Way inflated.lol
Best grades on the team would be M2N with a B and Hauser with a B-.
Sacar gets a C+. I might go B- as his improvement during the year was laudatory.
Rowsey gets a C-. Great at times, no defense and too much hero ball.
Heldt gets an "A" for effort but a C because he is an average center. Theo, Jamal and Greg get Cs for now with some expectation of improvement.
Wojo gets a D for failing the NCAA test. Wins over two of Georgia, DePaul and St. John's and he would have gotten a "B".
I think Harry is an "F"
It's late here, I hope the boys come back and pull it out, but I'm going to bed. These are my grades for our lads and the man in charge this year. Let's get a PG!
M2N: B. The nation's youngest sophomore was absolutely electric at times. None of us will forget at Providence. But too often pressed hero ball, couldn't keep his man in front of him on D, and for the life of me I can't understand how he doesn't have a handle like glue. With rockin' rowdy and big
Sammy what we really needed was someone who could press break and distribute. I hope Markus works on that this summer, because 60% 3fgm isn't worth spending another offseason on.
Sacar: B+. Took a big step forward and is a poster child for redshirting. Reliable starter and contributor. Good, but not lockdown defender, which is what we really needed. O game showed some flashes, but too inconsistent to be a reliable 4th option.
Big John: A-. A freshman in a fullman's body. Rough around the edges with some freshman moments, but showed steady improvement throughout the season. Flashes of a soft-touch on O, and makes opposing players think twice in the lane. No reason he won't be a 10pt, 10reb, 2 block player next year.
Greg: B-. Tough to be too hard on Greg as he looks like he only weighs 60 lbs when he's wet and wearing boots and had the nagging hand injury. However, the game often looked too fast for him, he was abused by bigger/stronger players on D, and his O game wasn't off the chart. Unlikely to develop as a 1, but 20lbs and two good hands could make him a nice 7th man next year.
Sammy: B+. Hands down highest basketball IQ on the team. Rarely made the wrong play. A guy you want on the floor, but you have to wonder if his relative lack of athleticism means he's already at his ceiling - a slightly shorter Steve Novak.
Heldt: B. He is what he is. And what he is would be a good 15 minute spell guy in the BEAST. Leaves it all on the court, but just doesn't have the skillset to be a starting center.
Harry: D. Was supposed to be the value added the propelled us to the Dance. Instead ends up Coaches Decision DNPing and must be on the way out. O-game was never there and defense lacked intensity. Disappointing.
Make it Cain: B+. If he can also put on 20lbs this offseason he could contend for BE honors next year. Was the "secret weapon" on O in a number of games, and seems like he led the team in playing above the rim. Another exciting piece for the future.
Rowdy: A-. The guy that's 5'7" in stilletos gave it a hell of a senior campagin. Tough to overcome the height, but generally gave the effort on D. Single season 3 point record - fun to watch him shoot. The thing. But for a bit of tendency to hero-ball, it would have been a straight A season.
Cammo: A. Gotta give love to a guy that put in all the same effort on the practice court, did all the same travel, in order to log a grand total of 12 minutes and 1 rebound.
Wojo: C+. The Oregon win pulls him from a C to a C+, but coach medicocrity finshes another luke-warm season. Won't relitigate here, but hard to argue that a coach with better X/Os, a bit of creativity in his lineups, some different defensive schemes, couldn't have squeezed another regular season win or two out of this team to get them to the NCAA. If he can't do it next year, you have to wonder if he'll ever be more than "a first round appearance every few years" kind of coach.
The only player who didn't meet or exceed expectations for me is Harry. The freshmen got better. Sam is so complete. Sacar is night and day from where he was as a freshman. They just didn't have enough size, particularly at guard. The story of the season defensively is 5'10 guys guarding 6'5 guys. PSU just took pages out of the Big East playbook tonight. Isolate big guards on small guards. Rowsey and Howard couldn't keep them out of the lane and everything followed from that.Agree, but am a harder grader. B- and C.
Players, collectively other than Harry: B.
Coaching: B-
Rowsey A
Sam A
Howard B+
Elliot B+
Sacar B+
Cain B
Matt Heldt B
Theo B
Froling C
Cam A
Ike - Incomplete
Wojo C+
We had a team that for the most part played hard every game and every possession . They had some physical limits that made certain match ups tough. However, they also used their extraordinary 3 point shooting ability to their advantage whenever they could. We won 60 percent of our games playing a strong schedule . A solid season overall.
