MUScoop

For a team that is (so far) exceeding expectations, what's been the biggest surprise (positive or negative) about this year's team? I've really been surprised by Kam's major step forward from a long-range jacker to an all-around offensive threat. Almost like a taller, poor-man's Markus.

For me, it was Oso's development. I expected him to improve, but not to this level. I never imagined seeing a big so comfortable operating with the ball in his hands.

I think Ross' impact and the offense being this good compared to the defense is also really impressive. One thing that I think is being made a big deal that really isn't is the closing out games. Yes, we lost leads at Purdue and Providence. But we also rallied from deficits to get close against Mississippi State and Wisconsin, as well as Providence in overtime. We also saw Notre Dame and Seton Hall repeatedly try to get back into those games, but we kept shutting the door and didn't let them back in.

If Chase hits one of those threes at Purdue, if O-Max makes one of the wide open looks against Wisconsin, if we make even one more basket down the stretch against Providence, then none of this is a talking point. It's a make or miss game and we've had some misses in those games. It happens. This is still one of the best teams in the Big East and on pace to be a safe single-digit NCAA seed.

Quote from: brewcity77 on December 29, 2022, 06:44:03 AM
For me, it was Oso's development. I expected him to improve, but not to this level. I never imagined seeing a big so comfortable operating with the ball in his hands.

I think Ross' impact and the offense being this good compared to the defense is also really impressive. One thing that I think is being made a big deal that really isn't is the closing out games. Yes, we lost leads at Purdue and Providence. But we also rallied from deficits to get close against Mississippi State and Wisconsin, as well as Providence in overtime. We also saw Notre Dame and Seton Hall repeatedly try to get back into those games, but we kept shutting the door and didn't let them back in.

If Chase hits one of those threes at Purdue, if O-Max makes one of the wide open looks against Wisconsin, if we make even one more basket down the stretch against Providence, then none of this is a talking point. It's a make or miss game and we've had some misses in those games. It happens. This is still one of the best teams in the Big East and on pace to be a safe single-digit NCAA seed.

Yeah - it was a lot harder to think of "negative" surprises than "positive" ones which, in and of itself, is a nice surprise.

Yeah, would Scoop prefer getting blown out in these losses to escape the "close games" narrative? Or blow a large lead to make it a close win? It's a silly talking point IMO.

My surprises is Keeyan. After some of the hype this summer I thought it would be at least serviceable. 

Quote from: brewcity77 on December 29, 2022, 06:44:03 AM
For me, it was Oso's development. I expected him to improve, but not to this level. I never imagined seeing a big so comfortable operating with the ball in his hands.

I think Ross' impact and the offense being this good compared to the defense is also really impressive. One thing that I think is being made a big deal that really isn't is the closing out games. Yes, we lost leads at Purdue and Providence. But we also rallied from deficits to get close against Mississippi State and Wisconsin, as well as Providence in overtime. We also saw Notre Dame and Seton Hall repeatedly try to get back into those games, but we kept shutting the door and didn't let them back in.

If Chase hits one of those threes at Purdue, if O-Max makes one of the wide open looks against Wisconsin, if we make even one more basket down the stretch against Providence, then none of this is a talking point. It's a make or miss game and we've had some misses in those games. It happens. This is still one of the best teams in the Big East and on pace to be a safe single-digit NCAA seed.

No question it's oso. The dunks he had in transition last game were incredible. Running the floor, spacing himself off the ball, the catches at full speed and court awareness to not put the ball on the deck.

His play in the half court has been stellar. Just a game changer that I didn't think we'd see until next year.

Quote from: 1SE on December 29, 2022, 07:03:01 AM
Yeah - it was a lot harder to think of "negative" surprises than "positive" ones which, in and of itself, is a nice surprise.

I think the minimal contributions from Wrightsil and Itejere would be a bit of a surprise. I didn't expect a ton from them, but I thought they would combine for 20 useful minutes to make it easier on the front court starters. Thankfully, Gold can at least give 5-10 spot minutes.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 07:04:13 AM
Yeah, would Scoop prefer getting blown out in these losses to escape the "close games" narrative? Or blow a large lead to make it a close win? It's a silly talking point IMO.

My surprises is Keeyan. After some of the hype this summer I thought it would be at least serviceable.

I don't think it's that silly. To be successful this year, we'll need to win tight games against good teams. So far we haven't pulled out one of our tight games. It's not an indictment yet, but it's a question mark for sure.

I am going to say Kolek, especially in conference play. There is more sharing of the ball as a team, yet his turnover rate is down, and is way down in conference play to Diener levels (15%). His efg% has jumped from 41% to 51%. His FTR has doubled.

The team's turnover rate in Big East play is elite. If there are turnovers, there are not many live ball turnovers which if you remember last season, transition defense was horrid. This season the offense is less one dimensional in terms of sharing the ball...like Oso, Kam, Sean, Stevie sharing and moving the ball. At one time versus SH, Shaka had three PGs in.

In short, MU's offense is less predictable, more diversified, and there is less 3-5. And I think you see that in Kolek's play the most where less is more.

Quote from: brewcity77 on December 29, 2022, 07:09:36 AM
I think the minimal contributions from Wrightsil and Itejere would be a bit of a surprise. I didn't expect a ton from them, but I thought they would combine for 20 useful minutes to make it easier on the front court starters. Thankfully, Gold can at least give 5-10 spot minutes.

Besides what you wrote, your thoughts on Gold please? Do you see him as simply good enough for "5-10 spot minutes" or do you see him as on the cusp of becoming a better player this season? I get a little nervous when he is on the court.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 07:13:43 AM
I don't think it's that silly. To be successful this year, we'll need to win tight games against good teams. So far we haven't pulled out one of our tight games. It's not an indictment yet, but it's a question mark for sure.

It's ridiculous. We have lost four games by a total of 16 points. Two went into overtime. We have by and large blown people out in our wins.  And people are finding issues with this? 

Again, would people prefer blow out losses and closer wins so we can say "hey, we at least win games when they are close?"

Cmon Scoop - let's be less angsty.

I assumed that the returnees would improve.   I assumed that Morsell's, Greg's, Justin's points would be absorbed by others.    I assumed that MU would get beat up on the boards.  I assumed the freshmen would be, well, freshmen.   

Actual surprises?
Oso's free throw shooting.
Joplin struggling to fit in the offense.
Keeyan.


It is a fun team.   It is a flawed team.   Stay healthy and avoid hitting 'the wall. '

Probably Kam being so great at the rim... all while keeping the to rate loooow. I knew he was krafty, but some of these shots... I swear multiple times most games after a Kam bucket (in a good way)

Team Offense v defense also up there

Oso - terrific, but usage still in the range I thought it would be (not a big usage guy)

Quote from: Scoop Snoop on December 29, 2022, 07:27:52 AM
Besides what you wrote, your thoughts on Gold please? Do you see him as simply good enough for "5-10 spot minutes" or do you see him as on the cusp of becoming a better player this season? I get a little nervous when he is on the court.

He's a freshman. Makes a lot of freshman mistakes, but some of the blocks and deflections he makes are excellent. He is learning to use his length. I'm not convinced he'll get there this season. Ultimately, we don't need him to do a ton. My hope is that we get Oso enough rest before then that he can play 32-35 every game for up to 9 games in the 26-day stretch between March 9 and April 3.

I could see him having an Oso type trajectory where he doesn't do much this year, shows serious upside next year, and is a star by his third year. And while the accuracy isn't there yet, I think the three point shot will fall in the future. But while I like Ben and love those moments where he shows his defensive recovery ability, I'm not expecting a ton yet.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 07:34:55 AM

It's ridiculous. We have lost four games by a total of 16 points. Two went into overtime. We have by and large blown people out in our wins.  And people are finding issues with this? 

Again, would people prefer blow out losses and closer wins so we can say "hey, we at least win games when they are close?"

Cmon Scoop - let's be less angsty.

Is winning close games against good teams important in march ?

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 07:44:16 AM
Is winning close games against good teams important in march ?

Is winning important?

Ben is fine.  He is a freshman big who missed out on a lot of game experience due to COVID and the international restrictions.  He is skilled, but raw.   Add some muscle and wait for the game to slow down for him.   He will be really good in a couple of years.

I would say the offense in general.  Especially because we're not a great 3pt shooting team. 

