MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Pakuni on October 11, 2016, 08:47:23 AM
-
Marquette was picked for seventh place. Last year, with one of the youngest rosters in the country, the Golden Eagles put together a 20-13 season and an 8-10 conference record. This season, Marquette has four starters back. Senior center Luke Fischer averaged 12.1 points, 6.2 rebounds and shot 60.8 percent from the field. Sophomore guard Haanif Cheatham impressed as a rookie by compiling an 11.8 scoring average and making the BIG EAST All-Freshman Team. Senior guard Jajuan Johnson averaged 10.2 points. Sophomore guard Traci Carter earned a starting spot as a freshman and averaged 5.4 points.
http://www.bigeast.com/news/2016/10/10/MBB_1010164924.aspx
Fischer on preseason 2nd team. No other MU representation. Surprised Haanif gets no mention.
http://www.bigeast.com/news/2016/10/10/MBB_1010163751.aspx
-
I'd bet they'll finish better than 7th. Returning 4 starters but they don't mention the 2 transfers that started and played major roles for their respective teams. They'll need to rebound at every position and figure out how to play average defense. I think they're a NIT team and dark horse for the tourney. I'm bullish.
-
Coaches must read paint touches. I picked the exact order besides SJU and Providence being switched. And in hindsight, I think the coaches are right.
I'm not surprised by no Haanif. I don't even think he's a top three player on our team. Which isn't a knock against him, I just have really high hopes for Luke, Rowsey, JJJ, and Reinhardt
-
Coaches must read paint touches. I picked the exact order besides SJU and Providence being switched. And in hindsight, I think the coaches are right.
I'm not surprised by no Haanif. I don't even think he's a top three player on our team. Which isn't a knock against him, I just have really high hopes for Luke, Rowsey, JJJ, and Reinhardt
My #mancrush is showing, but I think Haanif ends up being at least our second best player this year(not sure how'd we measure this) and at least 2nd team All Big East.
-
I understand there is excitement in D.C. regarding Pryor, Akau, and an improved Govan but all the potential in the world can't overcome the horrendous coaching they have in place. Yet every October for the past half decade, the Hoyas are considered a dangerous team.
-
I understand there is excitement in D.C. regarding Pryor, Akau, and an improved Govan but all the potential in the world can't overcome the horrendous coaching they have in place. Yet every October for the past half decade, the Hoyas are considered a dangerous team.
As well as the Wednesday before the first weekend of the tournament.
-
I am bullish and think this Warrior tram will surprise a lot if people. After we whip the Badgers we will win in the Big East because if our great shooting.
-
Coaches must read paint touches. I picked the exact order besides SJU and Providence being switched. And in hindsight, I think the coaches are right.
I'm not surprised by no Haanif. I don't even think he's a top three player on our team. Which isn't a knock against him, I just have really high hopes for Luke, Rowsey, JJJ, and Reinhardt
If Haanif is the 5th best player on Marquette this is a top 25 team and there is no way there are 6 teams ahead of us in the Big East.
-
I think there is lots of question marks on this team, but they are 12 deep, it will be up to the coach to get them to play together and figure out whom deserves time
on the court or not. Talent is there, have to rebound. Hauser might be the key. If he can rebound or play some inside D, his ability to go outside and shoot will be much
like Jae and Lazar. It will be just as hard for other true 4's to guard him. If this happens, might be 4th or 5th, Wojo needs some improvement, at least to get the
students to come and watch.
-
Marquette was picked for seventh place. Last year, with one of the youngest rosters in the country, the Golden Eagles put together a 20-13 season and an 8-10 conference record. This season, Marquette has four starters back. Senior center Luke Fischer averaged 12.1 points, 6.2 rebounds and shot 60.8 percent from the field. Sophomore guard Haanif Cheatham impressed as a rookie by compiling an 11.8 scoring average and making the BIG EAST All-Freshman Team. Senior guard Jajuan Johnson averaged 10.2 points. Sophomore guard Traci Carter earned a starting spot as a freshman and averaged 5.4 points.
http://www.bigeast.com/news/2016/10/10/MBB_1010164924.aspx
Fischer on preseason 2nd team. No other MU representation. Surprised Haanif gets no mention.
http://www.bigeast.com/news/2016/10/10/MBB_1010163751.aspx
This all seems reasonable.
