MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: MU Avenue on November 17, 2009, 09:45:20 PM
-
I have just watched Marquette’s 86-60 victory over the University of Maryland Eastern Shore.
I know this MU team is young, but these guys are already showing stuff rarely seen in Marquette teams of recent, including last season’s squad.
The Marquette team I watched tonight moves and passes the ball nicely, including some very nice, very soft passes that resulted in good-looking scores from near the hoop.
This year’s team would have given last year’s team a lot of trouble.
-
Teal?
-
is tealing the word teal like a double negative?
-
For sure, teal.
Defensively, this team is a sieve. No way should UMES score 60 and score down low with ease.
-
I have just watched Marquette’s 86-60 victory over the University of Maryland Eastern Shore.
I know this MU team is young, but these guys are already showing stuff rarely seen in Marquette teams of recent, including last season’s squad.
The Marquette team I watched tonight moves and passes the ball nicely, including some very nice, very soft passes that resulted in good-looking scores from near the hoop.
This year’s team would have given last year’s team a lot of trouble.
With all due respect, Ave., this team just beat two pretty s h i t t y teams. Now, there may be better talent on this team than last year, but let's hold off judgment until they actually play and beat somebody, especially away from home.
-
This year’s team would have given last year’s team a lot of trouble.
Well, maybe at the end of the year (or perhaps in a year or so) but not right now. The big 3 of last year are better than ANY player on MU right now....that may change through time, but right now that's just reality. The team tonight got blown out the other day by Stony Brook...hard to say how good this team is, but I suspect this weekend we may find a little bit more.
-
Yup, you're talking about a DIII school and a team that went 7-21 in a horrible conference. They will struggle in the big east.
-
I felt like we saw some improvements from the first game - especially with respect to team scores on offense as opposed to individuals creating for themselves - but I think last year's team would be close to doubling up on this year's team as it stands right now.
-
With all due respect, Ave., this team just beat two pretty s h i t t y teams. Now, there may be better talent on this team than last year, but let's hold off judgment until they actually play and beat somebody, especially away from home.
Better talent on this team than last year? I cant believe I am reading this my eyes may start to bleed...you realize we had 3 borderline NBA guys, the worst of which (in college) is actually playing in the NBA.
If u think DJO, buycks, ewill, and maymon is "better talent" than james, mcneal, matthews I really dont know what to say. Throw in yous, and it may still be a close 5v3 game
Also, Im not even gonna begin to address the argument that this team would give last years a hard time, cause im hoping its a joke
-
Offensively it appears like we will be okay. And there was some improvement from the last game offensively. Defensively I am concerned. This team is NOWHERE near last year's team defensively.
We did not easy give up transition baskets and we were able to pressure the ball so that entry passes to post and cuts to the basket were not easy. This year, transition baskets galore and not enough ball pressure to stop those passes. I think we get a wake-up call in the Old Spice against Xavier. They are going to score at will at this point.
Before everyone melts down on me I do think we will improve on 'D'... but we have a long way to go.
-
Way too early to tell how this team will compare to last year's team. However, if Butler can continue to hit three point shots and open jumpers the way he did tonight, he is going to be a hell of a player and we could be a very dangerous team.
I said it at the end of last season that I thought Butler was showing some real flashes of being a great player and I'm thrilled to see him continue to progress.
-
Were you watching the same game as me tonight? This team lost to Stoney Brook by 20. What is this STUFF rarely seen you're talking about. I'm not even going to touch your comment about giving last year's team trouble. They have got to figure out a way to get the ball into the post to keep defenses honest. We cannot live and die by the three.
Post defense was way to soft. Slow rotation on drives and passes into the lane. I look forward to seeing these guys improve throughout the season. Hopefully it comes together quickly.
-
Better talent on this team than last year? I cant believe I am reading this my eyes may start to bleed...you realize we had 3 borderline NBA guys, the worst of which (in college) is actually playing in the NBA.
If u think DJO, buycks, ewill, and maymon is "better talent" than james, mcneal, matthews I really dont know what to say.