   "I could see him having an Oso type trajectory where he doesn't do much this year, shows serious upside next year, and is a star by his third year. And while the accuracy isn't there yet, I think the three point shot will fall in the future. But while I like Ben and love those moments where he shows his defensive recovery ability, I'm not expecting a ton yet."


  my thoughts exactly!  he looked really comfortable in the baylor game...baby steps, then the good thing about freshman thing comes to mind

i would have to say "other"= our LOW team turnover ratio #'s

  then change oso developing into a stud right before our eyes...he's not done yet-all good

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 07:44:16 AM
Is winning close games against good teams important in march ?

Yes. No idea what that has to do with anything now.

While it isn't a huge surprise, there's been really significant improvement in Omax in-season (similar to Kam). Early on it felt like he was was playing too fast and slightly out of control offensively, especially on drives or when he got the ball in the paint. His decision-making has gotten much better and it seems like he has a lot more poise and calm now when he's maneuvering down low.

That we lost to the Badgers. I 100% believed that we would handle them with ease. Aside from that, Oso's free throw shooting, Kam's inside game and the offense in general. Will add, I am happily surprised that some of the negative posters are starting believe that the program is ahead of schedule and it has a high ceiling.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 07:57:27 AM
Yes. No idea what that has to do with anything now.

You brought it up, it is listed as a choice for biggest surprise and has been imo the biggest flaw of this team. Feel free to ignore it.

For me the biggest surprise will be finishing the season strong and making the BET final. Everything else so far is pretty much how we felt about the team up to this point last year. My biggest surprise up to this point if I have to pick one is Kam not being the Stud of the game.

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 29, 2022, 07:47:42 AM
Is winning important?

Not if by double digits

Quote from: Newsdreams on December 29, 2022, 08:58:17 AM
Not if by double digits

So all games decided by less than double digits don't matter. So UConn beating Nova by 8 or losing to them by 8 doesn't matter? I'm not a stat guy so please explain it to me.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on December 29, 2022, 09:12:44 AM
So all games decided by less than double digits don't matter. So UConn beating Nova by 8 or losing to them by 8 doesn't matter? I'm not a stat guy so please explain it to me.

The bigger the win, the better

I think Shaka was 5-2 in 5 point games last year, so maybe he needs to go into concussion protocol ?

Quote from: lawdog77 on December 29, 2022, 09:36:43 AM
I think Shaka was 5-2 in 5 point games last year, so maybe he needs to go into concussion protocol ?

We don't talk about the past on Scoop

Chase Ross' rapid development on the positive.....Jop's lack of defensive development is the negative.

Quote from: lawdog77 on December 29, 2022, 09:36:43 AM
I think Shaka was 5-2 in 5 point games last year, so maybe he needs to go into concussion protocol ?

The biggest surprise is that Shaka got stoopid in close games, and was also so stoopid that he had us pull away to win other games instead of keeping them close so our record in close games would be better.

The other big surprise is that Shaka failed his first test (again).

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 08:46:51 AM
You brought it up, it is listed as a choice for biggest surprise and has been imo the biggest flaw of this team. Feel free to ignore it.

I brought it up to confirm brew's point that it really isn't a problem.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on December 29, 2022, 09:12:44 AM
So all games decided by less than double digits don't matter. So UConn beating Nova by 8 or losing to them by 8 doesn't matter? I'm not a stat guy so please explain it to me.

The current Scoop narrative is that we are both winning games too easily and not losing them by large enough margins. Apparently this will hurt is come March or something.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 10:46:00 AM

The current Scoop narrative is that we are both winning games too easily and not losing them by large enough margins. Apparently this will hurt is come March or something.

That's not the narrative.  Stop conjuring things from thin air.  All of us would like to win every game by 50 points Fluffy but that's obviously not realistic.  I and others have mentioned that we are 0-4 in close games because......well.....we're 0-4 in close games.  And we at minimum should have won two of them and more likely 3 of 4.  To completely disregard some of our performances in tight games down the stretch is foolish.  We will need to find a way to slam the door in these potential contests and it could be the difference in making the tournament and or advancing in the NCAA tournament. 

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 08:46:51 AM
You brought it up, it is listed as a choice for biggest surprise and has been imo the biggest flaw of this team. Feel free to ignore it.

Panda thinks Marquette should have played their walk-ons more against Creighton. gotta get that close game experience.

What did I miss with Keeyan?  He is a walk-on?

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 10:52:56 AM
That not the narrative.  Stop conjuring things from thin air.  All of us would like to win every game by 50 points Fluffy but that's obviously not realistic.  I and others have mentioned that we are 0-4 in close games because......well.....we're 0-4 in close games.  And we at minimum should have won two of them and more likely 3 of 4.  To completely disregard some of our performances in tight games down the stretch is foolish.  We will need to find a way to slam the door in these potential contests and it could be the difference in making the tournament and or advancing in the NCAA tournament.

Eat at Arby's

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 10:52:56 AM
That not the narrative.  Stop conjuring things from thin air.  All of us would like to win every game by 50 points Fluffy but that's obviously not realistic.  I and others have mentioned that we are 0-4 in close games because......well.....we're 0-4 in close games.  And we at minimum should have won two of them and more likely 3 of 4.  To completely disregard some of our performances in tight games down the stretch is foolish.  We will need to find a way to slam the door in these potential contests and it could be the difference in making the tournament and or advancing in the NCAA tournament. 

Who said I was disregarding performances down the stretch? I am saying that worrying about losing close games, while also being 10-4, is foolish. This team could easily be 12-2. That's a good thing...not something to worry about.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 10:44:30 AM

I brought it up to confirm brew's point that it really isn't a problem.

If it isnt a problem, we'd have a better record.

Hopefully it's simply early season, lack of cohesion. Otherwise the team has been awesome.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 10:59:15 AM

Who said I was disregarding performances down the stretch? I am saying that worrying about losing close games, while also being 10-4, is foolish. This team could easily be 12-2. That's a good thing...not something to worry about.

Close games have been an issue, but so have games away from home.

Marquette has 2 wins away from home and 1 is a true road game.  Neither Georgia Tech nor Notre Dame is a quality team this year.  We need to beat a quality team on the road to build some confidence in both the road and close game departments.  Villanova is the perfect opportunity to do both.

Biggest surprise for me is how good the offense is. Sure, against really good defensive teams like Purdue and Miss State it was horrid for large stretches. But that happens.

My optimism for this year was that I did believe all guys would improve, especially the Core 4. TK and Kam are basically what I expected them to be based off how much they showed last year(tho like everyone Kams crafty layups are def a surprise) but Omax and Oso's impacts all around are better than I even imagined when trying to be an optimist this year. Except Oso free throws thats a surprise the other way.

When Oso has the ball I geniuniely feel as confident in him as any MU player dating back to the amigos. It just always feels like he knows he to spin for a hammer dunk. When to finesse in the lane for a hook. When to drop some ridiculous no look dime. When to dribble it back out himself. Hes far from flawless and had a dumb no look last game but Im also confident when hes making decisions.

Omax as others have mentioned is getting more and more in control as the season goes on. He still spins widely a bit and travels or nearly travels in the paint. But hes gotten really good. And his ability on D to lock down and turn D to O is so fun.

Also I love the solidness to Stevie. His shot still sucks something awful. But hes good at knowing when to get a look at the rim. Rebounds well for his size and is tough even trying to get his own miss. D is awesome. And hes also the guy in transition I think who forces it the least. He knows when to slow it down and run offense. Or to make a play at the hoop whether its a pass or himself.

Keep developing the offense all year and things will be fun.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 11:00:57 AM
If it isnt a problem, we'd have a better record.

Hopefully it's simply early season, lack of cohesion. Otherwise the team has been awesome.

It would be a bigger problem if we got blown out in those games.  It would be a bigger problem if more of our wins were closer than they have been.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 11:27:44 AM

It would be a bigger problem if we got blown out in those games.  It would be a bigger problem if more of our wins were closer than they have been.

As you speak in hypotheticals, I'll circle back to reality. We've played four close games and lost each of them.

I believe we can improve in tight games as we grow tighter as a unit and roles are more defined, but as it stands today, this team has not performed well in close games.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 11:37:11 AM
As you speak in hypotheticals, I'll circle back to reality. We've played four close games and lost each of them.

I believe we can improve in tight games as we grow tighter as a unit and roles are more defined, but as it stands today, this team has not performed well in close games.

<sigh>

Unfortunately you don't seem to get it. Losing close games is being overstated as a problem here.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 11:37:11 AM
As you speak in hypotheticals, I'll circle back to reality. We've played four close games and lost each of them.