You must be drunk. This is an NIT team. No one gets an A or a B+. Theology majors should not be given computers.
Rowsey is an all big east honorable mention AND has MUs all time single season scoring record.
Anything less than a B means the grader is drunk, at best.
Some of you should be grateful that your college professors didn't grade you as tough as you are grading this team.
This is a weird exercise in the sense that I to grade everyone within the context of the sum of their parts, which is an NIT team.
That being said, I agree with others that Sam is the only one in an A range. Markus and Rowsey, net of defense, settle into solid Bs. This probably speaks to just how good they were offensively because they weren't close to a B defensively. Think Greg, Jamal, Matt and Sacar settle into a B-/C+. All definitely exceeded expectations on both ends, and the future is bright if they progress. Heldt probably is what he is, which is a solid contributor. I'd be excited if Theo makes the same leaps as Matt did over the course of his career
Thats about how i graded it. Sure they are our team but they also came in 7th out of 10 teams n went to the nit fir a reason.
For the peopke throwing out all the As, if rowsey us an A what do brunson, cartwright n carrington get
For the peopke throwing out all the As, if rowsey us an A what do brunson, cartwright n carrington get?
Sacar an A what do desi, khyri thomas and bridges get?
Our players for whatever reasons were some of the worst at their pisition inbthe BE. We came in 7th for a reason
Sammy: A
Rowsey: B+ (A+ offense, D defense)
Howard: B+
Sacar: C+
Elliott: C
Heldt: C
Cain: C-
Theo: C-
Froling: D
I don't weight based on age or preseason expectations. They also look at the entire season, not just where they ended up. If all three freshmen played all season like they did at the end of the season, they would have much higher grades, Sacar probably up a little bit too.
Brunson is an A+
Cartwright and Carrington's seasons were similar to or worse than Rowdy's
Thats because u simply gocus on offense. Some nights like tonight Rowsey was better but in most nights he gave up more than he scored. Cartwright and carringtons defensive abilities are patially why they danced n we didnt
Say a “B” is a solid high major player. It was be hard to argue MU had more than three of them on this roster. Nice kids and hope they develop but like others have mentioned that relative to their competition it’d be hard to give them higher grades than this.
Sorry but the OPs grades are an fin joke!! So are towers. I guess we just wanna give these guys all A’s for effort??!!
Wtf??!!
1. Rowsey C+. Scored like a machine lpositive, passed very well. Negatives fouled too much, couldnt guard his man, turned the ball over way too much, at times very poor decision maker, inconsistant, 7th best starting PG in BE
2. Howard B-. Shoots the ball really well. Negatives very bad ball handler, poor rebounder, bad passer, terrible defender. Defensive effort follows how his shooting is going, questionable on taking bad shots
3. Sacar C. Good driver.
Negatives - avergae defender, below average ft shooter, bad 3 point shooter , poor rebounder. Much improved but still not very good. Worst 3 in the BE?
4. Hauser A-. Great shooter, very good passer. Decent rebounder. Negs needs to get stronger lacks lateral quickness n avg athleticism hurts him defensively.
5. Heldt C. Pretty solid defender. Great Ft shooter. Solid screener. Solid jump hook Negs not very athletic, not very strong, not a strong finisher, not a strong rebounder.
3 Freshman B. Not all freshman team type seasons but i do like their toughness their length and their size. Need to add strength but if the commitment is their they could be 3 really solid player by their junior seasons.
Froling D-. Would give him a straight F is it didnt look like he might be able to make some shots and he did make two against Creighton?? Other than that he was an unathletic kitten. Zero toughness. I would want tough guys on my team and he exudes none of that quality.
Thats because u simply gocus on offense. Some nights like tonight Rowsey was better but in most nights he gave up more than he scored. Cartwright and carringtons defensive abilities are patially why they danced n we didnt
This is the most accurate, although I would make the following changes:
Markus: C+
Sacar: B-
Heldt: B-
Wojo: C
Speaking of English grades..