Now it's up to the lads to prove the predictors are underestimating us!
-
I'm not surprised by no Haanif. I don't even think he's a top three player on our team. Which isn't a knock against him, I just have really high hopes for Luke, Rowsey, JJJ, and Reinhardt
You think Rowsey could be better than Haanif?
-
I am bullish and think this Warrior tram will surprise a lot if people. After we whip the Badgers we will win in the Big East because of our great shooting.
[/color]
Hmm. I'll believe it when I see it and we will still get killed on the boards giving other teams 2, 3, 4 or more chances to score. I hope I'm wrong I really really do.
-
Coaches must read paint touches. I picked the exact order besides SJU and Providence being switched. And in hindsight, I think the coaches are right.
I'm not surprised by no Haanif. I don't even think he's a top three player on our team. Which isn't a knock against him, I just have really high hopes for Luke, Rowsey, JJJ, and Reinhardt
I guess no one is impressed with Duane either.
-
You think Rowsey could be better than Haanif?
"Could be?" Sure. There's an argument to be made for it. He's more experienced, handles the ball better, better O and D ratings.
The question is can he handle the upgrade in competition.
-
My #mancrush is showing
Navy...
-
I guess no one is impressed with Duane either.
Are you?
-
Haanif had a really good freshmen year. He was overshadowed by Henry, which may of hurt his recognition. However, I suspect that he greatly benefited from Henry being on the floor. He was much better than Henry at driving and actually making a layup and he was a better three point shooter than Henry. However, the defenses were more focus on Henry than Haanif. By all reports Haanif is stronger and more athletic this year, so it will be interesting to see how he fares this year. In the second Butler game, where it was questionable if Henry would play, Haanif did not score a point and he seemed to be intimidated by Butler's defense. Did Butler's defense focus more on Haanif in that game or did he just have an off game? It will be a while before we know how much Henry being on the floor hurt or helped the rest of our players.
-
You think Rowsey could be better than Haanif?
Cheatham will give JJJ a run for his money as best player. Luke will most important because of lack of replacement. Rowsey and Reinhardt will be nice additions, neither better than Haanif though. I think he'll make the leap from an already impressive freshman season.
-
It will be a while before we know how much Henry being on the floor hurt or helped the rest of our players.
First of all, I am cautiously optimistic about this year. I predicted 20+ wins and a pretty good Big East record, which would get us in the tournament. I admit a lot of this is my heart speaking but I see lots of things improving this year.
As to Henry, it's an intangible but it seemed like whenever the team "needed" something, there was a concept of "let Henry do it." They looked for Henry and his talent rather than working as a team to get a basket or a defensive stop. This was especially true early in the season and something that was not quite as prevalent as the season went on. Nonetheless, with Henry gone, Haaniff, JJJ and Luke will have to pick it up. If our outside shooting is materially improved, we'll be in the top half of the conference for sure.
Here's hoping.
-
For as much as players will be effected by being more of a focus of an opposing team's defensive gameplan without Hank around, the additional shooting ability of this team will open the floor up just as much for those same players.
I would be very surprised if JJJ was our best player.
-
You think Rowsey could be better than Haanif?
From what I've heard he was the better player in practice last season. I'll also admit some bias. I hate turnovers more than anything else. HCs leading the team in TOs kept me from having the same level of admiration for him as others. Still think he's a stud, but he's gotta work on ball control and going to his right.
I think Rowsey could be our Rotnei Clark.
-
Haanif had a really good freshmen year. He was overshadowed by Henry, which may of hurt his recognition. However, I suspect that he greatly benefited from Henry being on the floor. He was much better than Henry at driving and actually making a layup and he was a better three point shooter than Henry. However, the defenses were more focus on Henry than Haanif. By all reports Haanif is stronger and more athletic this year, so it will be interesting to see how he fares this year. In the second Butler game, where it was questionable if Henry would play, Haanif did not score a point and he seemed to be intimidated by Butler's defense. Did Butler's defense focus more on Haanif in that game or did he just have an off game? It will be a while before we know how much Henry being on the floor hurt or helped the rest of our players.