I believe we can improve in tight games as we grow tighter as a unit and roles are more defined, but as it stands today, this team has not performed well in close games.

They havent, and its annoyed me too because we could have at least 2 more wins.

But his point is we are still regularly blowing teams out. Which is a good thing. We are to this point never getting blown out, which is also a good thing.

As frustrating as it is to lose close ones(especially providence) its still better to lose games like that then get swept off the floor.

In a perfect world we would have a bunch of blow out wins and 4-0 in close games and be undefeated. But lets be honest, we are not that good of a team.

Im confident at some point we will win a close game or 2. Sadly I also believe we will get smacked a time or 2. Thats still 1-1 or 2-2. And has a better chance of being worse for our NET.

Quote from: GoldenEagles03 on December 29, 2022, 11:15:31 AM
Close games have been an issue, but so have games away from home.

Marquette has 2 wins away from home and 1 is a true road game.  Neither Georgia Tech nor Notre Dame is a quality team this year.  We need to beat a quality team on the road to build some confidence in both the road and close game departments.  Villanova is the perfect opportunity to do both.

Exactly.

Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on December 29, 2022, 11:41:47 AM
They havent, and its annoyed me too because we could have at least 2 more wins.

But his point is we are still regularly blowing teams out. Which is a good thing. We are to this point never getting blown out, which is also a good thing.

As frustrating as it is to lose close ones(especially providence) its still better to lose games like that then get swept off the floor.

In a perfect world we would have a bunch of blow out wins and 4-0 in close games and be undefeated. But lets be honest, we are not that good of a team.

Im confident at some point we will win a close game or 2. Sadly I also believe we will get smacked a time or 2. Thats still 1-1 or 2-2. And has a better chance of being worse for our NET.

Thank you. Exactly.

Quote from: GoldenEagles03 on December 29, 2022, 11:15:31 AM
Close games have been an issue, but so have games away from home.

Marquette has 2 wins away from home and 1 is a true road game.  Neither Georgia Tech nor Notre Dame is a quality team this year.  We need to beat a quality team on the road to build some confidence in both the road and close game departments.  Villanova is the perfect opportunity to do both.

Didn't you think we would lose to both GT and ND?

Going 0-4 in close games is concerning.

I would be much more concerning if those 4 losses were blowouts and our wins were all close.

Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on December 29, 2022, 11:41:47 AM
They havent, and its annoyed me too because we could have at least 2 more wins.

But his point is we are still regularly blowing teams out. Which is a good thing. We are to this point never getting blown out, which is also a good thing.

As frustrating as it is to lose close ones(especially providence) its still better to lose games like that then get swept off the floor.

In a perfect world we would have a bunch of blow out wins and 4-0 in close games and be undefeated. But lets be honest, we are not that good of a team.

Im confident at some point we will win a close game or 2. Sadly I also believe we will get smacked a time or 2. Thats still 1-1 or 2-2. And has a better chance of being worse for our NET.

I agree with most of this. Saying at least we didn't get blown out is just an ignorant statement. The facts are we've lost four close games to three probable tournament teams. To say it's not a present concern is ignoring facts.

Now, I do believe we will improve in end of game situations as the season moves on as we learn from our mistakes. I'm very happy with where the team is at now if my only concern is losing tight games to good teams. But it's a concern.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 12:10:44 PM
I agree with most of this. Saying at least we didn't get blown out is just an ignorant statement. The facts are we've lost four close games to three probable tournament teams. To say it's not a present concern is ignoring facts.

Now, I do believe we will improve in end of game situations as the season moves on as we learn from our mistakes. I'm very happy with where the team is at now if my only concern is losing tight games to good teams. But it's a concern.

Weve also boatraced two probable tournament teams.

At the end of the day my hope is we can go 13-7 in league play.

If we win 13 blow outs and lose all 7 in close games. I do not give a flying fu ck. And again, metric wise it actually will almost certainly help our seeding.

Then when you factor in the non con 3 blowouts and 3 close losses.

That has us entering BET and NCAA tourney play at 16-10 against high majors. Which then gives us a 61.5% chance of running a team we play off the floor and not even sweating out a post seasn game. And heck if we lose, itll be a fun one unlike UNC where we all wanted to drink the cyanide 5 minutes in.

Sure, based off our results we are much closer to being 12-2 than 8-6 so thats a bit annoying. But thats all it is. At the end of the day we just need to win enough bball games.

Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on December 29, 2022, 12:18:11 PM
At the end of the day we just need to win enough bball games.

That's so silly. If we go 6-0 in the NCAA Tournament, winning all our games by double digits, it will have been a massive fail.

Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on December 29, 2022, 12:18:11 PM
Weve also boatraced two probable tournament teams.

At the end of the day my hope is we can go 13-7 in league play.

If we win 13 blow outs and lose all 7 in close games. I do not give a flying fu ck. And again, metric wise it actually will almost certainly help our seeding.

Then when you factor in the non con 3 blowouts and 3 close losses.

That has us entering BET and NCAA tourney play at 16-10 against high majors. Which then gives us a 61.5% chance of running a team we play off the floor and not even sweating out a post seasn game. And heck if we lose, itll be a fun one unlike UNC where we all wanted to drink the cyanide 5 minutes in.

Sure, based off our results we are much closer to being 12-2 than 8-6 so thats a bit annoying. But thats all it is. At the end of the day we just need to win enough bball games.

Agreed - we're right there. I believe we'll get over the hump, but I just want to see us pull out a close one.

What has surprised me the most this season is how much Marquette has outperformed the projections.

There were several on this board that were very bullish on this years squad, but the bottom line is that this team was projected to finish 9th in the BE in its preseason poll.
Perhaps there were a few outliers, but even some of the most glass half full fans wouldn't have imagined this good of a start.

It's easy for that to get lost in the hoopla as the season progresses. It's easy to expect more, and it's ok to expect more, but that doesn't change that up to this point the expectations have been met and far exceeded.

On top of that, it's the way that it's been done. Most would have said that IF* Marquettes offense can keep up with its defense that this team would comfortably dance. Now, if Marquettes defense gets up to speed with the current pace of this offense then look the F out.
The individual improvements are also all staggering.

That's why it's extremely exciting when I read some of the stuff Brew has to say about a "dangerous team in March" etc.
That means the data suggests that it is a possibility all of our wildest expectations can be blown out of the water this season, and who woulda seen that coming?

It's also extremely exciting that it's been fun as hell, just a joy to watch, and every step of the journey gives hope to a greater tomorrow.

Where do I stand? Well, again this team is so far greatly exceeding anything I would have expected. That said, it's a long season.
My instinct says that there will be a few games where the squad gets smacked back to reality- with a subsequent large dip in the metrics- but every game that passes I get more hopeful that maybe we won't see that. The home wins I've come to expect at this point, but I can see a bad road clunker where we drop substantially in NET.
I think my instinct says that likely due to past end of the season failures, it's just a hard thing to shake because it's happened so often in the last half decade.

At the end of the day Im just enjoying the ride and have one hope, an NCAA win.

The coaches -- or their grad assistants or their SIDs or their ballboys or whoever votes on their behalf -- got it horrifically wrong about Marquette for a second straight year.

There was nothing wrong with the predictions.  A whole lot of scoring, minutes, and leadership left.   Incoming was two guards and Gold.  And an NAIA guy.   MU had very little proven coming back.    So, 9th.    The offseason improvement was dramatic.   But not a given, according to the preseason prognosticators.    Ah, well.

Going into the season I said it wouldn't have surprised me if the team was a 2nd weekend tourney team or NIT-bound. I leaned toward us being an NCAA bubble team but I did think the potential range of outcomes could be that wide.

I did think those that thought this wasn't even an NIT team were nuts and there were more than a handful of those posters.

In spite of some of those tough losses I'm thrilled with how the season has started and what Shaka is building here. I know we're also looking for our Jay Wright as far as someone who can stay and lead this program for 20 years and I think Shaka can be that guy.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 12:10:44 PM
I agree with most of this. Saying at least we didn't get blown out is just an ignorant statement. The facts are we've lost four close games to three probable tournament teams. To say it's not a present concern is ignoring facts.

Now, I do believe we will improve in end of game situations as the season moves on as we learn from our mistakes. I'm very happy with where the team is at now if my only concern is losing tight games to good teams. But it's a concern.

Losing any game is a concern. Hell, every game has some concerns win or loss.

