I'm still a little concerned about the offense. I was at the game yesterday and rewatched it today. Yesterday was a good reminder of what are team is capable of when the lane is clear. When we have space to operate, we will sashimi pretty much any team in the country.
My concern is, that I think a good chunk of our success yesterday was due to coaching malpractice by Neptune. Drop coverage has been our kryptonite all season. Wisconsin, Providence, Seton Hall, second half Butler all utilized it to great effect. Neptune used a lot of different looks against us but didn't use drop coverage until late in the game. As a result, the paint was wide open all game and we hit Nova with their worst 2P% defensive game in decades. Shaka even pointed it out during one of the inside the huddles saying that we didn't have to take threes because they were giving us the paint all day.
The good news is, when Neptune switched to drop coverage, the offense didn't stall. Stevie and Tyler both hit wide open threes and those generated some wiggle room leading to a classic TKO to Oso dunk.
I still believe the team is much better from three than they've shown so far. If that's true and those start falling, our offense will return to being unstoppable. Combine that with our consistently great defense (yesterday wasn't the best but Nova was uncharacteristically hot from three), and we have a legitimate contender.
Yeah I have no idea what Neptune was thinking. The bizarre thing was they packed in in twice against MU last year with some success.
That said... They played with aggression and made the right reads. The tentative mindf*ckedness we saw against Butler wasn't there.
I might end up being wrong, but from what I've seen, I don't think St John's has the defensive discipline to completely muck it up . The opportunities will be there if MU takes care of the basketball.
Especially when we thought the offense would be better with Jop starting, yet worse with Jop on D, and no OMax.
One of the first things I noticed was that the spacing seemed much better.
One of the next things I noticed was that Villanova, for some bizarre unknown reason, was playing really aggressive defense away from the basket.
The combination of the two was a much needed and pleasant sight.
No idea what Neptune was thinking, I asked in the game thread if he had watched the tape?
There is a formula to beat Marquette and that ain't it coach Kyle.
Just another example of why I'm not sold on him as Novas HC. I like Shaheen and Kim much more to have longer term success at their gigs despite the smaller programs and more difficult recruiting.
Marquette won't always miss badly from distance, and when they don't you'll probably lose, but if you don't pack it in and dare MU to shoot, instead opening up passing and driving lanes to the hoop with will most definitely lose.
So, take your chances with the long ball until you pay.
I couldn't believe how many easy baskets MU got in the first half because of Nova's defensive approach. I commented about it at halftime from my seat in the upper level.
Nova also gave up a couple of easy baskets just by not getting back on defense.
MU needed the late threes they got from Mitchell and Kolek to maintain their lead down the stretch.
MU could really use another game from Kolek like he had against Texas when he drained threes when the defense went under the outside screens. That opens the floodgates for the rest of the offense when teams have to respect his outside shot.
Fair point. Thought Neptune's defense was odd at times
Quote from: wisblue on January 17, 2024, 06:14:51 AM
MU could really use another game from Kolek like he had against Texas when he drained threes when the defense went under the outside screens. That opens the floodgates for the rest of the offense when teams have to respect his outside shot.
Yep. He passed up a few of them and ultimately it led to a basket against Villanova. But passing it up wasn't leading to anything in prior games. He will need to hit that shot without hesitation in most games against teams that pack the paint. He will definitely need to make that shot against better teams in the tournament to advance. Hope he finds his confidence from distance soon.
Good topic TAMU
I know we're all concerned about our 3-point shooting percentages as of late. However, i did some quick analysis and found some surprising statistics.
- On the year Marquette averages 26 3-point attempts per game.
- For the non/con portion of our schedule Marquette shot 33% from beyond the arc or 8.5 made baskets per 26 attempts.
- In the BEAST Marquette is shooting 27% from beyond the arc or 7 made baskets per 26 attempts.
- If Marquette would have shot a the same percentage in Conference that they did in Non/con it would have only affected the outcome of one of the 3 losses.
- Marquette only needs to increase their 3-point made baskets by 1.5 per game to get back to our non/con rate... This seems very doable.
I bring this up, because personally i felt we were losing recent games due to our horrible 3 point shooting and teams beginning to sag on defense. However, our 3-point shooting was seldom brought up during our dominance in the non/con schedule. Even with a paltry 33% from beyond the arc, we could still get to the basket.
I'll leave it to the experts to dive into the advance stats, but I'm thinking its our percentage of 2-point baskets made and ability/inability to get to the rim (i.e. what we saw yesterday against NOVA.) that is killing us right now.
I for one am going to layoff the hyper-focus on 3 point shooting for awhile.
Better three point shooting helps to open up the paint. (Except for the Nova game, where they just left the paint open most of the game.)
When ice cold, teams just need to pack the paint and take away driving lanes. That's what Butler did in the 2nd half.
Hitting a few to keep the defense will open up the driving lanes. That's what happened in the 2nd half vs Creighton.
Quote from: goldeneagle91114 on January 17, 2024, 09:04:50 AM
I know we're all concerned about our 3-point shooting percentages as of late. However, i did some quick analysis and found some surprising statistics.
- On the year Marquette averages 26 3-point attempts per game.
- For the non/con portion of our schedule Marquette shot 33% from beyond the arc or 8.5 made baskets per 26 attempts.
- In the BEAST Marquette is shooting 27% from beyond the arc or 7 made baskets per 26 attempts.
- If Marquette would have shot a the same percentage in Conference that they did in Non/con it would have only affected the outcome of one of the 3 losses.
- Marquette only needs to increase their 3-point made baskets by 1.5 per game to get back to our non/con rate... This seems very doable.
I bring this up, because personally i felt we were losing recent games due to our horrible 3 point shooting and teams beginning to sag on defense. However, our 3-point shooting was seldom brought up during our dominance in the non/con schedule. Even with a paltry 33% from beyond the arc, we could still get to the basket.
I'll leave it to the experts to dive into the advance stats, but I'm thinking its our percentage of 2-point baskets made and ability/inability to get to the rim (i.e. what we saw yesterday against NOVA.) that is killing us right now.
