategy and game-planning would have been very different with Henry still in the fold. HE obviously would have been the focal point of the offense and MU, for better or worse, would not have had the same balance offensively. The big question would be whether HE's offensive usage was so high last season because it needed to be or because he was "showcasing his skills." If HE bought into the team-first, move-the-ball philosophy (not hard to believe), MU would have been a bear offensively, in addition to having a bigger team and a better rebounding team (especially when it comes to the easy boards).
In terms of other players' development, Hauser and Katin averaged a combined 52.5 min/gm this season (1496 total minutes, KR missed 3 games). You figure HE would get 34ish minutes which would have left about 18ish/game for Hauser, about 8 less than he averaged without HE. Then again, it's reasonable to believe that Hauser have also taken some of Heldt's 12.8 min/gm with HE being the only big on the floor during some stretches. With HE still around, I don't think Hauser's minutes would have decreased all that dramatically but Heldt potentially would have seen his minutes cut in half.
It should also be noted that KT and Hauser average a combined 15.3 FGA/gm. HE alone averaged 13.2 in his only season at MU. HE's shots may have decreased slightly but I don't see it dropping below 12. That likely means fewer shots for Hauser as well as guards like Rowsey and Howard. HE was not nearly as efficient a scorer as those guys so it's reasonable to believe that, despite adding a dynamic offensive player, MU's offensive would have been less efficient. Then again, if HE was surrounded by shooters, it's reasonable to believe that his efficiency would have increased at a decent clip.
In conclusion, I believe that the team would have been better with HE (not going out on a big limb there). A talent like HE could have made the difference in several hard luck losses this season, especially when MU hit an offensive drought or when it came down to hauling in a critical rebound. With HE, I picture MU being similar to Butler this season - 23-7, 2nd in the BE, a top 12-20 team for a bulk of the season and eyeing a 3-seed.
This is good stuff, and I agree for the most part. Some of that dip in inefficiency would have been overridden by vastly superior rebounding. That said, most of the assumptions on what we would or would not have been are ignoring Fischer as part of the equation. HE's and Fisch's games did not complement each other, and one season of D-league ball suggests HE's 3-ball hasn't improved enough to play the stretch 4. That would have complicated this line-up, and our best lineup may have been w/ HE at the 5.
So it's a bit ebb and flow. We'd be better, but chemistry matters, so I don't know that we would have seen a full ROI with HE on this roster. I'd argue, we'd be in 5-seed land. with that team. All in all, I'm pleased with the platform this year's team has created for years to come.
What games do we probably lose with Hank on this team that we won without him? I don't think Xavier or Creighton in the form they were at when we played them would beat MU with or without Hank (or, more likely, trading Hank for Katin). We didn't beat Providence or Butler without him anyway. Maybe we lose to Nova at home. Georgia or Vandy? I think we still win those games. Georgetown at home, both DePaul games, St. John's at home? Don't see those having been losses. Seton Hall at home? Think we win with him.
What games do we probably win with him? Seton Hall away, Pitt on a neutral court, probably both Providence games and probably home against Butler.
There aren't many kids that are as talented as Hank is in college basketball. We don't have anybody with his combination of size and skill on our roster. Sure, he wasn't as efficient as we would've liked, but he also had Traci Carter, Haanif Cheatham, and JJJ as his best perimeter teammates. This year he'd have Rowsey, Howard, and Hauser spreading the floor. That combination would be absolutely deadly. And sure, Hank and Fisch didn't really "work together" very well, but again, I'd argue that's more because defenses could collapse on those 2 and not pay a nearly high enough price for doing so. Even so, we saw some great high low post feeds from Hank to Fisch and some great passes on the double from Fisch to a cutting Hank last year.
Imagine an offense where you have Hank catching the ball at the elbow/high post with Hauser in one corner, Rowsey in another, and Howard fading to the opposite FT line extended. Good luck defending that. Hank can take a big off the dribble and once the defense collapses the kick to a wide open Rowsey/Howard/Hauser? Oops. Same thing with a high pick and roll/pick and pop.
And to top it all off you have the guy who can go and get you a basket in a number of different ways in crunch time. Really the only issue offensively with this team has been a go-to guy who you can just throw the ball to and say, "We need one basket to close this game out. Go get it for me." That's Hank.
Good point, wades, and this year, that's been KR with disappointing results in those specific moments.
Henry at the 5....
Sam at the 4.....
Katin at the 3.....
Rowsey and Howard at the guards.....
Best 3 point shooting team to be put on the floor as an NCAA team?????
Quote from: wadesworld on March 06, 2017, 06:42:27 AM
Henry Ellenson leaving Marquette is not why Marquette is a better basketball team.
I agree completely. We would be a solid Sweet 16 team or better if Henry was still here.
Quote from: burger on March 06, 2017, 02:52:37 PM
Henry at the 5....
Sam at the 4.....
Katin at the 3.....
Rowsey and Howard at the guards.....
Best 3 point shooting team to be put on the floor as an NCAA team?????
Katin would absolutely not be here. No chance.
The three games we may have lost in my opinion are Creighton away, Villanova, and Xavier away. Reinhardt was immense in those games. Possibly Seton Hall at home and away as the SHU bigs did a great job last year on Henry. I think we probably win 3-4 we lost, probably lose 1-2 we won. I'd guess we're 2 games better with him, but again, only if he was willing to take a lesser role.