But losing a close game is much less of a concern then getting blown out.  Winning a close game is a greater concern than winning in a blow out. If we had to be 10-4 at this point of the season, I would WANT them to be four close losses and ten blowout wins.

Quote from: tower912 on December 29, 2022, 12:52:58 PM
There was nothing wrong with the predictions.  A whole lot of scoring, minutes, and leadership left.   Incoming was two guards and Gold.  And an NAIA guy.   MU had very little proven coming back.    So, 9th.    The offseason improvement was dramatic.   But not a given, according to the preseason prognosticators.    Ah, well.

We'll disagree on this, tower.

The coaches are supposed to be super-experts. They are supposed to be able to look at a player -- or in this case, several players on every team -- and see that a certain level of improvement was likely.

Those who played against Kolek, Jones and O-Max last year should have been able to see it. Oso was harder to project, as he is playing differently this year than he did last, but he was still gonna get better. Those new to the Big East -- Miller, Matta, etc -- have coached exceptional talent throughout their careers and should have been able to see it, too.

I mean, you have said on several occasions that you thought we'd be a lot better this season because you expected significant improvement from several of our players. Are you more knowledgeable about what to look for in a basketball player than McDermott and Matta are? Hey, maybe you are! And you're almost surely more knowledgeable than whoever voted on the coaches' behalf!

I don't think coaches pay a lot of attention to other teams pre-season until they have to. So I think tower, brew, etc. all had a better understanding of what Marquette could project to than other coaches did.

I paid attention.   They were paying attention to their teams.    The easy shorthand to predict a season is 'a team is as. good as what they have coming back.'   Look at the story about Shaka showing the freshmen last year's SHU box score.   That is what others thought was coming back.   I bought into offseason improvement.   

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 01:11:19 PM
I don't think coaches pay a lot of attention to other teams pre-season until they have to. So I think tower, brew, etc. all had a better understanding of what Marquette could project to than other coaches did.

I think you're probably right.

And it's why relying on preseason coaches' polls as some kind of "benchmark" is flawed. Just because 10 coaches off the top of their heads thought we'd finish 9th doesn't mean we should look at beating that benchmark as an achievement. The achievement is playing as well as we have, winning the games we have, positioning ourselves to be in the NCAAT field, etc.

Sure, I get the easy talking point: "The coaches said Marquette would finish 9th!" But, as you and tower say, they aren't even paying attention.

MU is three games into BE play, so I will wait until the end of the next five games to determine the status of this team. It will be a good barometer of what to look for going forward.

@ Nova
@ STJ
Georgetown
Uconn
@ Xavier

As for "surprises", agree with others about Oso's performances and can't wait to see how he plays against Uconn and Xavier with their two bigs. 

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 01:01:38 PM

Losing any game is a concern. Hell, every game has some concerns win or loss.

But losing a close game is much less of a concern then getting blown out.  Winning a close game is a greater concern than winning in a blow out. If we had to be 10-4 at this point of the season, I would WANT them to be four close losses and ten blowout wins.

Sure

What is an endgame situation? Under 2 left? After the last TV timeout?

Because two of those four losses were well on their way before those points.

Biggest surprise wuz Kolek sayin', "fook 'em" at a catholic university and such, aina?

I'm also surprised that Wrightsil was not likely a big contributor if was healthy.  Gold is better than I thought he would be but we're essentially playing with one big. 

Quote from: 4everwarriors on December 29, 2022, 01:49:23 PM
Biggest surprise wuz Kolek sayin', "fook 'em" at a catholic university and such, aina?

Shows how much you know! Catholics invented swearing.

If there is an injury to one of the starters not named 'Stevie', all of this comes tumbling down.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 12:10:44 PMBut it's a concern.

No, it's not. At least not an intelligent concern. Is it a concern when you flip a coin and it comes up tails four times in a row?

If Chase and O-Max shots rim in, we're 11-2 and no one is talking about this inane point. Basketball is a make or miss game, and if you think there's some grand takeaway because O-Max missed a wide open three while Hepburn made a blind closely guarded 30-footer, you don't understand the game.

The coin came up tails. Doesn't change what this team is.

Indeed.    The record of the 4 teams who beat MU is 42-6.     Two of those were coinflip games.     We had a lead on the current #1 team in the country deep into the second half in their gym.    MU is doing just fine.     Say prayers for health.   

Quote from: brewcity77 on December 29, 2022, 02:22:38 PM
No, it's not. At least not an intelligent concern. Is it a concern when you flip a coin and it comes up tails four times in a row?

If Chase and O-Max shots rim in, we're 11-2 and no one is talking about this inane point. Basketball is a make or miss game, and if you think there's some grand takeaway because O-Max missed a wide open three while Hepburn made a blind closely guarded 30-footer, you don't understand the game.

The coin came up tails. Doesn't change what this team is.

Pgsareheroes said it before I did - two of the four close games were very winnable. That absolutely changes who this team is.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on December 29, 2022, 01:49:23 PM
Biggest surprise wuz Kolek sayin', "fook 'em" at a catholic university and such, aina?

Traditional at that!

Shaka's cookie crumbles...

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 02:43:31 PM
Pgsareheroes said it before I did - two of the four close games were very winnable. That absolutely changes who this team is.

It changes the results sure. But it doesn't change "who this team is."  That's silly.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 08:36:45 PM
It changes the results sure. But it doesn't change "who this team is."  That's silly.

Correct - they're a team that has not yet won a close game this year.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 08:43:43 PM
Correct - they're a team that has not yet won a close game this year.

So would you feel better if we only beat Baylor by 3? Or Radford?

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 01:43:07 PM
Sure

Help me out Panda.....what is Fluffy talking about?

Quote from: lawdog77 on December 29, 2022, 08:49:33 PM
So would you feel better if we only beat Baylor by 3? Or Radford?

As stated previously, I feel very good about this team. However as it was brought up by someone else, it is concerning we're 0-4 against quality teams in close games.

Winning close games is a skill. When I see us handle teams down the stretch when we have a lead, I'll feel better. There are some lofty WL record projections thrown around here. We will need to win close games to get to that 12/13 win total in conference. 0-4 is not an indictment, especially this early in the season, but it was presented as a possible concern and I understand and recognize the possibility that may stop this team from realizing it's true potential.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 11:27:44 AM

It would be a bigger problem if we got blown out in those games.  It would be a bigger problem if more of our wins were closer than they have been.

Agreed.

All one needs to do is look at the close games. We lost 3 close games to top 25 teams this year. Last year we won 3 close games against DePaul, Butler, and St. Johns. Huge difference.

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 08:53:05 PM
Help me out Panda.....what is Fluffy talking about?

He doesn't think our 0-4 record in close games against quality competition is cause for concern. He says it's better to lose a close game than get blown out (no duh). I say it's still early to press the panic button but our record in close games this season is less than stellar. 

Quote from: lawdog77 on December 29, 2022, 08:49:33 PM
So would you feel better if we only beat Baylor by 3? Or Radford?

Apparently he'd feel better if we won those two games close and got blown out in our losses. We would then be "2-0 in close games," yet have demonstrably worse results - which tells you how dumb this whole thing is.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 08:57:34 PM
Apparently he'd feel better if we won those two games close and got blown out in our losses. We would then be "2-0 in close games," yet have demonstrably worse results - which tells you how dumb this whole thing is.

Not even remotely close to what I'm saying.

We played four close games. We're 0-4. I wouldn't be having this conversation if we closed out two of those four close games.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 08:54:45 PM
As stated previously, I feel very good about this team. However as it was brought up by someone else, it is concerning we're 0-4 against quality teams in close games.

Winning close games is a skill. When I see us handle teams down the stretch when we have a lead, I'll feel better. There are some lofty WL record projections thrown around here. We will need to win close games to get to that 12/13 win total in conference. 0-4 is not an indictment, especially this early in the season, but it was presented as a possible concern and I understand and recognize the possibility that may stop this team from realizing it's true potential.

Its just statistics. Winning "close" games will even itself out. Unless of course we beat everyone else by more than 5. I'm with those that would be more concerned if we got blown out in games. Worrying about being 0-4 in close games at this point is a strange hill to die on, IMO.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 08:56:57 PM
He doesn't think our 0-4 record in close games against quality competition is cause for concern. He says it's better to lose a close game than get blown out (no duh). I say it's still early to press the panic button but our record in close games this season is less than stellar.

So hypothetically if we lose to XU twice, UCONN twice, and Creighton, Providence, and Nova once by a combined 10 points with chances to win all 7 games, Fluffy wouldn't be concerned whatsoever?  I'm a bit lost.  Ty. 