I for one am going to layoff the hyper-focus on 3 point shooting for awhile.
Good for last in conference in Big East play. Yippee!!!
UCONN, on the other hand, is at 40%. That is close to where MU needs to be to be elite the rest of the way. Time to get off the schneid with these road games.
This team reminds me of some of Buzz's teams. Tough as nails but can't shoot.
Kolek can absolutely drain the triple if teams choose to sag into the paint. We saw it earlier this season, he's in a bit of a slump. Jop, Ben, Lowery, and Mitchell can also make that shot, it's about getting it in rhythm off of Oso touches or ball reversals. We clearly are not a good 3pt shooting team at this juncture. However we're not this bad and can't lose confidence. I think there is no reason known to man why we can't shoot respectable numbers vs a pack line D. We all know it's coming, we all know what the game plan will be vs us, knock down open shots.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2024, 09:21:26 AM
Good for last in conference in Big East play. Yippee!!!
UCONN, on the other hand, is at 40%. That is close to where MU needs to be to be elite the rest of the way. Time to get off the schneid with these road games.
This team reminds me of some of Buzz's teams. Tough as nails but can't shoot.
What the Hell is a schneid Doc? ;D
Quote from: Juan Anderson's Mixtape on January 17, 2024, 09:19:38 AM
Better three point shooting helps to open up the paint. (Except for the Nova game, where they just left the paint open most of the game.)
When ice cold, teams just need to pack the paint and take away driving lanes. That's what Butler did in the 2nd half.
Hitting a few to keep the defense will open up the driving lanes. That's what happened in the 2nd half vs Creighton.
Yep, the struggles from 3 roll downhill and impact our effectiveness and conversion rate in the paint.
Quote from: goldeneagle91114 on January 17, 2024, 09:04:50 AM
I know we're all concerned about our 3-point shooting percentages as of late. However, i did some quick analysis and found some surprising statistics.
I for one am going to layoff the hyper-focus on 3 point shooting for awhile.
Alternative analysis:
When we shoot less than 29% from deep, we usually use (only 1 win). In our losses, we've gone 24.8% from deep; excluding SH we're at 21.6%.
Shoot like a$$ from 3 and we're in trouble.
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on January 17, 2024, 09:42:45 AM
What the Hell is a schneid Doc? ;D
I try to bring the proper cultural appropriation into Scoop and get dinged. You got something against Krauts?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/where-does-get-off-the-schneid-come-from-history
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2024, 10:31:26 AM
I try to bring the proper cultural appropriation into Scoop and get dinged. You got something against Krauts?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/where-does-get-off-the-schneid-come-from-history
I sure do. They attacked Pearl Harbor.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 17, 2024, 10:22:31 AM
Alternative analysis:
When we shoot less than 29% from deep, we usually use (only 1 win). In our losses, we've gone 24.8% from deep; excluding SH we're at 21.6%.
Shoot like a$$ from 3 and we're in trouble.
*lose
(Otherwise I agree with this analysis. Need to shoot 3s better.)
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on January 17, 2024, 10:35:53 AM
I sure do. They attacked Pearl Harbor.
"Mr. Blutarsky: Zero.Point.Zero."
Senator Blutarsky
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 17, 2024, 10:22:31 AM
Alternative analysis:
When we shoot less than 29% from deep, we usually use (only 1 win). In our losses, we've gone 24.8% from deep; excluding SH we're at 21.6%.
Shoot like a$$ from 3 and we're in trouble.
Then you look at the Butler game where they were something like 1 for 14 at one point and 3 for 28 before making a couple after the game was decided.
Never going to convince me that just a couple makes it the first half of that game would have affected the outcome. Leading by 13 or 16 at the half instead of 7 would have made a big difference.
And a win in that game would make MU's position in the conference standings look a lot different.
Quote from: goldeneagle91114 on January 17, 2024, 09:04:50 AM
I know we're all concerned about our 3-point shooting percentages as of late. However, i did some quick analysis and found some surprising statistics.
- On the year Marquette averages 26 3-point attempts per game.
- For the non/con portion of our schedule Marquette shot 33% from beyond the arc or 8.5 made baskets per 26 attempts.
- In the BEAST Marquette is shooting 27% from beyond the arc or 7 made baskets per 26 attempts.
- If Marquette would have shot a the same percentage in Conference that they did in Non/con it would have only affected the outcome of one of the 3 losses.
- Marquette only needs to increase their 3-point made baskets by 1.5 per game to get back to our non/con rate... This seems very doable.
I bring this up, because personally i felt we were losing recent games due to our horrible 3 point shooting and teams beginning to sag on defense. However, our 3-point shooting was seldom brought up during our dominance in the non/con schedule. Even with a paltry 33% from beyond the arc, we could still get to the basket.
I'll leave it to the experts to dive into the advance stats, but I'm thinking its our percentage of 2-point baskets made and ability/inability to get to the rim (i.e. what we saw yesterday against NOVA.) that is killing us right now.
I for one am going to layoff the hyper-focus on 3 point shooting for awhile.
OK, but what about our 3 pt defense. I now it is just the eye test but it seems either the whole (Purdue, Nova) team or one poor 3 pt shooter just shoots the light out against us.
I think Villanova, even under Jay Wright, is one of those "we play defense the way we play defense, and if we do it right we can stop anybody" kind of teams. But you are all right, the way they played defense is what we would love to see from every team. I even added it as point 10 on Tower's game synopsis.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 17, 2024, 02:26:28 PM
OK, but what about our 3 pt defense. I now it is just the eye test but it seems either the whole (Purdue, Nova) team or one poor 3 pt shooter just shoots the light out against us.
I mentioned elsewhere that our defenders got right into the faces of Nova's "would-be" 3 point shooters in the second half. Instead of launching yet another 3, they wisely chose to pass the ball instead. The key was to figure out to whom the ball was going on the three point line and
very quickly get your ass over there. They got 4 (vs. 9 in the first half) while the outcome of the game was still in question plus one more after a missed MU FT in the closing seconds.