See if he worked on, drive and pull up jump shot to add to his game, would make a big difference.
-
Luke has a shot to be our best player if he can actually stay on the floor. He didn't show the ability to do that last season.
-
Being underestimated is usually to one's advantage.
-
Luke has a shot to be our best player if he can actually stay on the floor. He didn't show the ability to do that last season.
Luke's defense has never been stellar but I think it's going to suffer this year with his fear of foul trouble. Really hope Matt "the bat outta" Heldt can surprise some folks.
-
We have lots of depth, lots of players who are basically interchangeable. But I don't see any stars, any real go to guys. Every successful MU team in my memory has had at least one (Vander, JFB, Crowder, DJO, Lazar, Wesley, Jerel, DJ, Steve, Travis, Dwyane). Hope to be proven wrong but I don't see one on this roster (at least not yet).
-
We have lots of depth, lots of players who are basically interchangeable. But I don't see any stars, any real go to guys. Every successful MU team in my memory has had at least one (Vander, JFB, Crowder, DJO, Lazar, Wesley, Jerel, DJ, Steve, Travis, Dwyane). Hope to be proven wrong but I don't see one on this roster (at least not yet).
Those guys were all true warriors what we've got is a team chalk full of Eagles
-
Luke's defense has never been stellar but I think it's going to suffer this year with his fear of foul trouble. Really hope Matt "the bat outta" Heldt can surprise some folks.
Lol that's an incredible nickname.
-
We have lots of depth, lots of players who are basically interchangeable. But I don't see any stars, any real go to guys. Every successful MU team in my memory has had at least one (Vander, JFB, Crowder, DJO, Lazar, Wesley, Jerel, DJ, Steve, Travis, Dwyane). Hope to be proven wrong but I don't see one on this roster (at least not yet).
Similar to descriptions of the Nova program in 2013-2014: You could find grit. Perhaps guts. Some potential. Highly rated prep prospects. But not one dominant soul night it, night out. Studs aren't magical. It's on the shoulders of every guy to elevate their game to that level. Just hope one of them can do it by January.
(Pre-emptive response for the clowns: no, that isn't me suggesting the pieces are in place for MU to win a title in two years)
-
Those guys were all true warriors what we've got is a team chalk full of Eagles
It can't be said any better than this.
-
Those guys were all true warriors what we've got is a team chalk full of Eagles
It can't be said any better than this.
Disagreed.
-
We have lots of depth, lots of players who are basically interchangeable. But I don't see any stars, any real go to guys. Every successful MU team in my memory has had at least one (Vander, JFB, Crowder, DJO, Lazar, Wesley, Jerel, DJ, Steve, Travis, Dwyane). Hope to be proven wrong but I don't see one on this roster (at least not yet).
A bit early to say whether this team does or does not have a go-to guy. I suspect at least one will reveal himself as the season progresses, as is nearly always the case.
Ans even bad MU teams usually have a go-to guy (see: Brian Wardle, Tony Smith, Matt Carlino).
-
Truths:
1) Luke's fouling is way overstated by the masses;
2) Against better competition, Haanif was not very good (86.5 Ortg in 18 games vs KenPom Tier A & B [approx top 100 teams]; 82.5 in 12 vs top 50)... not a lot of assisting for his role; crazy TO's. Needs to maintain eFG% - not easy - and chop down on TO's. I expect a nice jump, but it's very much needed
-
Disagreed.
disagree that those players were warriors or are you saying there's somebody on this team who's name is going to be on par with those other guys that were absurdly good against their opponents no matter who they faced off against
-
I shudder to think what this team will be like if Fischer gets injured.
-
From what I've heard he was the better player in practice last season. I'll also admit some bias. I hate turnovers more than anything else. HCs leading the team in TOs kept me from having the same level of admiration for him as others. Still think he's a stud, but he's gotta work on ball control and going to his right.
I think Rowsey could be our Rotnei Clark.
I think a lot of HC's TO issues last year were due to A) Inexperience and B) playing out of position at the PG part of the time. I think both of those things are resolved this year and he will have far fewer TOs this season.