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 08:59:26 PM
Not even remotely close to what I'm saying.

We played four close games. We're 0-4. I wouldn't be having this conversation if we closed out two of those four close games.

Wow! Are you saying it's better to win games than lose them???  SHOCKING!!!

Your argument has lost all semblance of logic. 

Quote from: lawdog77 on December 29, 2022, 08:59:30 PM
Its just statistics. Winning "close" games will even itself out. Unless of course we beat everyone else by more than 5. I'm with those that would be more concerned if we got blown out in games. Worrying about being 0-4 in close games at this point is a strange hill to die on, IMO.

We're not going to blow everyone out. We've played great games which we dominated end to end for 40 minutes.

It's a different game flow playing in close games and we've struggled to score in the half court for stretches in those matchups.

Not really sure why it's so controversial.

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:02:36 PM
So hypothetically if we lose to XU twice, UCONN twice, and Creighton, Providence, and Nova once by a combined 10 points with chances to win all 7 games, Fluffy wouldn't be concerned whatsoever?  I'm a bit lost.  Ty. 

If you think that's what I am saying, not only are you "a bit lost," I would question your ability to comprehend the English language.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 09:03:10 PM

Wow! Are you saying it's better to win games than lose them???  SHOCKING!!!

Your argument has lost all semblance of logic.

Yes I am saying it's better to win games than lose games. My point of concern is that we've lost all four close games we've played.

You're right Panda that there's no need to hit the panic button right now.  At the same time to think that we aren't going to have to win some close games, against our remaining quality opponents, not to mention in the NCAA tournament (assuming we make it) seems to be rather la-la-landish imo. 

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 09:05:07 PM
Yes I am saying it's better to win games than lose games. My point of concern is that we've lost all four close games we've played.

Again if we would have played eight close games, and gone 4-4 in them, would you feel better about the season because of our record in close games?

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:05:44 PM
You're right Panda that there's no need to hit the panic button right now.  At the same time to think that we aren't going to have to win some close games, against our remaining quality opponents, not to mention in the NCAA tournament (assuming we make it) seems to be rather la-la-landish imo. 

Who said we aren't going to have to win some close games in the future?

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 09:04:33 PM
If you think that's what I am saying, not only are you "a bit lost," I would question your ability to comprehend the English language.

Fluffy, your command of the English language may not be as strong as you believe? 

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 09:07:24 PM
Again if we would have played eight close games, and gone 4-4 in them, would you feel better about the season because of our record in close games?

You're clearly  missing the point.  Because it's about who we would have beaten in your hypothetical 4-4, not the margin of victory.  The fact is we have not played 8 tournament teams as it stands right now. 

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 09:07:24 PM
Again if we would have played eight close games, and gone 4-4 in them, would you feel better about the season because of our record in close games?

I'd feel better if we won 2 of the 4 close games we've been in this season.

I still feel good about this team. Would be more encouraged if we performed better in the close games we played this season.

Winning close games is a skill. I know some posters brains may explode with this one but look at providence last year. They had multiple guys who could score in various ways in the half court, great OOB sets when they needed buckets out of timeouts, played very organized tough half court defense and rebounded the ball well. Some Kenpom subscribers called that lucky because they "stole" a bunch of close games, but they were built to win those games.

We haven't showed those qualities yet in close games. That's not to say we can't be that team this year, but with younger players in new roles, it isn't a shock we haven't been great at closing out games.

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 09:16:24 PM
I'd feel better if we won 2 of the 4 close games we've been in this season.

I still feel good about this team. Would be more encouraged if we performed better in the close games we played this season.

Winning close games is a skill. I know some posters brains may explode with this one but look at providence last year. They had multiple guys who could score in various ways in the half court, great OOB sets when they needed buckets out of timeouts, played very organized tough half court defense and rebounded the ball well. Some Kenpom subscribers called that lucky because they "stole" a bunch of close games, but they were built to win those games.

We haven't showed those qualities yet in close games. That's not to say we can't be that team this year, but with younger players in new roles, it isn't a shock we haven't been great at closing out games.

Yes.  But in the most basic analysis it's simpler than that.  What is our record against probable or potential tournament teams?  That's essentially all that matters.  Fluffy prefers to live in an alternate universe and antagonize MU fans. 

Lol. Winning close games is not "a skill." You win close games the way you win blowouts.

Read this.

https://statsbywill.com/2021/08/02/college-basketball-close-games-study/

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:21:49 PM
Yes.  But in the most basic analysis it's simpler than that.  What is our record against probable or potential tournament teams?  That's essentially all that matters.  Fluffy prefers to live in an alternate universe and antagonize MU fans. 

WTF are you even talking about?

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 29, 2022, 09:27:31 PM
WTF are you even talking about?

We have four freaking close losses Fluffy.  1, 2, 3, 4. All four against potential tournament teams as it stands currently.  We have two wins against potential tournament teams.  1, 2.  That means we are 2-4 in these contests and that is all that matters right now.  The fact that you get unhinged and stuff is a personal issue that hopefully you can solve in the future. 

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:14:52 PM
You're clearly  missing the point.  Because it's about who we would have beaten in your hypothetical 4-4, not the margin of victory.  The fact is we have not played 8 tournament teams as it stands right now.

Yeah youre lost on this one. No offense but you cant tell someone they are "missing the point" when 5 posts ago you asked Panda to explain what is even going on haha.

None of this argument is about quality of opponent. Its all about whether close losses matter.

The close losses turned to close wins is not gonna be better than the blow out wins being turned to bad losses in almost any scenario.

Say we win Purdue and Wisconsin in close games. Heck yeah those are two big wins. But now if Baylor and Creighton wax us off the floor that is nullified.

Even more disasterous if we are swapping close losses and blow out wins would be if the blowouts of GT and ND turned into the losses in this scenario.

Our NET is going to be a huge key come tourney time. And one of the reasons we are top 30 right now with just a meh schedule is becaue we are boat racing teams, and losing tight games.

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:34:41 PM
We have four freaking close losses Fluffy.  1, 2, 3, 4. All four against potential tournament teams as it stands currently.  We have two wins against potential tournament teams.  1, 2.  That means we are 2-4 in these contests and that is all that matters right now.  The fact that you get unhinged and stuff is a personal issue that hopefully you can solve in the future.

None of what you said is the debate between Panda and Fluffy.

Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on December 29, 2022, 09:36:52 PM
Yeah youre lost on this one. No offense but you cant tell someone they are "missing the point" when 5 posts ago you asked Panda to explain what is even going on haha.

None of this argument is about quality of opponent. Its all about whether close losses matter.

The close losses turned to close wins is not gonna be better than the blow out wins being turned to bad losses in almost any scenario.

Say we win Purdue and Wisconsin in close games. Heck yeah those are two big wins. But now if Baylor and Creighton wax us off the floor that is nullified.

Even more disasterous if we are swapping close losses and blow out wins would be if the blowouts of GT and ND turned into the losses in this scenario.

Our NET is going to be a huge key come tourney time. And one of the reasons we are top 30 right now with just a meh schedule is becaue we are boat racing teams, and losing tight games.

Yes. the NET matters and we're 2-4 vs the top 75. 

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:38:49 PM
Yes. the NET matters and we're 2-4 vs the top 75.

The NET matters.

And according to the NET our 4 loses are by a total of 10 points (OT loses are 1 pt) and our wins are by 20 (capped at 10). (minus the fact that they just basically use KenPom/another efficiency metric with this somehow.)

So technically Marquette is +10 in these games.

Marquette's NET is gonna be 25ish tomorrow.

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:38:49 PM
Yes. the NET matters and we're 2-4 vs the top 75.

Not how the NET works

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 10:52:56 AM
That's not the narrative.  Stop conjuring things from thin air.  All of us would like to win every game by 50 points Fluffy but that's obviously not realistic.  I and others have mentioned that we are 0-4 in close games because......well.....we're 0-4 in close games.  And we at minimum should have won two of them and more likely 3 of 4.  To completely disregard some of our performances in tight games down the stretch is foolish.  We will need to find a way to slam the door in these potential contests and it could be the difference in making the tournament and or advancing in the NCAA tournament.

Muggsy the only who can conjure is the Wizard of Scoop AKA TAMU

Quote from: GoldenEagles03 on December 29, 2022, 10:56:26 AM
What did I miss with Keeyan?  He is a walk-on?