Rowsey A
Sam A
Howard B+
Elliot B+
Sacar B+
Cain B
Matt Heldt B
Theo B
Froling C
Cam A
Ike - Incomplete
Wojo C+
We had a team that for the most part played hard every game and every possession . They had some physical limits that made certain match ups tough. However, they also used their extraordinary 3 point shooting ability to their advantage whenever they could. We won 60 percent of our games playing a strong schedule . A solid season overall.
The guy who just set the single-season scoring record gets a "C" from some of you?I think his defense was so poor that many nights it couldn't overcome his offensive production... he won games for us but lost more. I don't think we will miss him next year.
SHEESH.
I think his defense was so poor that many nights it couldn't overcome his offensive production... he won games for us but lost more. I don't think we will miss him next year.
AR-30 - D-.
Markus - D-.
Sam - D-.
Heldt - F.
Sacar - F.
Cain - F.
Elliott - F.
Theo - F+ish.
Froling - F-.
Haani - C+ (smart enough to get out of Dodge).
Wojo - F-----.
There. I think that covers it.
Worst coach ever got nothing out of the crap he brought to the greatest basketball school in the nation.
Wait ... is it too late to change AR, Markus and Sam to F's, too?
So tired of sucking. They'd better fix this next season ... OR ELSE!
Sammy: A
Rowsey: B+ (A+ offense, D defense)
Howard: B+
Sacar: C+
Elliott: C
Heldt: C
Cain: C-
Theo: C-
Froling: D
I don't weight based on age or preseason expectations. They also look at the entire season, not just where they ended up. If all three freshmen played all season like they did at the end of the season, they would have much higher grades, Sacar probably up a little bit too.
By what possible logic are Sacar and Heldt better players than Howard? (Not necessarily picking on you, I've seen it a couple of places). Are you grading on your preseason expectations? The kid was 2nd team All Big East.I don’t think these grades can be standardized in the way you’re suggesting. I’m grading each player on how they filled their role on the team. Heldt and Sacar filled their roles markedly better than Howard did his this year. Same reason, I’m sure, why OP gave Cam Marotta an A.
I don’t think these grades can be standardized in the way you’re suggesting. I’m grading each player on how they filled their role on the team.
The only player who didn't meet or exceed expectations for me is Harry. The freshmen got better. Sam is so complete. Sacar is night and day from where he was as a freshman. They just didn't have enough size, particularly at guard. The story of the season defensively is 5'10 guys guarding 6'5 guys. PSU just took pages out of the Big East playbook tonight. Isolate big guards on small guards. Rowsey and Howard couldn't keep them out of the lane and everything followed from that.The wojo Kool aid affect for a B- in coaching.
Players, collectively other than Harry: B.
Coaching: B-
Some of you should be grateful that your college professors didn't grade you as tough as you are grading this team.My guess is they did.
Sammy: A
Rowsey: B+ (A+ offense, D defense)
Howard: B+
Sacar: C+
Elliott: C
Heldt: C
Cain: C-
Theo: C-
Froling: D
I don't weight based on age or preseason expectations. They also look at the entire season, not just where they ended up. If all three freshmen played all season like they did at the end of the season, they would have much higher grades, Sacar probably up a little bit too.
Sammy: A
Rowsey: B+ (A+ offense, D defense)
Howard: B+
Sacar: C+
Elliott: C
Heldt: C
Cain: C-
Theo: C-
Froling: D
I'd say you've nailed it here. The only quibbles I might have is to bring both Theo and Jamal up to C's as I think they improved significantly towards the back third of the year. Their B-'s on the final exam, if you will, earned them C's. But pretty spot on assessment IMO.
Dgies,
Beating 9 big East teams isn't loading up on Horton Roe classes. That's signing up for senior level classes as an underclassmen. Your analogy is way off
One other thought about grades.
Let's suppose you had a job candidate who came to you full of personality, energy and enthusiasm. You sat down with her and, after a lengthy interview, you thought, "wow, this person is pretty good." You finish by asking her for a copy of her transcript from Marquette.
A week later, the official copy comes. She has a solid "C" average. But she did it by loading up on Horton Roe classes, speech classes and Theology of Marriage classes. She had a couple of "D"s in core classes that were red flags.
How many of you would hire her?
That's my point about our basketball team. There were a couple of bright spots. The team is likable. But the body of work was weak. We did not accomplish what other candidates did and so we were passed over.