-
First of all, I am cautiously optimistic about this year. I predicted 20+ wins and a pretty good Big East record, which would get us in the tournament. I admit a lot of this is my heart speaking but I see lots of things improving this year.
As to Henry, it's an intangible but it seemed like whenever the team "needed" something, there was a concept of "let Henry do it." They looked for Henry and his talent rather than working as a team to get a basket or a defensive stop. This was especially true early in the season and something that was not quite as prevalent as the season went on. Nonetheless, with Henry gone, Haaniff, JJJ and Luke will have to pick it up. If our outside shooting is materially improved, we'll be in the top half of the conference for sure.
Here's hoping.
I think the beauity of this year's team is there is a lot of talent but no one alpha dog that we have to defer to at the end of games. We will have enough talent across the floor that we should be able to take advantage of whatever match up is best for MU.
I do think the most likely late game candidates will be Katin, JjJ and Duane
-
I think the beauity of this year's team is there is a lot of talent but no one alpha dog that we have to defer to at the end of games. We will have enough talent across the floor that we should be able to take advantage of whatever match up is best for MU.
I do think the most likely late game candidates will be Katin, JjJ and Duane
Or in other words: "We lost our best player and are praying that other people step up."
Losing an alpha dog is basketball is rarely a good thing.
-
Or in other words: "We lost our best player and are praying that other people step up."
Losing an alpha dog is basketball is rarely a good thing.
Disagree, there is a reason Bill Simmons has a Ewing Theory.
-
Disagree, there is a reason Bill Simmons has a Ewing Theory.
But the point is that the departure of Henry isn't going to make Marquette better. Marquette would undoubtedly be better this year had Henry stuck around.
Now they *could* be better than last year even without Henry. But that's not because of Henry because more of a minus than a plus. It's because other people stepped up in his absence.
-
I understand there is excitement in D.C. regarding Pryor, Akau, and an improved Govan but all the potential in the world can't overcome the horrendous coaching they have in place. Yet every October for the past half decade, the Hoyas are considered a dangerous team.
I just don't get the Georgetown love. I think they'll be worse than last year. Pryor is an average efficiency, super high usage player from a terrible team. I'm not convinced he can succeed at this level at all. Agau can play some defense, but he's not a game changer. Govan is good, but what about this team tells you they can overcome the loss of DSR, much less be better? What about JTIII indicates a reason for faith? They look like a 7th-9th place team. Only DePaul being terrible really separates them from the cellar.
-
disagree that those players were warriors or are you saying there's somebody on this team who's name is going to be on par with those other guys that were absurdly good against their opponents no matter who they faced off against
Disagreed in that I think there will be players on this team that I personally would consider "warriors." To me that doesn't necessarily mean they are All American talents/production, but are tough minded kids who have a little swagger about them. I think Rowsey will be a Warrior. I think Katin may be a Warrior. I think Traci and Cheatham could be Warriors. And I think Sam, over the course of his career, will be looked at as a Warrior in that I think he'll consistently make the right play and do all the little, tough things.
-
Disagreed in that I think there will be players on this team that I personally would consider "warriors." To me that doesn't necessarily mean they are All American talents/production, but are tough minded kids who have a little swagger about them. I think Rowsey will be a Warrior. I think Katin may be a Warrior. I think Traci and Cheatham could be Warriors. And I think Sam, over the course of his career, will be looked at as a Warrior in that I think he'll consistently make the right play and do all the little, tough things.
I don't think you can say "could be" when the topic is about the team's lack of a go to player. I wrote that regarding those players being guys that could carry a team, it's shifting the goal posts to disagree based on the premise that Sam or Hani or Carter could turn out like that later in his career. Swagger is earned in wins, not a single person other than Katin deserves an ounce of swagger.
I personally have high hopes for those young guys you mentioned but at this point they can't carry a team and strike fear into opponents the way Zar or Jae or McNeal did. When they do I'll gladly mention them as warriors
-
But the point is that the departure of Henry isn't going to make Marquette better. Marquette would undoubtedly be better this year had Henry stuck around.
Now they *could* be better than last year even without Henry. But that's not because of Henry because more of a minus than a plus. It's because other people stepped up in his absence.