Yes

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 29, 2022, 09:52:25 AM
We don't talk about the past on Scoop

Never ever, except for Woj, Markus & Hausers

Quote from: 4everwarriors on December 29, 2022, 01:49:23 PM
Biggest surprise wuz Kolek sayin', "fook 'em" at a catholic university and such, aina?

Nah, Jesus said it first at the temple

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:02:36 PM
So hypothetically if we lose to XU twice, UCONN twice, and Creighton, Providence, and Nova once by a combined 10 points with chances to win all 7 games, Fluffy wouldn't be concerned whatsoever?  I'm a bit lost.  Ty.

No we would just be losing 7 games, now how we lose them will affect the NET. If we lose by less than we are supposed to lose it won't hurt us much or might help us.

Oso's improvement is off the charts.  He seems to be getting better by the game.  He just needs to start making free throws and he will take his game to a whole new level.

O-Max has also improved dramatically since last season. 

There will be frustrating moments but this team is a lot of fun to watch.  They've lost four games by a very narrow margin...let's hope they learn to close out some close games.

Quote from: Newsdreams on December 29, 2022, 10:20:57 PM
Yes

When was this released?

Go back and watch the end of regulation against Wisconsin and maybe those that are upset about the close losses will change their mind. Every coach in America would have taken our last 5 possessions over Wisconsin's. And yet it went to OT and MU lost. Sometimes you have to accept the absurdity of sports.

Quote from: Newsdreams on December 29, 2022, 10:29:06 PM
No we would just be losing 7 games, now how we lose them will affect the NET. If we lose by less than we are supposed to lose it won't hurt us much or might help us.

I can't imagine we could get in the NCAA tournament in my hypothetical example if we lost all of those games because of margin of loss.  Especially with possibly one or two wins vs the NET top 50.

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 29, 2022, 09:34:41 PM
We have four freaking close losses Fluffy.  1, 2, 3, 4. All four against potential tournament teams as it stands currently.  We have two wins against potential tournament teams.  1, 2.  That means we are 2-4 in these contests and that is all that matters right now.  The fact that you get unhinged and stuff is a personal issue that hopefully you can solve in the future. 

::) ::) ::)

Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on December 29, 2022, 09:36:52 PM
Yeah youre lost on this one. No offense but you cant tell someone they are "missing the point" when 5 posts ago you asked Panda to explain what is even going on haha.

None of this argument is about quality of opponent. Its all about whether close losses matter.

Yep.

English language Muggs. Learn it. Appreciate it.

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 30, 2022, 06:23:07 AM
I can't imagine we could get in the NCAA tournament in my hypothetical example if we lost all of those games because of margin of loss.  Especially with possibly one or two wins vs the NET top 50.

What could really kill MU is losing to DePaul & Georgetown, then MU might have to win all remaining games to get in. Right now if MU lost those 7 games and won all other games, 12-8 BE = MU in NCAAT

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 30, 2022, 06:23:07 AM
I can't imagine we could get in the NCAA tournament in my hypothetical example if we lost all of those games because of margin of loss.  Especially with possibly one or two wins vs the NET top 50.

Muggsy at a birthday party while everyone sings Happy Birthday:

"I guess it's a happy birthday but you're just one day closer to death.  Are you planning your funeral yet?"

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 07:02:58 AM
Muggsy at a birthday party while everyone sings Happy Birthday:

"I guess it's a happy birthday but you're just one day closer to death.  Are you planning your funeral yet?"

LOL

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 07:02:58 AM
Muggsy at a birthday party while everyone sings Happy Birthday:

"I guess it's a happy birthday but you're just one day closer to death.  Are you planning your funeral yet?"

I don't see the analogy.  We're going to have to figure out how to win close games.  It's not rational to think we'll blow out teams, continue to lose close games, but still make the NCAA tournament. 

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 09:16:24 PM
I'd feel better if we won 2 of the 4 close games we've been in this season.

I still feel good about this team. Would be more encouraged if we performed better in the close games we played this season.

Winning close games is a skill. I know some posters brains may explode with this one but look at providence last year. They had multiple guys who could score in various ways in the half court, great OOB sets when they needed buckets out of timeouts, played very organized tough half court defense and rebounded the ball well. Some Kenpom subscribers called that lucky because they "stole" a bunch of close games, but they were built to win those games.

We haven't showed those qualities yet in close games. That's not to say we can't be that team this year, but with younger players in new roles, it isn't a shock we haven't been great at closing out games.

The skill that is missing is so obvious...rebounding!

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 30, 2022, 07:33:33 AM
I don't see the analogy.  We're going to have to figure out how to win close games.  It's not rational to think we'll blow out teams, continue to lose close games, but still make the NCAA tournament. 

The point is they don't have to "figure out" anything. You win close games the same way you win blowouts.

I voted for Keeyan as my biggest surprise. By nature, I'm generally an optimist when it comes to MU basketball, so I really didn't want to vote for one of the more negative choices...but it is the biggest surprise for me this season. I really expected him to be a solid contributor and I was looking forward to seeing him play. My optimistic nature returns when I think that the team is doing pretty well even without the contributions I expected from Keeyan. I'm still hopeful that he'll be a big part of MU's success at some point.

Oso's outstanding progress and the offense would be my next two choices. Seeing Oso and O-Max improve so much is very encouraging and I'd love to see Keeyan right there with them.

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 30, 2022, 07:41:15 AM
The point is they don't have to "figure out" anything. You win close games the same way you win blowouts.

And yet we haven't done it yet this year. It takes a different mentality and strategy to win back and forth close games then blow outs.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:13:09 AM
And yet we haven't done it yet this year. It takes a different mentality and strategy to win back and forth close games then blow outs.

And luck

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 08:17:10 AM
And luck

Ask providence about all their luck last season.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:18:59 AM
Ask providence about all their luck last season.

Worked out great.  It wasn't some brilliant end of game coaching strategies

Quote from: MuggsyB on December 30, 2022, 07:33:33 AM
I don't see the analogy.  We're going to have to figure out how to win close games.  It's not rational to think we'll blow out teams, continue to lose close games, but still make the NCAA tournament.

Do you know Rachel Dratch?

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 08:21:21 AM
Worked out great.  It wasn't some brilliant end of game coaching strategies

Good point - it doesn't take any particular skill to close out a bunch of different opponents in tight games, win your conference (asterisks) or go to the sweet 16. Just luck

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:13:09 AM
And yet we haven't done it yet this year. It takes a different mentality and strategy to win back and forth close games then blow outs.

So, would you feel better about this team if we had the same record, but were 2-2 in close games, with 2 double digit losses?

Quote from: lawdog77 on December 30, 2022, 08:26:09 AM
So, would you feel better about this team if we had the same record, but were 2-2 in close games, with 2 double digit losses?

We're all speaking in hypotheticals.

I've only spoke about our four close games. I've said what feels like a zillion times I'd feel better if we won a couple of our close games that we had control of.

Otherwise we've played really well this season.

I've never mentioned a hypothetical outside of our four close games.

It's just been the usual pedants that are trying to push their narrative without acknowledging my points.

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 08:24:08 AM
Do you know Rachel Dratch?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8c/Debbie_Downer.PNG)

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:25:45 AM
Good point - it doesn't take any particular skill to close out a bunch of different opponents in tight games, win your conference (asterisks) or go to the sweet 16. Just luck

What coaching decisions did Ed Cooley make last year that Shaka hasn't this year?  What did they do this Marquette team hasn't?

I mean, I'm just some pedant that isn't acknowledging your points that winning close games is better than losing close games

Quote from: panda on December 29, 2022, 09:16:24 PM
I'd feel better if we won 2 of the 4 close games we've been in this season.

I still feel good about this team. Would be more encouraged if we performed better in the close games we played this season.

Winning close games is a skill. I know some posters brains may explode with this one but look at providence last year. They had multiple guys who could score in various ways in the half court, great OOB sets when they needed buckets out of timeouts, played very organized tough half court defense and rebounded the ball well. Some Kenpom subscribers called that lucky because they "stole" a bunch of close games, but they were built to win those games.

We haven't showed those qualities yet in close games. That's not to say we can't be that team this year, but with younger players in new roles, it isn't a shock we haven't been great at closing out games.

This

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 08:47:30 AM
What coaching decisions did Ed Cooley make last year that Shaka hasn't this year?  What did they do this Marquette team hasn't?

I mean, I'm just some pedant that isn't acknowledging your points that winning close games is better than losing close games

It's ok to be slightly critical of certain things yet still be highly optimistic and positive.