3 point defense(as far as percentage) is mostly luck........reducing attempts is really all the defense is able to impact.
Pomeroy did a study on it once......
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on January 17, 2024, 02:45:35 PM
I mentioned elsewhere that our defenders got right into the faces of Nova's "would-be" 3 point shooters in the second half. Instead of launching yet another 3, they wisely chose to pass the ball instead. The key was to figure out to whom the ball was going on the three point line and very quickly get your ass over there. They got 4 (vs. 9 in the first half) while the outcome of the game was still in question plus one more after a missed MU FT in the closing seconds.
The 3 point defense was much better in the second half. One of the makes by Hausen was from so far out that it would be pretty hard to prevent him from launching it.
You could see how teams would feel when Rowsey was making them from out there.
Part of the second half issue was Nova picking up the rebounds on their misses. But the 4 or 5 turnovers they had to start the second half were pivotal.
Quote from: wisblue on January 17, 2024, 03:03:06 PM
The 3 point defense was much better in the second half. One of the makes by Hausen was from so far out that it would be pretty hard to prevent him from launching it.
You could see how teams would feel when Rowsey was making them from out there.
Part of the second half issue was Nova picking up the rebounds on their misses. But the 4 or 5 turnovers they had to start the second half were pivotal.
Yep on the bolded, as well as the rest of your reply.
Did you see PC's Carter's laughable attempt to do a Rowsey "thing" in a recent game? I don't know which was the funniest-his "thing" attempt or his hysterical attempt at being outraged that he didn't get the call. Missed the three badly and threw himself sideways in the (alleged) act of shooting to create contact. ;D
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 17, 2024, 02:26:28 PM
OK, but what about our 3 pt defense. I now it is just the eye test but it seems either the whole (Purdue, Nova) team or one poor 3 pt shooter just shoots the light out against us.
Our 3P defense currently ranks 188th in the country which is approximately in the 48th percentile. So we're average there.
3P defense is a bit of misnomer, as others said, it mostly comes down to luck, but there is value in denying good three point shooters from getting attempts (for example, cheating off Stevie but staying glued to Joplin can be good defense). There is also value in denying unguarded threes vs. allowing guarded threes.
I happen to have the Villanova numbers handy. Villanova shot 7/9 on unguarded threes against us. Giving up 9 unguarded threes isn't good (bad 3P defense), but them making 7 of them is absurd (bad luck). An average team would likely make 4/9 and would be more likely to make 3/9 than 5/9. Nova as it happens has been a below average team this season making unguarded threes so on a normal night they would have made about 3/9.
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 17, 2024, 05:14:12 PM
Our 3P defense currently ranks 188th in the country which is approximately in the 48th percentile. So we're average there.
3P defense is a bit of misnomer, as others said, it mostly comes down to luck, but there is value in denying good three point shooters from getting attempts (for example, cheating off Stevie but staying glued to Joplin can be good defense). There is also value in denying unguarded threes vs. allowing guarded threes.
I happen to have the Villanova numbers handy. Villanova shot 7/9 on unguarded threes against us. Giving up 9 unguarded threes isn't good (bad 3P defense), but them making 7 of them is absurd (bad luck). An average team would likely make 4/9 and would be more likely to make 3/9 than 5/9. Nova as it happens has been a below average team this season making unguarded threes so on a normal night they would have made about 3/9.
So are you able to compile those numbers across other games or across the season in terms of the percentages our opponents are hitting from 3 while unguarded and guarded (I'm not sure if those are the only categories)? I was saying in another post it has felt like we've been very unlucky this year in regards to that but it could just be bias. Very curious about what those numbers are.
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 17, 2024, 05:14:12 PM
Our 3P defense currently ranks 188th in the country which is approximately in the 48th percentile. So we're average there.
3P defense is a bit of misnomer, as others said, it mostly comes down to luck, but there is value in denying good three point shooters from getting attempts (for example, cheating off Stevie but staying glued to Joplin can be good defense). There is also value in denying unguarded threes vs. allowing guarded threes.
I happen to have the Villanova numbers handy. Villanova shot 7/9 on unguarded threes against us. Giving up 9 unguarded threes isn't good (bad 3P defense), but them making 7 of them is absurd (bad luck). An average team would likely make 4/9 and would be more likely to make 3/9 than 5/9. Nova as it happens has been a below average team this season making unguarded threes so on a normal night they would have made about 3/9.
Bingo. MU has been late on rotations all season.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2024, 05:48:59 PM
Bingo. MU has been late on rotations all season.
TK and Jop are two of the worst offenders here. Ball watching.
I share TAMU's fears. I don't think we'll be as fortunate with other teams. The word is out on MU and teams are doing to give up open 3s to protect the paint until we prove that we can make them. While VU was shooting out of their mind that Hausen guard is a great shooter. I think this is where Shaka's recruiting philosophy could use some tweaking. MU really needs a guy they can count on to hit 3s even deep threes. Instead we have a bunch of guys who are great defensively and can handle switching all 5 positions but we don't recruit anyone who is first and foremost a shooter. I realize this means we might give up some defense if we are giving up quickness for shooting in one guy. Having a guy like Hausen could save us when we're in a situation like we were against Butler. We'd probably be more likely to get a guy like that out of the portal where they would have already proven they have solid deep shooting. Until we do we will be in trouble if Kam and TKO and Jop have off nights.
What happens if our new great shooter has an off night ?
Rowsey, Howard, and the Hauser that could shoot, come on back.
Quote from: tower912 on January 17, 2024, 07:31:15 PM
Rowsey, Howard, and the Hauser that could shoot, come on back.
Kon was it but Duke offers a million +
Quote from: MUfan12 on January 17, 2024, 06:52:58 PM
TK and Jop are two of the worst offenders here. Ball watching.
And MU leads the country on dumb trey line fouls with less than five seconds on the shot clock by chasing late.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 17, 2024, 08:13:22 PM
And MU leads the country on dumb trey line fouls with less than five seconds on the shot clock by chasing late.
Yep. Maddening.