Henry's efficiency was pretty terrible last season....maybe he improves on that year 2, maybe he doesn't but there is a scenario where this year's team is worse with him than without him.
If we end up with post defense issues and inability to rebound this year, you are right and I'm wrong. If not, I'm not necessarily right, but there is definitely an argument to be made.
-
I don't think you can say "could be" when the topic is about the team's lack of a go to player. I wrote that regarding those players being guys that could carry a team, it's shifting the goal posts to disagree based on the premise that Sam or Hani or Carter could turn out like that later in his career. Swagger is earned in wins, not a single person other than Katin deserves an ounce of swagger.
I personally have high hopes for those young guys you mentioned but at this point they can't carry a team and strike fear into opponents the way Zar or Jae or McNeal did. When they do I'll gladly mention them as warriors
You wrote, verbatim, "Those guys were all true warriors what we've got is a team chalk full of Eagles." I responded to what you wrote, that we have "a team chalk full of Eagles" and don't have "true warriors" like guys of the past. Being a "Warrior" doesn't imply you can "carry a team."
And I absolutely can say some players "could be" warriors, because we really don't know what we have. Even if you want to define "Warrior" as "go to player," there absolutely "could be" a number of "go to players" on this team. We don't know right now.
Heading into the 2013-2014 season the coaches selected MU as the favorite to win the BE tournament and were a team that were thought to have the potential to go to a Final Four. We missed the postseason altogether. Nobody knows what we have on October 11 of any upcoming season. So yes, there are some players that "could be" Warriors, and that I hope will be Warriors. But I know they will be just as much as you know they won't be.
Anybody who has a full scholarship definitely "deserves to have swagger" for whatever it is they are on scholarship for. It means they're pretty darn good at whatever that thing is.
-
Coaches must read paint touches. I picked the exact order besides SJU and Providence being switched. And in hindsight, I think the coaches are right.
I'm not surprised by no Haanif. I don't even think he's a top three player on our team. Which isn't a knock against him, I just have really high hopes for Luke, Rowsey, JJJ, and Reinhardt
Due to his size, Luke may well have a bigger impact, but Haanif is clearly MU's best player to me. Haanif will be making that freshman to sophomore jump and won't have to worry about playing PG, two theings that will increase his effectiveness. Rowsey and Reinhardt both need to work on their defense.
-
Due to his size, Luke may well have a bigger impact, but Haanif is clearly MU's best player to me. Haanif will be making that freshman to sophomore jump and won't have to worry about playing PG, two theings that will increase his effectiveness. Rowsey and Reinhardt both need to work on their defense.
I'm expecting Katin, Luke, JJJ and Rowsey to all be better than Hannif. Maybe Duane too. I'm also not expecting much from Hannif. I feel like he's going to plateau. Hope I am wrong.
-
From what I've heard he was the better player in practice last season. I'll also admit some bias. I hate turnovers more than anything else. HCs leading the team in TOs kept me from having the same level of admiration for him as others. Still think he's a stud, but he's gotta work on ball control and going to his right.
I think Rowsey could be our Rotnei Clark.
Out of necessity, Haanif was playing out of position last year at PG. There's a big reason for leading the team in turnovers.
-
Luke has a shot to be our best player if he can actually stay on the floor. He didn't show the ability to do that last season.
I'm pretty sure that Jay Bee has debunked the Luke fouls too much to stay on the floor argument.
-
You wrote, verbatim, "Those guys were all true warriors what we've got is a team chalk full of Eagles." I responded to what you wrote, that we have "a team chalk full of Eagles" and don't have "true warriors" like guys of the past. Being a "Warrior" doesn't imply you can "carry a team."
And I absolutely can say some players "could be" warriors, because we really don't know what we have. Even if you want to define "Warrior" as "go to player," there absolutely "could be" a number of "go to players" on this team. We don't know right now.
Heading into the 2013-2014 season the coaches selected MU as the favorite to win the BE tournament and were a team that were thought to have the potential to go to a Final Four. We missed the postseason altogether. Nobody knows what we have on October 11 of any upcoming season. So yes, there are some players that "could be" Warriors, and that I hope will be Warriors. But I know they will be just as much as you know they won't be.