We've already discussed coach Cooleys record in games within 5pts as well as coach Shakas.
We've also already discussed the difference in approach- Ed said he starts every practice with a simulation of the last 4 minutes of the game and Shaka said he hasn't practiced the 5s end of the game scenario at all.

The more prepared you are for a certain situation the better the results usually are.

I'd still take Shaka Smart over Ed Cooley as the basketball coach at Marquette.

There is nothing wrong with suggesting that end of the game situations and rebounding are works in progress.
As the team gets better and better in all other facets, which it is doing, then you can zero in on your Achilles heels.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:51:39 AM
This

LOL quoting yourself?

Again, winning close games isn't "a skill." You keep saying that, but there really is no data to prove that at all. Bringing up Providence last year is EXTREMELY anecdotal and doesn't really prove anything.

SURPRISE!

/THREAD

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 30, 2022, 08:54:20 AM
LOL quoting yourself?

Again, winning close games isn't "a skill." You keep saying that, but there really is no data to prove that at all. Bringing up Providence last year is EXTREMELY anecdotal and doesn't really prove anything.

More like it doesn't prove anything you want to hear.

Quote from: DoctorV on December 30, 2022, 08:53:44 AM
It's ok to be slightly critical of certain things yet still be highly optimistic and positive.

We've already discussed coach Cooleys record in games within 5pts as well as coach Shakas.
We've also already discussed the difference in approach- Ed said he starts every practice with a simulation of the last 4 minutes of the game and Shaka said he hasn't practiced the 5s end of the game scenario at all.

The more prepared you are for a certain situation the better the results usually are.

I'd still take Shaka Smart over Ed Cooley as the basketball coach at Marquette.

There is nothing wrong with suggesting that end of the game situations and rebounding are works in progress.
As the team gets better and better in all other facets, which it is doing, then you can zero in on your Achilles heels.

Presenting coaching records, without any sort of context, doesn't mean much.  Perhaps Shaka's coaching gets the team to blowout level so "record in close games" is never triggered.  Perhaps Cooley under performs until the end of games.

It's an irrelevant stat that really isn't indicative of anything. And it most certainly is not "a skill."

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:55:59 AM
More like it doesn't prove anything you want to hear.

Nope. You have providing nothing to actually back up this assertion. You have been on this dumb talking point for about 24 hours and have just kept repeating yourself. 

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 08:47:30 AM
What coaching decisions did Ed Cooley make last year that Shaka hasn't this year?  What did they do this Marquette team hasn't?

I mean, I'm just some pedant that isn't acknowledging your points that winning close games is better than losing close games

Also to clarify (if you care) - you're not one of the pedants 👍

Quote from: jfp61 on December 29, 2022, 09:54:33 PM
The NET matters.

And according to the NET...our wins are by 20 (capped at 10).

So technically Marquette is +10 in these games.

Source? I feel this may be #FakeNews & #Lies

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 30, 2022, 08:54:20 AM
LOL quoting yourself?

Again, winning close games isn't "a skill." You keep saying that, but there really is no data to prove that at all. Bringing up Providence last year is EXTREMELY anecdotal and doesn't really prove anything.

I didn't have the "close games" option in my top three, but there certainly are certain skills that can contribute to winning close games. I have a pretty vivid and nausea-inducing recollection of two consecutive inbound attempts where MU didn't even manage to get a touch of the ball by a player in blue. That's a skill. It's a skill that is particularly useful late in close games. There are others. I hope that Shaka and the team learned something from that and will execute better in the future.

I remember someone saying at the time that Kolek is our best passer and you definitely want your best passer inbounding in that situation. I agree that Kolek is our best passer. I am not at all convinced that Kolek if our best 3/4 court passer (I certainly hope not). I hope the team has worked on that. Maybe they found someone on the team that is really good at making that pass. Putting it in terms of the Cleveland Cavs (who I've watched a lot this year): Garland is the team's best passer, but if they're making a 3/4 pass with the game on the line, I'd put the ball in Kevin Love's hands every time.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:30:05 AM
We're all speaking in hypotheticals.

I've only spoke about our four close games. I've said what feels like a zillion times I'd feel better if we won a couple of our close games that we had control of.

Otherwise we've played really well this season.

I've never mentioned a hypothetical outside of our four close games.

It's just been the usual pedants that are trying to push their narrative without acknowledging my points.

You have.  And you have the unique ability to unite Scoopers who frequently have opposing points of view, all of whom find your points illogical.  At best you're a great troll.

Tell us though, how did clutch Coach Ed Cooley lose an 8 point lead in Overtime, at home, with 1:40 seconds left, in a game where his team was awarded 49 FT attempts?

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:51:39 AM
This

I'm sure it's happened as this is Scoop but I don't recall anyone ever quoting themselves and topping it off with "This". Remarkable. 

I know winning by 10+ tomorrow would be better but I hope we win by 1 so it hopefully kills this discussion.

Quote from: StillAWarrior on December 30, 2022, 09:11:21 AM
I didn't have the "close games" option in my top three, but there certainly are certain skills that can contribute to winning close games. I have a pretty vivid and nausea-inducing recollection of two consecutive inbound attempts where MU didn't even manage to get a touch of the ball by a player in blue. That's a skill. It's a skill that is particularly useful late in close games. There are others. I hope that Shaka and the team learned something from that and will execute better in the future.

I remember someone saying at the time that Kolek is our best passer and you definitely want your best passer inbounding in that situation. I agree that Kolek is our best passer. I am not at all convinced that Kolek if our best 3/4 court passer (I certainly hope not). I hope the team has worked on that. Maybe they found someone on the team that is really good at making that pass. Putting it in terms of the Cleveland Cavs (who I've watched a lot this year): Garland is the team's best passer, but if they're making a 3/4 pass with the game on the line, I'd put the ball in Kevin Love's hands every time.

Pointing out a couple of instances where teams have failed down the stretch doesn't mean that "winning close games" is meaningful, and it certainly doesn't make it "a skill."  At least a skill apart from usual basketball skills. 

Quote from: Elonsmusk on December 30, 2022, 09:17:54 AM
You have.  And you have the unique ability to unite Scoopers who frequently have opposing points of view, all of whom find your points illogical.  At best you're a great troll.

Tell us though, how did clutch Coach Ed Cooley lose an 8 point lead in Overtime, at home, with 1:40 seconds left, in a game where his team was awarded 49 FT attempts?

What was the final score of the game genius

Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on December 30, 2022, 09:20:51 AM
I'm sure it's happened as this is Scoop but I don't recall anyone ever quoting themselves and topping it off with "This". Remarkable. 

I know winning by 10+ tomorrow would be better but I hope we win by 1 so it hopefully kills this discussion.

Not me, I don't think my heart could take it.

Guys, if Marquette almost blows a 12 point lead in the last 3 minutes tomorrow and wins by 1 will that make you feel better about winning close games?

Quote from: Jay Bee on December 30, 2022, 09:05:32 AM
Source? I feel this may be #FakeNews & #Lies

I know this is a joke.

But if you want what the NCAA will give us as to the NET ranking calculations.

"Team Value Index"- (way to give more value to difficult wins, no clue what it means seems like a, "big win bonus")
"Net Efficiency"- (basically KenPom, even down to .475*FTA being a part of the tempo)
Winning Percentage
Adjusted Win Percentage (1.4 wins per road win, 0.6 wins per home win, 0.6 losses per road loss, -1.4 losses per home loss)
Scoring Margin (This value has a point differential capped at 10 points in each game. All overtime games are capped at one point.)

And then this some weird multiplication. no one is privy too.

https://www.si.com/college/2018/11/04/college-basketball-rankings-net-system-explain

Quote from: The Sultan of Semantics on December 30, 2022, 09:23:16 AM

Pointing out a couple of instances where teams have failed down the stretch doesn't mean that "winning close games" is meaningful, and it certainly doesn't make it "a skill."  At least a skill apart from usual basketball skills.

I said simply that there are some skills that are uniquely tied to end of game situations in close games. Nothing else. I'm not really sure that is debatable unless you're just looking to debate. I am not particularly worried about Marquette's performance in close games (although, like everyone else, I certainly would prefer that they'd won all those games). I will be on the edge of my seat the next time they find themselves needing an 3/4 court inbounds pass at the end of a game because I haven't seen that they have that skill in their arsenal.