What part of that performance merits a "B" or an "A"?
One other thought about grades.Nailed it. Everyone in here moaning that some of us are "too harsh" with our grades. Unbelievable. We literally failed at the one important thing that was extremely reasonably attainable. If you are giving grades and your team average (coaches+players divided by total grades given) is higher than a B-, you are unquestionably wrong.
Let's suppose you had a job candidate who came to you full of personality, energy and enthusiasm. You sat down with her and, after a lengthy interview, you thought, "wow, this person is pretty good." You finish by asking her for a copy of her transcript from Marquette.
A week later, the official copy comes. She has a solid "C" average. But she did it by loading up on Horton Roe classes, speech classes and Theology of Marriage classes. She had a couple of "D"s in core classes that were red flags.
How many of you would hire her?
That's my point about our basketball team. There were a couple of bright spots. The team is likable. But the body of work was weak. We did not accomplish what other candidates did and so we were passed over.
What part of that performance merits a "B" or an "A"?
Nailed it. Everyone in here moaning that some of us are "too harsh" with our grades. Unbelievable. We literally failed at the one important thing that was extremely reasonably attainable. If you are giving grades and your team average (coaches+players divided by total grades given) is higher than a B-, you are unquestionably wrong.
A's are reserved for above and beyond, excellent effort, exceeding expectations.
B's are for very solid, did your job, everything went well.
C's are for meh, could see some improvement, not quite where we want you to be.
D's are for poor progress toward goals, needs significant improvement, not acceptable.
F's are for you completely missed the mark consistently throughout the year.
That's how these grades are presented in (non-comm) college classes. Take a look at those descriptions and YOU tell ME which one this team as a whole earned.
B's and A's for certain components of this team make no sense whatsoever. That's the type of contentedness that will get us stuck with an NIT 2-seed mixed in with a tournament appearance every 3 years.
So if Nova losses in the Final Four they would only get a B by your standards. That does not exceed expectations considering they were top 5 most of they year, they just did their job and everything went well. They would have failed at the thing that was extremely attainable, to use your words.Apples and Oranges - even with a stacked roster like Nova, a FF is VERY hard to get to and you should know that.
Apples and Oranges - even with a stacked roster like Nova, a FF is VERY hard to get to and you should know that.A consensus top 5 team getting to the FF vs a top 50-60 team getting an at large. I'd say that's about on par.
So your argument is that it is as attainable for Nova to get to the FF as it is for us to get a bid to the NCAA tourney??? So Nova getting to the FF is just as difficult as us beating DePaul away or Georgia at home?
Even with this ridiculous comparison, I would grade Nova's season a B+ or A- if they reach the FF and lose right away. Anything before that should be a B or B- on the merit of not winning the BEAST regular season (winning the BET does provide a boost if they are ousted in the Sweet Sixteen IMO).
Nova didn't win the BE regular season, C at best, right?Let's assume:
No one game defines a season, although tourney games are obviously more important. If Nova were to lose to WVA they'd still get an A IMO. Virginia gets an A- IMO. UMBC is bad, but that shouldn't take away from what they did in the ACC regular season/ conference tourney.Do you realize there is no higher grade than an A? So losing in the Sweet Sixteen and not even winning your regular season conference merits the highest POSSIBLE grade in the ledger? I wish I had some of you in my high school courses - then I could have gone to Penn and I’d at least be cheering for a tourney team.
As part of any performance review is whether the group meet expectations or not? Then, they are rated/calibrated on potential.Agree with most of this. My preseason expectations were bubble team. I lowered them when Haanif left.
Some folks here are rating on a F4 run as their expectation and some on their pre-season expectation. I think we have to rate on the latter.
Under that scenario, this team met expectations for me if not slightly beat them. I was hoping for 7-8 BE wins and an NIT. Check.
As to exceeding expectations....I think only Sam and Andrew beat expectations.
Meeting expectations: Markus, Sacar, Matt, Jamal. Expectations are different for each but they were all sturdy in their roles.
Developing: Greg and Theo. I think most frosh would go here. These two were up and down on consistency whether injuries or performance or both. There are signs.
Did not meet: Haanif, Harry
On the potential scores to carry team forward.