Anybody who has a full scholarship definitely "deserves to have swagger" for whatever it is they are on scholarship for. It means they're pretty darn good at whatever that thing is.
And the post I was responding to was about those players that could carry a team. If I'm framing a sentence using "warrior" referencing a player that can carry a team then that's what it means for the purpose of the conversation. If you feel there's a fundamental difference on what our definition of warrior means then it's not you disagreeing with my post on our team so much as the definition I used, in which case you should've made your own statement first framing the definition of what Warriors would mean.
Regarding your second point, if I'm rating a player as a warrior because they can carry the team and play tough (something our teams have been severely lacking recently) then I stand buy there not being a proven individual on this team.
The difference between your knowledge of what they can be and mine of thinking they won't be is that mine is grounded in their lack of being warriors for their entire career. If JJJ or Wilson start playing unbelievably physical and take over games I'll say "wow these guys really developed into warriors" but I'll stand by my statement that as of this point in time there is no warrior on the team. Just like if Senior Sam essentially becomes Novak I'll say he "developed into a true warrior"
I'm sorry but your last statement is patently false. Grambling players don't deserve to walk around with swagger, Depaul players don't deserve to walk around with Swagger, heck I know at least a handful of people that went to good D3 and D2 schools electing to pay some money rather than take the full rides at crappy D1 schools. I'd say those guys who're paying, but winning, deserve more swagger than those who get the full ride but lose constantly.
Finally way to take an awesome statement playing into two of our mascots and blow it out of proportion.
-
Out of necessity, Haanif was playing out of position last year at PG. There's a big reason for leading the team in turnovers.
Oh I'm well aware, he had some head scratching turnovers and was fairly predictable on offense. I think he's much improved this season but I really like the other players we have too.
-
Due to his size, Luke may well have a bigger impact, but Haanif is clearly MU's best player to me. Haanif will be making that freshman to sophomore jump and won't have to worry about playing PG, two theings that will increase his effectiveness. Rowsey and Reinhardt both need to work on their defense.
I think you demonstrate an issue all fans have with picking valuable players. Luke is boring. He doesn't make mind blowing plays. Everything he does looks relatively easy because of his size. But he is our best player and I will still hold that he was our best player last season. Value add agrees with me.
-
I just don't get the Georgetown love. I think they'll be worse than last year. Pryor is an average efficiency, super high usage player from a terrible team. I'm not convinced he can succeed at this level at all. Agau can play some defense, but he's not a game changer. Govan is good, but what about this team tells you they can overcome the loss of DSR, much less be better? What about JTIII indicates a reason for faith? They look like a 7th-9th place team. Only DePaul being terrible really separates them from the cellar.
I think that Georgetown has the most talented roster in the Big East. Even with a history of underperformance that fact makes them a top five team in the Big East. You don't even mention Isaac Copeland. I'm not sure how you can forget a guy how had a line of 32 points and 9 rebounds against us last year. Peak is almost as good. Dickerson and Govan will be making that sophomore jump. Pryor has created some buzz in Hoya land, so maybe all he needed to be more efficient was to be surrounded by some talent. I'm not sure that Agau will be able to get much PT. PG is their weak spot. I don't know how they haven't shored that up more.
-
And the post I was responding to was about those players that could carry a team. If I'm framing a sentence using "warrior" referencing a player that can carry a team then that's what it means for the purpose of the conversation. If you feel there's a fundamental difference on what our definition of warrior means then it's not you disagreeing with my post on our team so much as the definition I used, in which case you should've made your own statement first framing the definition of what Warriors would mean.
Regarding your second point, if I'm rating a player as a warrior because they can carry the team and play tough (something our teams have been severely lacking recently) then I stand buy there not being a proven individual on this team.