I'm going Kam-
While we 'heard' he was a scorer, last season, and much of early this one, he was more a launcher. 
That's been corralled and his driving has opened up much for his own outside opportunities as well as opps for others... both outside and in. 
Continue that, and the mere fact that the ball is in his hands could result in 3, drive, drive and dish, you name it.  Harder to predict and defend-  now he becomes a true scorer. 

Oso - not a huge surprise, but a pleasant one with the output that's accompanied.  He showed the intelligence and moves prior, but has grew into his role nicely.

Close losses?  Would be more a surprise much later in a season than early, when the team is still figuring out the 'team' personality vs the individual ability aspects of the game. 

Quote from: jfp61 on December 30, 2022, 09:28:32 AM
I know this is a joke.

But if you want what the NCAA will give us as to the NET ranking calculations.

"Team Value Index"- (way to give more value to difficult wins, no clue what it means seems like a, "big win bonus")
"Net Efficiency"- (basically KenPom, even down to .475*FTA being a part of the tempo)
Winning Percentage
Adjusted Win Percentage (1.4 wins per road win, 0.6 wins per home win, 0.6 losses per road loss, -1.4 losses per home loss)
Scoring Margin (This value has a point differential capped at 10 points in each game. All overtime games are capped at one point.)

And then this some weird multiplication. no one is privy too.

https://www.si.com/college/2018/11/04/college-basketball-rankings-net-system-explain

Not a joke. Your source is from 2018. I think two years later it was revised, and the scoring margin (as well as other components) were scrapped. Please research & confirm for me. I'm not 100% certain, except that I definitely do not know how to calc N.E.T.... But I do believe your component list to be #FakeNews & #Lies

Quote from: Jay Bee on December 30, 2022, 09:52:02 AM
Not a joke. Your source is from 2018. I think two years later it was revised, and the scoring margin (as well as other components) were scrapped. Please research & confirm for me. I'm not 100% certain, except that I definitely do not know how to calc N.E.T.... But I do believe your component list to be #FakeNews & #Lies

I must have missed that. Honestly they don't even have to give anyone actual data.

Seems like its two components now the "Team Value Index" (which just sounds like BS, to favor big conferences and big wins)  and an adjusted net efficiency rating.

So the NET is just now 1/2 KenPom and 1/2 whatever the NCAA wants (seems like they put win percentage inside of the
Team Value index, though I wouldn't be surprised if margin is in there too even thought it would be redundant to KenPom).

My biggest surprise is that I think this is the best team we've had in over a decade. I wasn't as down on the team as most were since I didn't think losing Lewis was going to set them back at all, but I didn't expect this much development from everyone.

As far as not being able to win close games goes, I've thought about each game individually and don't think there's much to it yet. I'd be more concerned if we had the same record and were instead 7-4 in close games. Other than the 4 losses, MU has won the other 10 games by double digits. That includes 5 wins over high majors and 2 of those wins are by 20+. There's no "we should have won that game, but also got really lucky in that other game so it evens out." If a few balls had bounced our way, MU would very solidly be in the Top 10 right now.

I think Omax has been a big surprise. I was not a big fan last year other than I love him out in front on the pressure defense. Last year he was just so out of control on offense.  I would wince when he would drive or be the guy trying to finish the break.  This year he still seems to be playing a bit out of control on offense but the results are dramatically different to my eye. Now he just needs to learn to stay on his feet so when he misses we aren't playing 4 on 5 and improve his 3 point shooting a tad.  Like I say I wasn't that big of a fan last year but I have been convinced so far this year.

Quote from: Hoops92 on December 30, 2022, 10:36:24 AM
I think Omax has been a big surprise. I was not a big fan last year other than I love him out in front on the pressure defense. Last year he was just so out of control on offense.  I would wince when he would drive or be the guy trying to finish the break.  This year he still seems to be playing a bit out of control on offense but the results are dramatically different to my eye. Now he just needs to learn to stay on his feet so when he misses we aren't playing 4 on 5 and improve his 3 point shooting a tad.  Like I say I wasn't that big of a fan last year but I have been convinced so far this year.

Agree Hoops92.  This is my biggest surprise.  Many were convinced he was the key to the success of this team and I was skeptical.  I have been pleasantly surprised at how his drives have been under more control, he can finish with either hand at the basket, and finish through contact.  His three point shot also seems better to me.  The game has slowed down for him for sure. I've been very impressed so far.

There is no doubt that Omax was more out of control last season, but he showed a ton of signs that he was a very skilled player. The things, aside from defense, that caught my eye was that he was capable of getting a defensive rebound or steal and take it coast to coast. Plus, I was beyond impressed last season that he was equally as skilled with both hands. To be honest, I think he has much more upside and it starts with his outside shooting. I steal believe that he is the key for team success this season. He has a big time, athletic body and a skilled player.

OMax and Kam hit the kill shots against UW and PC and Shaka's endgame coaching is lauded on here.

This stuff is really overrated by fans, especially at the college level. Yes, there are tactical adjustments involved, but the head coach is there to communicate clearly and keep the players calm in those situations. It's up to them to make the shots.

Truth is, there have been several really nice surprises so far this season - the development of Oso and Kam, TK's improvement, Omax's improvement, etc. But, to me, there are two things that stand out. First, the ball does not stop on offense anymore like it frequently did last season. Everyone can pass and is looking for an open man. Second, the help defense is much  better than last year. It still breaks down at times, but is much improved.

Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on December 30, 2022, 09:28:26 AM
Guys, if Marquette almost blows a 12 point lead in the last 3 minutes tomorrow and wins by 1 will that make you feel better about winning close games?

Depends who you ask.

57

The movement on offense has been awesome to watch. There have been times when I thought a great shot was passed up and they end up with a better one. I also agree that Kolek, who I am a big fan of, has improved across the board. When I saw him in the preseason he looked physically bigger and stronger, and it shows on the court.

Quote from: Hards Alumni on December 30, 2022, 12:56:10 PM
Depends who you ask.

It was a sarcastic question. I think the bigger focus is minimizing the longer scoring droughts, which we've seen in those close losses as well as in some of the double-digit wins.

Those have happened in the same game and not solely at the end of games but obviously when they contribute to a blown lead in the last 5-10 minutes of a game that's where the attention goes.

They're still going to happen but you find a way to cut the frequency and duration and you have a little more margin for error.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 08:13:09 AM
And yet we haven't done it yet this year. It takes a different mentality and strategy to win back and forth close games then blow outs.

I rather win by blowouts.

Vander

They have had scoring droughts even in their wins. A lot has to do with the guys on the court and they will figure it out. I am not overly concerned about their ability to score a lot of points.

Quote from: Newsdreams on December 30, 2022, 04:32:23 PM
I rather win by blowouts.

And I like to drink expensive Bourdeaux but unfortunately I can't do that every night.

Quote from: rgoode57 on December 30, 2022, 12:37:20 PMFirst, the ball does not stop on offense anymore like it frequently did last season. Everyone can pass and is looking for an open man.

Lewis was an outstanding player, Morsell was a very good one. Moving the basketball was not a strength for either.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 04:42:59 PM
And I like to drink expensive Bourdeaux but unfortunately I can't do that every night.

You could

Quote from: Goose on December 30, 2022, 04:40:59 PM
Vander

They have had scoring droughts even in their wins. A lot has to do with the guys on the court and they will figure it out. I am not overly concerned about their ability to score a lot of points.

Agreed, said exactly that regarding the droughts during the wins in my post. Like you I'm not too worried about it at this point.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 04:42:59 PM
And I like to drink expensive Bourdeaux but unfortunately I can't do that every night.

Seriously, if we did it every night we would be undefeated and #1. Vino choice / year? Let's see if we agree.

Quote from: Uncle Rico on December 30, 2022, 04:49:48 PM
You could

I need to mix in overrated Cab's from time to time to keep me honest.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 04:51:42 PM
I need to mix in overrated Cab's from time to time to keep me honest.

Add a few Malbec's to really dumpster dive

Quote from: Newsdreams on December 30, 2022, 04:51:35 PM
Seriously, if we did it every night we would be undefeated and #1. Vino choice / year? Let's see if we agree.

Best I've ever had was a '96 chateau margaux. Generous friend with a passion for French wine.

Favorite "everyday" is chateau biac. Just delicious.

Quote from: panda on December 30, 2022, 04:58:31 PM
Best I've ever had was a '96 chateau margaux. Generous friend with a passion for French wine.

Favorite "everyday" is chateau biac. Just delicious.

Nice, do a budget for every night, doable (sorry legs)