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 17, 2024, 05:14:12 PM
I happen to have the Villanova numbers handy. Villanova shot 7/9 on unguarded threes against us. Giving up 9 unguarded threes isn't good (bad 3P defense), but them making 7 of them is absurd (bad luck). An average team would likely make 4/9 and would be more likely to make 3/9 than 5/9. Nova as it happens has been a below average team this season making unguarded threes so on a normal night they would have made about 3/9.
And the guys who were making many of them were well below average. Armstrong came in shooting 26% from 3; Moore was shooting 28%. You WANT guys like that to shoot, just as opposing coaches have dared Stevie and SJones to shoot.
Quote from: MuggsyB on January 17, 2024, 09:39:25 AM
Kolek can absolutely drain the triple if teams choose to sag into the paint. We saw it earlier this season, he's in a bit of a slump. Jop, Ben, Lowery, and Mitchell can also make that shot, it's about getting it in rhythm off of Oso touches or ball reversals. We clearly are not a good 3pt shooting team at this juncture. However we're not this bad and can't lose confidence. I think there is no reason known to man why we can't shoot respectable numbers vs a pack line D. We all know it's coming, we all know what the game plan will be vs us, knock down open shots.
All Marquettes do reach equilibrium after all
Quote from: TSmith34, Inc. on January 17, 2024, 11:29:41 AM
"Mr. Blutarsky: Zero.Point.Zero."
"Forget it. He's rolling."
https://youtu.be/q7vtWB4owdE?si=FLIU1DdA3t3PLFu3
Quote from: Vander Blue Man Group on January 17, 2024, 05:23:42 PM
So are you able to compile those numbers across other games or across the season in terms of the percentages our opponents are hitting from 3 while unguarded and guarded (I'm not sure if those are the only categories)? I was saying in another post it has felt like we've been very unlucky this year in regards to that but it could just be bias. Very curious about what those numbers are.
I have the same feeling. Don't they have charts that plot where the 3pt buckets are made on the court. The only "lucky shot" that comes to mind is that dagger to finish the first half of the Purdue game.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on January 18, 2024, 08:07:37 AM
I have the same feeling. Don't they have charts that plot where the 3pt buckets are made on the court. The only "lucky shot" that comes to mind is that dagger to finish the first half of the Purdue game.
When a 26% shooter goes 5-for-9, what do you call it? Not sure if "lucky" is the right word, but maybe unfortunate for Marquette.
Similarly, when Sean Jones makes the game-winning 3 vs. UCLA and torches Creighton, was it "unlucky" for UCLA and Creighton (and "lucky" for MU)?
Maybe those aren't examples of "lucky/unlucky" as Purdue's heave, but still going against the odds.
Every coach in every game has to pick his poison. Do you focus on X, meaning that Y is gonna get some looks; or vice versa? Personally, as a fan, I'm pretty comfortable not putting the focus of the defense on the 3-point shooting of a 26% shooter.
Quote from: MU82 on January 18, 2024, 08:53:07 AM
When a 26% shooter goes 5-for-9, what do you call it? Not sure if "lucky" is the right word, but maybe unfortunate for Marquette.
Similarly, when Sean Jones makes the game-winning 3 for UCLA and torches Creighton, was it "unlucky" for UCLA and Creighton (and "lucky" for MU)?
Maybe those aren't examples of "lucky/unlucky" as Purdue's heave, but still going against the odds.
Every coach in every game has to pick his poison. Do you focus on X, meaning that Y is gonna get some looks; or vice versa? Personally, as a fan, I'm pretty comfortable not putting the focus of the defense on the 3-point shooting of a 26% shooter.
...but the odds don't appear to be in our favor, even when we win.
Quote from: MU82 on January 18, 2024, 08:53:07 AM
When a 26% shooter goes 5-for-9, what do you call it? Not sure if "lucky" is the right word, but maybe unfortunate for Marquette.
Similarly, when Sean Jones makes the game-winning 3 for UCLA and torches Creighton, was it "unlucky" for UCLA and Creighton (and "lucky" for MU)?
Maybe those aren't examples of "lucky/unlucky" as Purdue's heave, but still going against the odds.
Every coach in every game has to pick his poison. Do you focus on X, meaning that Y is gonna get some looks; or vice versa? Personally, as a fan, I'm pretty comfortable not putting the focus of the defense on the 3-point shooting of a 26% shooter.
For me its when its a culmination of a Sean Jones type hitting shots against us while normal players are also hot or at least one player going nuclear.
Like with SJ making 3/5 against creighton unlucky for them? Yeah. But they were lucky the rest of the team couldnt hit water if they fell out of a boat for a half.
vs Nova, Armstrong cant shoot at all and looked like Rowsey. But it wa a unlucky game because their whole team made ungoldy amount of unguarded 3s as tAMU showed. Woulda been less unlucky if good shooters like Hausen or Dixon were off to offset it.
Klesmit going nuclear was much different than SJ hitting 3 big shots.
I went to the Seton Hall board during their prov game(due to hopkins injury) they basically didnt talk the injury every single post was about Dawes being a borderline mass murderer and the worse player in D1. He was first team NBA vs us.
When we have a guy with a good game the team itself is still like 33% at best. We seem unlucky because entire rosters cook us from deep a lot while we have objectively a really good D all around.
Quote from: MU82 on January 18, 2024, 08:53:07 AM
When a 26% shooter goes 5-for-9, what do you call it? Not sure if "lucky" is the right word, but maybe unfortunate for Marquette.
Similarly, when Sean Jones makes the game-winning 3 for UCLA and torches Creighton, was it "unlucky" for UCLA and Creighton (and "lucky" for MU)?
Maybe those aren't examples of "lucky/unlucky" as Purdue's heave, but still going against the odds.
Every coach in every game has to pick his poison. Do you focus on X, meaning that Y is gonna get some looks; or vice versa? Personally, as a fan, I'm pretty comfortable not putting the focus of the defense on the 3-point shooting of a 26% shooter.
Agreed....but once Klesmit and others are having that type of game, would like to see a quicker adjustment by our D.