The difference between your knowledge of what they can be and mine of thinking they won't be is that mine is grounded in their lack of being warriors for their entire career. If JJJ or Wilson start playing unbelievably physical and take over games I'll say "wow these guys really developed into warriors" but I'll stand by my statement that as of this point in time there is no warrior on the team. Just like if Senior Sam essentially becomes Novak I'll say he "developed into a true warrior"
I'm sorry but your last statement is patently false. Grambling players don't deserve to walk around with swagger, Depaul players don't deserve to walk around with Swagger, heck I know at least a handful of people that went to good D3 and D2 schools electing to pay some money rather than take the full rides at crappy D1 schools. I'd say those guys who're paying, but winning, deserve more swagger than those who get the full ride but lose constantly.
Finally way to take an awesome statement playing into two of our mascots and blow it out of proportion.
(To the bolded) I did exactly that when you asked what I was disagreeing on.
The rest is more or less semantics. We absolutely could have any number of "warriors" (by either of our definitions) on this team. And telling anyone they can't "have swagger" because they haven't met some random standard that you have set for them is absolutely absurd. "You're one of the top 1% in the world at what you do, but you aren't winning against the other top 1% you're competing with, so you should be hanging your head and considering yourself a failure rather than walking around with confidence!" People who don't have to pay a penny for school because they are good at something that that school values should be walking around campus like the BMOC, because, well, the school has decided that they are the BMOC with a full ride scholarship.
-
I think you demonstrate an issue all fans have with picking valuable players. Luke is boring. He doesn't make mind blowing plays. Everything he does looks relatively easy because of his size. But he is our best player and I will still hold that he was our best player last season. Value add agrees with me.
Your post I responded to was about MU's "best" player, now you're talking about "valuable" players. I think that Haanif is a better basketball player then Luke. But he's not someone who can control under the boards like Luke can. Those players are rare. That's enough to make Luke more "valuable." Which is why in my earlier post I led off with "Due to his size, Luke may well have a bigger impact."
-
We have lots of depth, lots of players who are basically interchangeable. But I don't see any stars, any real go to guys. Every successful MU team in my memory has had at least one (Vander, JFB, Crowder, DJO, Lazar, Wesley, Jerel, DJ, Steve, Travis, Dwyane). Hope to be proven wrong but I don't see one on this roster (at least not yet).
That's true about needing a go-to guy but there may be some confirmation bias here. Don't forget that in some cases we didn't know the go-to guys would actually be dependable enough to carry the team before the season started. I recall there were questions about whether Steve could be "the guy" rather than a role-player when we entered the BE (having D. James and Co. surely helped him in this way). Ditto Lazar after the Three Amigos left. And Crowder didn't emerge as the player he became as a senior until the season got underway; indeed, some of us thought DJO would be the go-to guy before the season started.
The point is: *we* may not see a go-to guy on the roster, but that doesn't mean he isn't there.
-
That's true about needing a go-to guy but there may be some confirmation bias here. Don't forget that in some cases we didn't know the go-to guys would actually be dependable enough to carry the team before the season started. I recall there were questions about whether Steve could be "the guy" rather than a role-player when we entered the BE (having D. James and Co. surely helped him in this way). Ditto Lazar after the Three Amigos left. And Crowder didn't emerge as the player he became as a senior until the season got underway; indeed, some of us thought DJO would be the go-to guy before the season started.
The point is: *we* may not see a go-to guy on the roster, but that doesn't mean he isn't there.
Bingo.
-
Bingo.
The most aggressive player that I saw from the scrimmage was Rowsey. It might be him.
-
(To the bolded) I did exactly that when you asked what I was disagreeing on.
The rest is more or less semantics. We absolutely could have any number of "warriors" (by either of our definitions) on this team. And telling anyone they can't "have swagger" because they haven't met some random standard that you have set for them is absolutely absurd. "You're one of the top 1% in the world at what you do, but you aren't winning against the other top 1% you're competing with, so you should be hanging your head and considering yourself a failure rather than walking around with confidence!" People who don't have to pay a penny for school because they are good at something that that school values should be walking around campus like the BMOC, because, well, the school has decided that they are the BMOC with a full ride scholarship.
Sorry man you just sound super stereotypical for our generation. Essentially here's what I read you saying: "Congrats you're above average at something, sure you're the worst of the best and in the midst of the worst stretch in 61 years of MU basketball but go ahead and walk around like you own the court because you got a scholarship." A little acceptance of reality to get these guys busting their ass would go a long way. And winning isn't a random standard I've set, it's the standard of a top collegiate basketball program.