High: Sam and Markus
Above: Jamal
Mid: Theo and Greg
Well placed: Sacar and Matt
Below: Harry
Conclusion: The majority of higher potential players are to come: Ed, Joey, 2 TBD. Ike is TBD. In other words, a lot of unknowns but roster balance and more physicalness coming.
High: Sam and Markus
Above: Jamal
Mid: Theo and Greg
Well placed: Sacar and Matt
Below: Harry
Conclusion: The majority of higher potential players are to come: Ed, Joey, 2 TBD. Ike is TBD. In other words, a lot of unknowns but roster balance and more physicalness coming.
Do you realize there is no higher grade than an A? So losing in the Sweet Sixteen and not even winning your regular season conference merits the highest POSSIBLE grade in the ledger? I wish I had some of you in my high school courses - then I could have gone to Penn and I’d at least be cheering for a tourney team.
Agree with most of this. My preseason expectations were bubble team. I lowered them when Haanif left.
Do you realize there is no higher grade than an A? So losing in the Sweet Sixteen and not even winning your regular season conference merits the highest POSSIBLE grade in the ledger? I wish I had some of you in my high school courses - then I could have gone to Penn and I’d at least be cheering for a tourney team.I am aware of how the grading system works.
As part of any performance review is whether the group meet expectations or not? Then, they are rated/calibrated on potential.
Some folks here are rating on a F4 run as their expectation and some on their pre-season expectation. I think we have to rate on the latter.
Under that scenario, this team met expectations for me if not slightly beat them. I was hoping for 7-8 BE wins and an NIT. Check.
As to exceeding expectations....I think only Sam and Andrew beat expectations.
Meeting expectations: Markus, Sacar, Matt, Jamal. Expectations are different for each but they were all sturdy in their roles.
Developing: Greg and Theo. I think most frosh would go here. These two were up and down on consistency whether injuries or performance or both. There are signs.
Did not meet: Haanif, Harry
On the potential scores to carry team forward.
High: Sam and Markus
Above: Jamal
Mid: Theo and Greg
Well placed: Sacar and Matt
Below: Harry
Conclusion: The majority of higher potential players are to come: Ed, Joey, 2 TBD. Ike is TBD. In other words, a lot of unknowns but roster balance and more physicalness coming.
I am aware of how the grading system works.Unfortunately, I was not around to see that part of MU's history. I admire Al and the swagger that was the program of the 70s, but I will reserve judgement because of the aforementioned.
Let me propose a question for you.
It is pretty well established that Marquette was the second best program in the country in the 70s. However, Al only won one national title. That means that eight other years he did not win a post season tournament. What grade would you give Al?
Think very carefully because if it's not the first letter of the alphabet, some posters may be a little upset considering his name is on our court.
Nova received a 1 seed. That means through the first 30+ games of the year they were one of the 4 best teams in the country. I think that is worth an A regardless of if they lose Friday.
Unfortunately, I was not around to see that part of MU's history. I admire Al and the swagger that was the program of the 70s, but I will reserve judgement because of the aforementioned.I wasn't around for Al either but I know he was an A coach. Comparing a 18 game season with a almost 40 game season is a bit of a stretch, and I don't really follow football so I can't answer your question, but I don't know how you can disagree that Nova was a top 4 team from November to March.
We may be at an agree to disagree with Nova, because I disagree with that entire paragraph. Do you rate the 2011 Packers an A? I'd say they were a B-range team (A offense, C- defense) that was exposed as such in the playoffs against Kaepernick.
That's been the difference between you and me all season. I raised them when he left.
How would we rate Wojo? I would rate Met and Developing. The defensive holes and roster deficiencies (balance, athleticsm) are improvement areas. It is a critical year for him upcoming as has been repeated to death here.
I know. We valued a 6'5 guard in a league of big guards differently. I saw his departure as affecting depth and rotations and compelling Wojo to force feed minutes to freshmen who either had to sink or swim. You saw him as a disappointment that the team was better off without. We shall continue to disagree.
Unfortunately, I was not around to see that part of MU's history. I admire Al and the swagger that was the program of the 70s, but I will reserve judgement because of the aforementioned.
None of this matters until the Gol_en Eagles finally get some "d". Way too many instances last night of PSU players going up for a shot and the MU defenders didn't even contest it - staying on the ground with hands down. And the rebounding problems continue, as they have all season.