The assertion that this recruiting class is better than the 3 Amigos talent wise is unable to be substantiated at this point, but really its comparing apples to oranges. The only two guys who really play the same style appear to be mcneal and buycks. I think its unfair to start comparing our new guys with three four year starting seniors from last season.
And lets be honest, while the Three Amigos were awesome collegiate players, none of them truly blew you away with their talent. They all had their strengths and weaknesses, but the key was they gelled together and the end result was greater than a sum of its parts. Way to early to be able to gauge the talent and potential of this years guys.
-
The assertion that this recruiting class is better than the 3 Amigos talent wise is unable to be substantiated at this point, but really its comparing apples to oranges. The only two guys who really play the same style appear to be mcneal and buycks. I think its unfair to start comparing our new guys with three four year starting seniors from last season.
And lets be honest, while the Three Amigos were awesome collegiate players, none of them truly blew you away with their talent. They all had their strengths and weaknesses, but the key was they gelled together and the end result was greater than a sum of its parts. Way to early to be able to gauge the talent and potential of this years guys.
Really? Buycks and DJO blow you away with theirs so far? DJ blew me away with his talent, he was BE rookie of the year and one of the more athletic, better passing, and better defending PGs around, just couldnt shoot. Mcneal blew me away with his talent- he was BE defensive player of the year as a guard, and many times could score at will. Matthews didnt really blow me away until his Sr yr, but he has thus far blown away mr sloan
-
I agree that in their FIRST YEAR PLAYING, this team has more talent. The three amigos developed so well and gelled together so well as they continued to play each other. Hopefully this team will do the same. I am very encouraged by Dwight
That said, this team would not come close to last years team
-
Really? Buycks and DJO blow you away with theirs so far? DJ blew me away with his talent, he was BE rookie of the year and one of the more athletic, better passing, and better defending PGs around, just couldnt shoot. Mcneal blew me away with his talent- he was BE defensive player of the year as a guard, and many times could score at will. Matthews didnt really blow me away until his Sr yr, but he has thus far blown away mr sloan
Did you read what I wrote? I didn't say the new guys blew me away, I said it was two early to judge their talent based on two games against poor competition. They very well may not be as talented.
And I guess you just take less to be "blown away". I agree the Big 3 all did certain things very well and others not so well. Just being a good player doesn't mean you have unbelievable talent; there are those who are, but you can be very good at the college level without unbelievable, upper crust talent.
-
Did you read what I wrote? I didn't say the new guys blew me away, I said it was two early to judge their talent based on two games against poor competition. They very well may not be as talented.
And I guess you just take less to be "blown away". I agree the Big 3 all did certain things very well and others not so well. Just being a good player doesn't mean you have unbelievable talent; there are those who are, but you can be very good at the college level without unbelievable, upper crust talent.
All three will likely go down somewhere in the top 25 players of all time at the university. To me there were many times where they did things that blew me away, not every night like Wade, but many nights
-
I was going to post something with my impressions... and then I saw this thread.
They're not good right now. They're just playing crap competition.
Sure, there are flashes. But there are some MAJOR flaws right now. Defensively, the awareness and rotations have been terrible on the perimeter. Guys have been lazy closing out. They either concede the catch, or they overplay and are susceptible to the drive. The foul trouble Butler and Hayward have been getting into so far is troubling.
Offensively, they're fine against a man defense, but lost against the zone. Initiating the offense in the halfcourt has been brutal to watch. It's four guys swinging it around the perimeter until someone has to shoot. 26 3pt attempts is way, way too many. The guards are missing cutters, and don't even look to make an entry pass, even when Maymon and Otule had established great early position.
On the plus side, their assist to turnover and assist to FG ratio have been fantastic. And they've managed to take care of business, just slow getting started. It's early, it's frustrating. But the talent is there. They just have to figure it out. That said, I don't think they look "pretty good."
-
"This is the most talented team I've been associated with" - Brent Favre
-
This marquette team may look good to you for the rest of us that live in something known as reality I think this team has some major problems!
For example Defensively they really have no idea what is going on and they still don't know how to attack a zone!
-
For example Defensively they really have no idea what is going on and they still don't know how to attack a zone!