Quote from: We R Final Four on January 18, 2024, 11:35:23 AM
Agreed....but once Klesmit and others are having that type of game, would like to see a quicker adjustment by our D.
True. And to repeat what I posted earlier, we
did make a quicker adjustment in the 2nd half vs. Nova. Compare 4 made 3s before an additional one in the final seconds when it no longer mattered vs. the 9 easily made ones in the first half.
Quote from: NotAnAlum on January 17, 2024, 07:25:40 PM
I share TAMU's fears. I don't think we'll be as fortunate with other teams. The word is out on MU and teams are doing to give up open 3s to protect the paint until we prove that we can make them. While VU was shooting out of their mind that Hausen guard is a great shooter. I think this is where Shaka's recruiting philosophy could use some tweaking. MU really needs a guy they can count on to hit 3s even deep threes. Instead we have a bunch of guys who are great defensively and can handle switching all 5 positions but we don't recruit anyone who is first and foremost a shooter. I realize this means we might give up some defense if we are giving up quickness for shooting in one guy. Having a guy like Hausen could save us when we're in a situation like we were against Butler. We'd probably be more likely to get a guy like that out of the portal where they would have already proven they have solid deep shooting. Until we do we will be in trouble if Kam and TKO and Jop have off nights.
I think this is what Scoop envisioned to be Jop's role, wasn't it? Not so good on D, but a strong shooter.
Quote from: DoctorV on January 16, 2024, 10:56:58 PM
One of the first things I noticed was that the spacing seemed much better.
One of the next things I noticed was that Villanova, for some bizarre unknown reason, was playing really aggressive defense away from the basket.
The combination of the two was a much needed and pleasant sight.
No idea what Neptune was thinking, I asked in the game thread if he had watched the tape?
There is a formula to beat Marquette and that ain't it coach Kyle.
Just another example of why I'm not sold on him as Novas HC. I like Shaheen and Kim much more to have longer term success at their gigs despite the smaller programs and more difficult recruiting.
Marquette won't always miss badly from distance, and when they don't you'll probably lose, but if you don't pack it in and dare MU to shoot, instead opening up passing and driving lanes to the hoop with will most definitely lose.
So, take your chances with the long ball until you pay.
Spacing was better because D chose to play.
Quote from: TAMU, Knower of Ball on January 16, 2024, 10:24:13 PM
I'm still a little concerned about the offense. I was at the game yesterday and rewatched it today. Yesterday was a good reminder of what are team is capable of when the lane is clear. When we have space to operate, we will sashimi pretty much any team in the country.
My concern is, that I think a good chunk of our success yesterday was due to coaching malpractice by Neptune. Drop coverage has been our kryptonite all season. Wisconsin, Providence, Seton Hall, second half Butler all utilized it to great effect. Neptune used a lot of different looks against us but didn't use drop coverage until late in the game. As a result, the paint was wide open all game and we hit Nova with their worst 2P% defensive game in decades. Shaka even pointed it out during one of the inside the huddles saying that we didn't have to take threes because they were giving us the paint all day.
The good news is, when Neptune switched to drop coverage, the offense didn't stall. Stevie and Tyler both hit wide open threes and those generated some wiggle room leading to a classic TKO to Oso dunk.
I still believe the team is much better from three than they've shown so far. If that's true and those start falling, our offense will return to being unstoppable. Combine that with our consistently great defense (yesterday wasn't the best but Nova was uncharacteristically hot from three), and we have a legitimate contender.
Wizard does know ball
Quote from: tower912 on January 17, 2024, 07:31:15 PM
Rowsey, Howard, and the Hauser that could shoot, come on back.
There is a player there that self proclaimed knowers of ball wouldn't approve. Plus I don't see JD there...
Quote from: We R Final Four on January 18, 2024, 11:35:23 AM
Agreed....but once Klesmit and others are having that type of game, would like to see a quicker adjustment by our D.
Totally agree. That it took until halftime for us to bother doing anything about Klesmit being 900-for-900 from 3 wasn't Shaka's shining coaching moment. And yep, similar happened in a couple other games too.
Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on January 18, 2024, 11:25:01 AM
For me its when its a culmination of a Sean Jones type hitting shots against us while normal players are also hot or at least one player going nuclear.
Like with SJ making 3/5 against creighton unlucky for them? Yeah. But they were lucky the rest of the team couldnt hit water if they fell out of a boat for a half.
vs Nova, Armstrong cant shoot at all and looked like Rowsey. But it wa a unlucky game because their whole team made ungoldy amount of unguarded 3s as tAMU showed. Woulda been less unlucky if good shooters like Hausen or Dixon were off to offset it.
Klesmit going nuclear was much different than SJ hitting 3 big shots.
I went to the Seton Hall board during their prov game(due to hopkins injury) they basically didnt talk the injury every single post was about Dawes being a borderline mass murderer and the worse player in D1. He was first team NBA vs us.
When we have a guy with a good game the team itself is still like 33% at best. We seem unlucky because entire rosters cook us from deep a lot while we have objectively a really good D all around.
OK. I guess MU is just 3-jinxed this season. Maybe we need to bring in a couple extra priests with super-strong holy water to sprinkle on the 3-point arcs at Fiserv and select road arenas.
We are a better 3-point shooting team than what we have shown this year.
Kam, Kolek, Jop, Ross, SJ and Stevie have a worse 3pt % this year compared to last year.
Kam 36.0 vs 34.6
Kolek 39.8 vs 34.9
Jop 39.9 vs 38.2
Ross 32.3 vs 26.5
SJ 31.7 vs 25.7
Stevie 30.0 vs 21.2
This mini slump occurred when Kam and Kolek couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.
What's concerning about the shooting slumps is that many of the misses aren't even close to going in. These aren't in-and-out misses that are mere centimeters from dropping. Instead, the misses are many times clanks off the side of the rim.
Quote from: Judge Smails on January 19, 2024, 08:55:22 PM
What's concerning about the shooting slumps is that many of the misses aren't even close to going in. These aren't in-and-out misses that are mere centimeters from dropping. Instead, the misses are many times clanks off the side of the rim.