I admit I am very frustrated right now. I was a big advocate for Ben Howland when we hired Wojo and I watched Mississippi State pull apart a talented Louisville team by playing great defense and pairing it with a well rounded offense. MU is a great offensive team but that is only 50% of the puzzle. It is maddening that we cannot play defense this far into Wojo's tenure.
And before everyone gets on me as new to the board: 1) add 3.000 to my post count since this is a new login, and; 2) I am not a Wojo-hater, just thought there was a much better option at the time of his hire. I have stated that if I turn out wrong on that I will post the admission of my error in judgement on here for everyone to see without complaint. I just wish I had reason to do that at this point...
I see a lot of beat up players at the end. Sacar being able to play 20 mpg at multiple positions giving others an opportunity to rest is underappreciated.
Do you realize there is no higher grade than an A? So losing in the Sweet Sixteen and not even winning your regular season conference merits the highest POSSIBLE grade in the ledger? I wish I had some of you in my high school courses - then I could have gone to Penn and I’d at least be cheering for a tourney team.
None of this matters until the Gol_en Eagles finally get some "d". Way too many instances last night of PSU players going up for a shot and the MU defenders didn't even contest it - staying on the ground with hands down. And the rebounding problems continue, as they have all season.
I admit I am very frustrated right now. I was a big advocate for Ben Howland when we hired Wojo and I watched Mississippi State pull apart a talented Louisville team by playing great defense and pairing it with a well rounded offense. MU is a great offensive team but that is only 50% of the puzzle. It is maddening that we cannot play defense this far into Wojo's tenure.
And before everyone gets on me as new to the board: 1) add 3.000 to my post count since this is a new login, and; 2) I am not a Wojo-hater, just thought there was a much better option at the time of his hire. I have stated that if I turn out wrong on that I will post the admission of my error in judgement on here for everyone to see without complaint. I just wish I had reason to do that at this point...
How many students in a given class should be expected to receive an A?
There are 351 D1 basketball schools. If you make it to the sweet sixteen, you are in the top 5%. How many of your high school teachers only gave A's to the top one or two students in a class of 30?
Howland wasn't an option. Terrible human being
How many students in a given class should be expected to receive an A?So since Nova proved to be that much better than McNeese State they get an A? If we were grading based on where a team is in KenPom why not just look at KenPom? If Nova doesn't make the FF and doesn't bring home a Big East regular season title (they did not), they did not have an A season in the lens of their capabilities/expectations.
There are 351 D1 basketball schools. If you make it to the sweet sixteen, you are in the top 5%. How many of your high school teachers only gave A's to the top one or two students in a class of 30?
Rowsey is an all big east honorable mention AND has MUs all time single season scoring record.
Anything less than a B means the grader is drunk, at best.
he probably gave up as many points as he scored with his lack of D and turnovers. I'd give him a BC (the old grading scale from my days at MU) at best.The school still grades this way, and I actually prefer it.
So since Nova proved to be that much better than McNeese State they get an A? If we were grading based on where a team is in KenPom why not just look at KenPom? If Nova doesn't make the FF and doesn't bring home a Big East regular season title (they did not), they did not have an A season in the lens of their capabilities/expectations.So you grade on whether on not you finish first in your conference and post season success? It's fine if you do, I just think most would disagree.
Now if McNeese State made the tourney and won a couple games, they had an A season in the lens of what their team is capable of for sure. Just like Loyola or even UMBC.
That's uncharacteristically harsh language for you. What are you basing this on? (SI article?)
Howland wasn't an option. Terrible human being
2018-19 Meme Watch: Golen Eagles
You can grade on a curve versus Springfield Community College students or grade on a curve versus Harvard Students.
Any grading system based on success in a one and done style tourney is only going to lead to disappointment. I'll be sure to Leo Tony Bennett know that he had a C season
Every class sets course objectives before the course begins. You grade based on accomplishments of the course objectives.
What we have in here is a difference in what the objective should be. A lot depends on your age and when you went to Marquette. The more you remember the Al era or the Buzz era or the Crean Final Four team, the more you are likely to be tough on what you believe the grade should be.