To be fair I don't think we have ever been any good at attacking a zone... They past few years we've always struggled to shoot out of a zone, and I'm not sure our coaching staff is real good at conveying an effective strategy to break it and get inside.
-
I Know lasts years team was very effective at. First, you need two good jump shooters(two is better then one). And one of them gets in the middle of zone. And you can give them the ball and then they must shoot it. If you have a good jump shooting team then defeating a zone is easier.
That's why you see Lazar(I think matthews did it last year) always go into the zone instead of staying on the perimeter since he shoot the jump shoot. Butler can do this too. In addition, it helps when you have a guy that beat his man off the dribble since this can change up the tempo. This team doesn't have anybody that beat their man off the dribble at the MOMENT.
Finally, you need good three point shooting and good ball movement. All of this is easier said then done!
-
I was going to post something with my impressions... and then I saw this thread.
They're not good right now. They're just playing crap competition.
Sure, there are flashes. But there are some MAJOR flaws right now. Defensively, the awareness and rotations have been terrible on the perimeter. Guys have been lazy closing out. They either concede the catch, or they overplay and are susceptible to the drive. The foul trouble Butler and Hayward have been getting into so far is troubling.
Offensively, they're fine against a man defense, but lost against the zone. Initiating the offense in the halfcourt has been brutal to watch. It's four guys swinging it around the perimeter until someone has to shoot. 26 3pt attempts is way, way too many. The guards are missing cutters, and don't even look to make an entry pass, even when Maymon and Otule had established great early position.
On the plus side, their assist to turnover and assist to FG ratio have been fantastic. And they've managed to take care of business, just slow getting started. It's early, it's frustrating. But the talent is there. They just have to figure it out. That said, I don't think they look "pretty good."
Agreed. Also, watch other "major" teams or teams we will have to play later in the year and one realizes how far this team has to go to be "pretty good". I watched Gonzaga and Louisville last night. We're way behind those two and Gonzaga isn't even ranked. I'm sure we'll be better as the year goes on, but it's way to early to prognosticate on where the team will be. I think this will be a tough year but one on which MU can build for the next.
-
It seems like buzz is subbing every 30 seconds and not allowing them to play together in long enough sperts
-
It seems like buzz is subbing every 30 seconds and not allowing them to play together in long enough sperts
Consider it preseason, he just trying a bunch of different looks to see what his rotation will be. Only two of the players were "in the mix" last year.
-
I was going to post something with my impressions... and then I saw this thread.
They're not good right now. They're just playing crap competition.
Sure, there are flashes. But there are some MAJOR flaws right now. Defensively, the awareness and rotations have been terrible on the perimeter. Guys have been lazy closing out. They either concede the catch, or they overplay and are susceptible to the drive. The foul trouble Butler and Hayward have been getting into so far is troubling.
Offensively, they're fine against a man defense, but lost against the zone. Initiating the offense in the halfcourt has been brutal to watch. It's four guys swinging it around the perimeter until someone has to shoot. 26 3pt attempts is way, way too many. The guards are missing cutters, and don't even look to make an entry pass, even when Maymon and Otule had established great early position.
On the plus side, their assist to turnover and assist to FG ratio have been fantastic. And they've managed to take care of business, just slow getting started. It's early, it's frustrating. But the talent is there. They just have to figure it out. That said, I don't think they look "pretty good."
26 3pt attempts is not "way too many" I seem to recall a great coach (mr. pitino) looking for his teams to shoot 20-25 threes a game (this was in 1990) I bet the ncaa average per game is in that neighborhood. When your post presence is Chirs Otule...You have to shoot 26 per game.
-
26 3pt attempts is not "way too many" I seem to recall a great coach (mr. pitino) looking for his teams to shoot 20-25 threes a game (this was in 1990) I bet the ncaa average per game is in that neighborhood. When your post presence is Chirs Otule...You have to shoot 26 per game.
Have you watched them yet? It's too many attempts. They're too reliant on that shot against the zone. There's no attempt to slash and find the gaps. When they're shooting at a sub-35% clip from outside that should tell you something.
Also, Pitino's system is Pitino's system. It has no bearing on what MU should do.