I noticed that too. Whether it is "many" or above average for a high level team is the only part that I think is debatable, and both terms are ambiguous. We saw 2 made threes by Lowery and his 3rd attempt was just a tad off.
Way too small of a sample size, but it gave me hope that at least one guy
may be a high percentage shooter (but 67% umm...let's get real!). Too many bricks. Looks like a masons' contest sometimes.
Quote from: Judge Smails on January 19, 2024, 08:55:22 PM
What's concerning about the shooting slumps is that many of the misses aren't even close to going in. These aren't in-and-out misses that are mere centimeters from dropping. Instead, the misses are many times clanks off the side of the rim.
That would be the next NBA talent Ben Gold
Quote from: Judge Smails on January 19, 2024, 08:55:22 PM
What's concerning about the shooting slumps is that many of the misses aren't even close to going in. These aren't in-and-out misses that are mere centimeters from dropping. Instead, the misses are many times clanks off the side of the rim.
The ugliest 3s by far against Nova were Kolek's first four attempts: 3 scuds that barely caught rim and an airball. Then, during crunch time, he swished a beauty that helped propel us to victory.
Here's hoping that last trey, combined with his return to the arena in which he was the best player in the BET, ignites a nice hot streak for him TK shot 40% from 3 last season and was well up in the 40s this season before his slump began; it's not as if he can't shoot.
Quote from: MU82 on January 20, 2024, 09:15:53 AM
The ugliest 3s by far against Nova were Kolek's first four attempts: 3 scuds that barely caught rim and an airball. Then, during crunch time, he swished a beauty that helped propel us to victory.
Here's hoping that last trey, combined with his return to the arena in which he was the best player in the BET, ignites a nice hot streak for him TK shot 40% from 3 last season and was well up in the 40s this season before his slump began; it's not as if he can't shoot.
Nope
Yesterday was fun but ...
... so was today, ultimately.
82
You obviously have to look at the entire game and make an honest review, but I do not think some realize how beautiful this offense is when humming. This group has provided some simply amazing offensive spurts/runs of any group I can remember. Time will tell if there are more first half or second half performances moving forward. That said, I am very confident that they will have a ton of open shots in most/all of the remaining games.
Quote from: Goose on January 20, 2024, 02:17:21 PM
82
You obviously have to look at the entire game and make an honest review, but I do not think some realize how beautiful this offense is when humming. This group has provided some simply amazing offensive spurts/runs of any group I can remember. Time will tell if there are more first half or second half performances moving forward. That said, I am very confident that they will have a ton of open shots in most/all of the remaining games.
It really is (almost) as simple as making shots. We won this game because our good shooters hit the same kind of wide-open 3s they missed in the first half. If we can just shoot what our percentage was before the slump started, we will be very difficult to beat in every game.
And I agree with you about how beautiful our offense can be. There was one TK-to-Oso play today that actually made me give a standing O in my TV room, and they had several others. Just masterful.
I get the frustrations of some folks. "Why can't we do that all the time?!?!" Because it's unrealistic to think we can. And because the other team has good players who desperately want to win, too. And in this case the other team has a Hall of Fame coach. It's not supposed to be easy.
82
The majority here does not believe they will shoot better and they might be right. If they are wrong, which I believe, MU can beat any team in the country. 14 more preseason games to go and then we will see what happens.
I am surprised that people do not comment often that MU only misses wide open three pointers. All they mention is the bad shooting %.
Hey, maybe your guy GE has an extra, extra, extra Covid semester and can come back and be that three pointer sniper for two months.
Quote from: Goose on January 20, 2024, 02:37:28 PM
82
The majority here does not believe they will shoot better and they might be right. If they are wrong, which I believe, MU can beat any team in the country. 14 more preseason games to go and then we will see what happens.
I am surprised that people do not comment often that MU only misses wide open three pointers. All they mention is the bad shooting %.
Hey, maybe your guy GE has an extra, extra, extra Covid semester and can come back and be that three pointer sniper for two months.
I don't regard the Big East season as the "preseason," because I personally hate preseason games in every sport but I love watching Marquette play these games. I'm an enjoy-the-journey kind of guy. But I know what you're getting at, and I agree that what happens after Selection Sunday is the only way this team ultimately will be judged.
Your line about Elliott made me laugh. We sure could use another shooter, though. Maybe your guy Rosenberger has a few months of eligibility left!
82
There were very few players in the Al era that I disliked as a player and you named one that is high on the dislike list. He was a very good shooter but that was about it.
Quote from: Goose on January 21, 2024, 05:26:49 AM
82
There were very few players in the Al era that I disliked as a player and you named one that is high on the dislike list. He was a very good shooter but that was about it.
Interesting. Anyway, pick any great shooter from the past - Novak? Tatum? - and insert for Rosenberger, and the point is the same. If only we could do that!
I actually like our shooters now just fine. Kam, TK, Joplin, maybe Zaide ... we can win (and have won) a lot of games with them knocking down 3s. It's not like it's a pipe dream - they've done so as recently as earlier this season and most of last season.
82
Like you, my concern about the shooting is not that great. If it does not improve, expectations will likely not be met. That said, my expectations remain the same, a deep run in March.
You got that right, Goose.
I honestly feel sorry for anyone who views 4 months of competitive and entertaining basketball as "preseason games" and puts all of their emotional eggs in the basket of a crapshoot tournament.
I don't think it's right, or fair, to judge or remember a team just for what it does in the NCAA tournament.
I would take a season like last year's MU season over Creighton's advance to the quarterfinals any time. I sure wouldn't spring for season tickets if I thought the NCAA tournament was all that mattered.
Quote from: wisblue on January 21, 2024, 08:26:07 AM
I honestly feel sorry for anyone who views 4 months of competitive and entertaining basketball as "preseason games" and puts all of their emotional eggs in the basket of a crapshoot tournament.
I don't think it's right, or fair, to judge or remember a team just for what it does in the NCAA tournament.
I would take a season like last year's MU season over Creighton's advance to the quarterfinals any time. I sure wouldn't spring for season tickets if I thought the NCAA tournament was all that mattered.