In my mind, here is the objectives for the team
A+ -- National Championship
A -- Final Four
A-/B+ -- Elite 8
B -- Second weekend of the NCAA
B- -- Win one NCAA game
C -- Make the NCAA
C- -- Make the NIT
D -- No tournament
F -- Losing record
This is why I am harsh on the grades. We should expect some performance in the NCAA as a minimum, with the highest possible grade being 1977. We've won, albeit a long time ago, and that shows we theoretically can.
We just have to do it again!
I have a sneaky suspicion that Loyola and Nevada are feeling better than a 'B' about their seasons right now.
Since you mention Buzz, his grades under your scale would have been B-, C, B, B, B+, D.
So, you'd give Buzz a 2.5 GPA? Basically a C+ student?
Tough crowd.
Brother TAMU, I'm kinda guessing he already knows that.
Not sure you were around when we lost to Miami of F-ing Ohio, but I will tell you there was more wailing and gnashing of teeth than you would ever imagine. I'm sure Coach Bennett is reliving that game in his mind over and over again and probably is harsher on himself than we are on Virginia -- or him for that matter.
Good coaches will take the fall when things go bad and say they need to coach better. For a team that was like 30-3 and an overall 1, it is a C- or perhaps even worse when you lose to a school that sounds like a high school.
I called our 1978 season a C- earlier. Brother Goose thought I was harsh. But when you lose to Miami of F-ing Ohio; when you team loses its composure against a LOW mid-major, as we did, C- was not unreasonable. Same for Virginia. If you're that good -- and they were -- you don't let an opponent of that caliber get anywhere close to you. And yes, if you are that elite of a team, it is a matter through your play of "letting" someone stay in the game with you.
Brother TAMU, I'm kinda guessing he already knows that.I was at that game in 78 at the old Market Square Arena. Sitting in the stands in disbelief felt at that time it was the beginning of the end. We were well positioned to win the whole thing that year and instead we lost our swagger which ultimately resulted in our very bad loss as you rightfully point out . MU had a golden opportunity to replace Al with almost any top young coach at the time, and instead they went with Hank. Hank was a good guy who was long since past his shelf life as a Head Coach, at that point he was much better suited to be AD and be a guiding light to a good young coach like Denny Crum.
Not sure you were around when we lost to Miami of F-ing Ohio, but I will tell you there was more wailing and gnashing of teeth than you would ever imagine. I'm sure Coach Bennett is reliving that game in his mind over and over again and probably is harsher on himself than we are on Virginia -- or him for that matter.
Good coaches will take the fall when things go bad and say they need to coach better. For a team that was like 30-3 and an overall 1, it is a C- or perhaps even worse when you lose to a school that sounds like a high school.
I called our 1978 season a C- earlier. Brother Goose thought I was harsh. But when you lose to Miami of F-ing Ohio; when you team loses its composure against a LOW mid-major, as we did, C- was not unreasonable. Same for Virginia. If you're that good -- and they were -- you don't let an opponent of that caliber get anywhere close to you. And yes, if you are that elite of a team, it is a matter through your play of "letting" someone stay in the game with you.
Sam's usage rate was about the same as Anim when he should have been closer to Howard and Rowsey, both just above 30% usage. I would have preferred all three between 24-27% usage.Strongly agree. I would have liked to see both Markus and Andrew be slightly more judicious with their shot selection. Take away a couple of their worst* shots per game and let Sam take those and I think our offence is even scarier.
Strongly agree. I would have liked to see both Markus and Andrew be slightly more judicious with their shot selection. Take away a couple of their worst* shots per game and let Sam take those and I think our offence is even scarier.
*Of course a few of Andrew's worst shots still somehow went in amazingly
Sam Hauser, B+ Sam was our best two-way player and I'd argue our MVP. What kept him from an A was him not being assertive enough in big games. Sam averaged 10.3 shots per game, but in the 5 losses to Villanova & Xavier, he averaged only 5.6 shots. When we needed Sam to be at his best, he wasn't getting involved. In addition, he was efficient in those games, so it wasn't like he was deferring because his shot was off. If he was more assertive in the biggest moments, we are likely dancing with two home wins over 1-seeds.
Andrew Rowsey, B He edges out Markus for me because while they were largely interchangeable, Rowsey was the better ball-handler. His incredibly prolific scoring would earn him an A, but his defense drags that down. Had a knack for the big shot, he will be missed.