Last year was fun, and by and large I agree with you. But I would rather make the Elite 8 this year than winning the BET.
I think there is a middle ground on this topic.
I have thoroughly enjoyed Marquette's Shaka Renaissance. Year 1 was a wonderful surprise, last season was special, and this season has been special in its own way. I plan each week around watching MU basketball, I have trips scheduled to attend 4 games this season, it's so much fun to see my wife and kids and friends get so into MU hoops, and I savor every win.
But I don't think it's "wrong" to ultimately judge the success of this season on NCAA tournament success. We've waited a long time for that. We have an outstanding team, and wanting - even expecting - NCAAT success is not "wrong."
I say that knowing that there will be some luck involved - who we get matched up against, how healthy we are, whether shots are falling, etc.
So if we lose early in the NCAAT, I won't threaten to quit loving Marquette basketball, or call for Shaka to be fired, or say the entire season was a failure. But I will be very disappointed - moreso than the last 2 years. Personally, it will be harder for me to shrug and say, "Oh well ... it's a crapshoot anyway."
Meanwhile, I'm just focused on enjoying the journey. For example, I happen to think yesterday's win was great, as was the win over Nova.
Sultan
I know I am in the minority on this, but I do not care if MU ever wins the BET again. I broke my own rule last season and got very caught up in the BET and I will never do that again. Give me an E8 over BET all day long.
Quote from: Goose on January 21, 2024, 09:11:49 AM
I know I am in the minority on this, but I do not care if MU ever wins the BET again. I broke my own rule last season and got very caught up in the BET and I will never do that again. Give me an E8 over BET all day long.
I've never cared much about conference tournaments -- I've always thought a regular-season league title was 10x as important, as was advancing in the NCAAT -- but I, like you, definitely got caught up in last year's MSG fun. I won't say "never again" because if our guys have another great BET run this year, I'll probably get into it again ... but I truly won't be even a little disappointed if we go out in the first round of the BET.
Quote from: MU82 on January 21, 2024, 09:17:00 AM
I've never cared much about conference tournaments -- I've always thought a regular-season league title was 10x as important, as was advancing in the NCAAT -- but I, like you, definitely got caught up in last year's MSG fun. I won't say "never again" because if our guys have another great BET run this year, I'll probably get into it again ... but I truly won't be even a little disappointed if we go out in the first round of the BET.
It was really cool to see them finally win it. On multiple occasions, Shaka mentioned how that was one of the goals of the team last year. It definitely felt like the pinnacle last year and mentally it may have felt that way for the players in some respect (MSG, confetti, trophies, etc). We won't hear any of that talk this year. As annoying as a loss in that tournament would be for me, I think the quicker the team can get their focus on the NCAAT, the better. Though I'm not sure there's much correlation to good conference tournament success equaling worse ncaa tournament success.
Being the first non-East Coast team to win the BET EVER was a huge accomplishment for the program. One for the ages. The pastings MU took under Wojo showed just how far the program had fallen.
I was in Columbus for that MSU debacle. I have rewatched every game from last season at least five times. I will NEVER watch that MSU game.
Dr. B
I am glad they won the BET and was caught up in the moment. Plus, I think there was a personal motivation for Shaka to win it and am glad they did. Now, they do not need to do it again this season to keep my attention.
Quote from: Goose on January 21, 2024, 09:37:03 AM
Dr. B
I am glad they won the BET and was caught up in the moment. Plus, I think there was a personal motivation for Shaka to win it and am glad they did. Now, they do not need to do it again this season to keep my attention.
Programs like Nova and UCONN expect to be in the BET final. So should Marquette. The media and recruiting potential is massive.
Fans and schools remember NCAA runs (or flame outs), but success comes from building blocks. I know you are an all in type of guy, but I don't agree with you essentially downplaying the importance of the season or BET. This idea of a crapshoot is silly imo (and fool's gold).
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 21, 2024, 09:54:31 AM
Programs like Nova and UCONN expect to be in the BET final. So should Marquette. The media and recruiting potential is massive.
Fans and schools remember NCAA runs (or flame outs), but success is comes from building blocks. I know you are an all in type of guy, but I don't agree with you essentially downplaying the importance of the season or BET. This idea of a crapshoot is silly imo (and fool's gold).
This.
Kansas, Villanova, etc. have had absolutely no problem making deep Tourney runs after winning conference regular seasons and tournament titles.
I put the conference tournament in a completely different category than the regular season.
Winning the regular season championship means generally excellent play over 20 games and guarantees that there were several very entertaining wins.
Winning the conference tournament was unique for MU because it was their first appearance in the high profile Saturday night title game and provided some additional validation for the regular season title.
I would take the regular season title over the tournament title any time, but getting both was nice.
But I would rather have a regular season conference title over a middling season capped by winning just 2 or 3 games in the NCAA. I know I'm in the minority on that.
From the vibe I'm getting on Scoop, most of us would choose NCAAT success at this point - would gladly trade a first-round BET exit for, say, an appearance in the Sweet 16 and beyond.
But it doesn't work like that. None of us gets to make that choice. Shaka and his players don't get to make it, either. As wades said, plenty of teams have done well in both.
For me, personally, I've never cared all that much about conference tournaments because I've always valued the regular season far more. Not just the Big East, but all of them. It was one of the things I agreed with Bobby Knight about - the Big Ten was one of the last to adopt a conference tournament, and Knight said it was a dopey way to decide a conference champion after months and months of teams going head-to-head during a long season.
Quote from: MU82 on January 21, 2024, 01:02:13 PMBut it doesn't work like that. None of us gets to make that choice. Shaka and his players don't get to make it, either. As wades said, plenty of teams have done well in both.
Effectively, they do, or at least their actions will control how that comes out.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 21, 2024, 09:54:31 AM
Programs like Nova and UCONN expect to be in the BET final. So should Marquette. The media and recruiting potential is massive.
Fans and schools remember NCAA runs (or flame outs), but success comes from building blocks. I know you are an all in type of guy, but I don't agree with you essentially downplaying the importance of the season or BET. This idea of a crapshoot is silly imo (and fool's gold).
This is where I am at. Great programs can and do both.
Quote from: Shooter McGavin on January 23, 2024, 04:19:02 PM
This is where I am at. Great programs can and do both.
Winning is a good culture.....
Quote from: Shooter McGavin on January 23, 2024, 04:19:02 PM
This is where I am at. Great programs can and do both.
I think it would be grammatically correct to say "... can and do do...", but we wouldn't want to rile up the anti-Stevie crowd.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 21, 2024, 01:10:55 PM
Effectively, they do, or at least their actions will control how that comes out.
Not really. They always choose to win. But they might try really hard but not be able to hit shots. And the opponent -- which also chooses to win -- has a say, too.
Quote from: MU82 on January 24, 2024, 01:18:32 PM
Not really. They always choose to win. But they might try really hard but not be able to hit shots. And the opponent -- which also chooses to win -- has a say, too.
I'm pretty certain that's not how choice works.
Quote from: wisblue on January 21, 2024, 11:40:46 AM
I put the conference tournament in a completely different category than the regular season.
Winning the regular season championship means generally excellent play over 20 games and guarantees that there were several very entertaining wins.
Winning the conference tournament was unique for MU because it was their first appearance in the high profile Saturday night title game and provided some additional validation for the regular season title.
I would take the regular season title over the tournament title any time, but getting both was nice.
But I would rather have a regular season conference title over a middling season capped by winning just 2 or 3 games in the NCAA. I know I'm in the minority on that.
Your take is reasonable.
Personally, I like when we win stuff. I want to win the Big East regular season crown. Very much. I want us to win the BET, also very much.
I want us to advance in the NCAA tournament as far as possible, very very much. Last year we one the BET. I think a trip to the Elite 8 would be forgotten a lot sooner than a BET championship.
BUt in the end I don't differentiate, I want badly to win them all. But in terms of where I would rank them
1. NCAA championship
2. Final Four
3. Big East Regular Season championship
4. Big East Tournament Championship
5. Elite 8
6. Sweet 16
7. NIT championship
8. Round of 32
9. Make the NCAAs
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 24, 2024, 01:42:38 PM
Your take is reasonable.
Personally, I like when we win stuff. I want to win the Big East regular season crown. Very much. I want us to win the BET, also very much.
I want us to advance in the NCAA tournament as far as possible, very very much. Last year we one the BET. I think a trip to the Elite 8 would be forgotten a lot sooner than a BET championship.
BUt in the end I don't differentiate, I want badly to win them all. But in terms of where I would rank them
1. NCAA championship
2. Final Four
3. Big East Regular Season championship
4. Big East Tournament Championship
5. Elite 8
6. Sweet 16
7. NIT championship
8. Round of 32
9. Make the NCAAs
Your list is pretty close to what I would say except that I would put winning the NIT somewhere between the bottom of the list and off the list.
Quote from: wisblue on January 24, 2024, 02:05:42 PM
Your list is pretty close to what I would say except that I would put winning the NIT somewhere between the bottom of the list and off the list.
LIke I said, I like winning things. I know I'm in the minority, but I'd rather win the NIT than lose in the first round of the NCAAs.
OTOH, I think we're getting to the point where the big time schools treat the NIT like they do the lower football bowls, so whatever meaning the NIT did have it probably doesn't anymore, so I could be talked out of my stance. I remember watching us lose to Virginia Tech in the NIT Final in MSG in the 90s and being very disappointed. Would have loved winning that.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 24, 2024, 02:28:08 PM
LIke I said, I like winning things. I know I'm in the minority, but I'd rather win the NIT than lose in the first round of the NCAAs.
OTOH, I think we're getting to the point where the big time schools treat the NIT like they do the lower football bowls, so whatever meaning the NIT did have it probably doesn't anymore, so I could be talked out of my stance. I remember watching us lose to Virginia Tech in the NIT Final in MSG in the 90s and being very disappointed. Would have loved winning that.
This is one stance you should not need to be talked out of, just get out of it.
NIT is nonsense.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 24, 2024, 01:42:38 PM
I think a trip to the Elite 8 would be forgotten a lot sooner than a BET championship.
I guess it depends who's doing the remembering and forgetting.
I have very fond memories of our run to the 2013 Elite Eight. The win over Davidson is one of the most amazing comebacks I've ever seen, the win over a very good Butler team in the next round was thrilling, and the domination of Miami (which my wife and I witnessed in D.C.) was wonderful.
The 2013 team was also boosted by having won a share of the BE regular-season title on Vander's winning shot, so that was cool, too.
Very fond memories.
You really like titles, and so do I, but I REALLY like NCAAT wins. Even a Sweet 16 appearance is pretty great to me, and anything beyond that is wonderful. Final Four is nirvana. A natty ... wow!
Quote from: MU82 on January 24, 2024, 01:18:32 PM
Not really. They always choose to win. But they might try really hard but not be able to hit shots. And the opponent -- which also chooses to win -- has a say, too.
Like I said, their actions will control how that comes out. They still have to perform those actions successfully, and in doing so prevent their opponent from performing their actions successfully, but they do have the ability to determine those outcomes.
That said, they do not perform those actions in a vacuum, but they have far more control over it than anyone else, certainly anyone in this conversation.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 25, 2024, 08:57:58 AM
Like I said, their actions will control how that comes out. They still have to perform those actions successfully, and in doing so prevent their opponent from performing their actions successfully, but they do have the ability to determine those outcomes.
That said, they do not perform those actions in a vacuum, but they have far more control over it than anyone else, certainly anyone in this conversation.
Well, your last point is ridiculous.
Everybody knows that fans control the action - especially if they talk about something other than the next game. That's as good as guaranteeing a loss in the upcoming game. Duh.
Quote from: MU82 on January 25, 2024, 09:09:43 AM
Well, your last point is ridiculous.
Everybody knows that fans control the action - especially if they talk about something other than the next game. That's as good as guaranteeing a loss in the upcoming game. Duh.
Maybe Muggsy does, but I certainly don't.