Markus Howard, B- Markus improved dramatically on offense. Despite the 3PFG% drop I predicted, the addition of a floater kept his efficiency up. He needs to work on his distribution & driving into contact. His defensive issues should be less glaring next year when he (hopefully) won't be paired with another sub-six foot guard. Yes, he was Second Team Big East, but that was because of his scoring. His incomplete play on the other end earns him this grade.
Sacar Anim, C+ I didn't know what to expect from Sacar. Early on, he seemed like just a guy out there. A decent role-player that could occasionally score on the drive. Over the last 15 games he was a different player, averaging 10 ppg while still playing quality defense. He now looks like a high-major starter.
Greg Elliott, C+ Greg was a difference maker & the bench player I was most excited to see come in. He improved steadily throughout the season and exceeded my expectations.
Jamal Cain, C Like Greg, came into his own as the season went on. He's the freshman I'm most excited about going forward. Still makes a number of unforced errors, but plays high effort defense and is excellent at not overextending his role.
Theo John, C Came a long way from the foul machine he was to start the season. He hasn't fouled out since November. Plays strong in the defensive post and showed some surprising offensive moves. He needs to get his game under control, but looks like a solid rotational big going forward.
Matt Heldt, C- Our best interior defender and a fan favorite, but really disappointed me. The #2 player in the nation in terms of offensive efficiency, Heldt needs to be more aggressive in the post. I don't expect him to be Luke Fischer, but he has to work harder to get position. When he has the ball under the hoop, instead of double clutching and missing a no-foot layup, go up, dunk and draw the foul. And while Theo got better at defending without fouling, Matt went in the opposite direction. He's fine as a rotational big, but I expected more.
Harry Froling, D We'll always have those two threes at Georgetown. Otherwise, despite his rebounding prowess, he never found his rhythm on either end of the floor. I hope another season will grow his confidence.
Reasonable post, brew.
<<Matt Heldt ... The #2 player in the nation in terms of offensive efficiency>>
I know that advanced stats have their place and a lot of great uses, but this shows how bogus they can be.
Rowsey A-
Sam A
Howard A-
Elliot B-
Sacar B-
Cain B
Heldt B-
Theo B-
Froling D
Cheatham F
That's a lot of A's and B's for a team that failed to make the tournament.Rowsey and Howard “A minuses”, Sam “A”? All our major role players “B”? If you’d have showed me this grading before the season I’d have guessed we had 25 regular season wins and went to the Sweet Sixteen.
For those of you that think Markus was a better player than Rousey you should consider the actual statistics. Markus even with missing a game took 20 more shots than Rousey.Not sure anyone thinks this, look at the MVP thread.
Rousey scored 716 points on 495 shots.
Markus scored 694 points on 515 shots.
Rousey had 169 assists to Markus's 94.
Rousey did have more turnovers. 99 vs. 85.
Rowsey and Howard “A minuses”, Sam “A”? All our major role players “B”? If you’d have showed me this grading before the season I’d have guessed we had 25 regular season wins and went to the Sweet Sixteen.
Some people will continue to accept this mediocrity with open arms.
How much more time do we need? Wojo was hired when Lebron was still on the Heat and Markus was 14 years old for Chrissake.
How much time did Porter Moser need at Loyola? This is his first tournament appearance in his 7th year. After 2 prior HC stops.Yeah but here's the difference - with this line of thinking you are aligning our program with Loyola of Chicago.
Breathe in, breathe out, my man. We'll be where you want starting this coming season. Namaste, brah.
Yeah but here's the difference - with this line of thinking you are aligning our program with Loyola of Chicago.
For those of you that think Markus was a better player than Rousey you should consider the actual statistics. Markus even with missing a game took 20 more shots than Rousey.You spelled Marcuss wrong
Rousey scored 716 points on 495 shots.
Markus scored 694 points on 515 shots.
Rousey had 169 assists to Markus's 94.
Rousey did have more turnovers. 99 vs. 85.
For those of you that think Markus was a better player than Rousey you should consider the actual statistics. Markus even with missing a game took 20 more shots than Rousey.
Rousey scored 716 points on 495 shots.
Markus scored 694 points on 515 shots.
Rousey had 169 assists to Markus's 94.
Rousey did have more turnovers. 99 vs. 85.