32,735 collegiate players in america. the odds of playing is 17:1, when you factor in the guys that get injured, the super small kid, the too dumb for college, the guy who chooses another sport. There's actually a pretty good chance that if you're halfway decent you're going to find somewhere to play in college. I don't think it's unfair to say that of those 32,735 only the guys who're actually winning deserve to walk around with "swagger".
-
I just don't get the Georgetown love. I think they'll be worse than last year. Pryor is an average efficiency, super high usage player from a terrible team. I'm not convinced he can succeed at this level at all. Agau can play some defense, but he's not a game changer. Govan is good, but what about this team tells you they can overcome the loss of DSR, much less be better? What about JTIII indicates a reason for faith? They look like a 7th-9th place team. Only DePaul being terrible really separates them from the cellar.
Unfortunately, you will understand it better on 12-28-16.
-
Sorry man you just sound super stereotypical for our generation. Essentially here's what I read you saying: "Congrats you're above average at something, sure you're the worst of the best and in the midst of the worst stretch in 61 years of MU basketball but go ahead and walk around like you own the court because you got a scholarship." A little acceptance of reality to get these guys busting their ass would go a long way. And winning isn't a random standard I've set, it's the standard of a top collegiate basketball program.
32,735 collegiate players in america. the odds of playing is 17:1, when you factor in the guys that get injured, the super small kid, the too dumb for college, the guy who chooses another sport. There's actually a pretty good chance that if you're halfway decent you're going to find somewhere to play in college. I don't think it's unfair to say that of those 32,735 only the guys who're actually winning deserve to walk around with "swagger".
There are 347 division one basketball teams (forget, for the moment, that Ivy League schools, and maybe others, don't give out athletic scholarships, lowering that number). There are 13 scholarships per division one basketball team. Not sure how you get to 32,735 players, but my math comes out to a *bit* less than that (4,511). Sure, if you want to cut out the people who can't cut it then yeah! It's really easy to get to be a division 1 basketball player! So easy to get there! A lot of people are too small, too weak, can't shoot well enough, too dumb, too unathletic, or go another direction. Eliminate those people and the competition is slim! Lol. Absurd.
4,511 people (less, really) are on athletic scholarships for men's division 1 basketball. Out of 7.4 billion people in the world. That's a pretty elite group. You can try to diminish it by eliminating everyone who's not, but that's the exact point. Not everyone can do it. In fact, very, very few people can.
Getting a full ride for a college education is no small feat. Diminish it all you want. When you have to pay your kids' student loans you'll realize how big of a deal it is.
-
I'm expecting Katin, Luke, JJJ and Rowsey to all be better than Hannif. Maybe Duane too. I'm also not expecting much from Hannif. I feel like he's going to plateau. Hope I am wrong.
Basis for this evaluation?
-
There are 347 division one basketball teams (forget, for the moment, that Ivy League schools, and maybe others, don't give out athletic scholarships, lowering that number). There are 13 scholarships per division one basketball team. Not sure how you get to 32,735 players, but my math comes out to a *bit* less than that (4,511). Sure, if you want to cut out the people who can't cut it then yeah! It's really easy to get to be a division 1 basketball player! So easy to get there! A lot of people are too small, too weak, can't shoot well enough, too dumb, too unathletic, or go another direction. Eliminate those people and the competition is slim! Lol. Absurd.
4,511 people (less, really) are on athletic scholarships for men's division 1 basketball. Out of 7.4 billion people in the world. That's a pretty elite group. You can try to diminish it by eliminating everyone who's not, but that's the exact point. Not everyone can do it. In fact, very, very few people can.
Getting a full ride for a college education is no small feat. Diminish it all you want. When you have to pay your kids' student loans you'll realize how big of a deal it is.
I said college basketball players, not D1, I don't believe that being on Grambling or even Depaul gives someone the right have more swag than the players at UW-SP or UW-WW, who are always winning their divisions, just because the crappy D1 players don't pay and the D3 guys do. You seem to have this fixation on the money aspect and once again I'm fixating on the fact that in order to get to walk with swagger you better damn well be performing on the court to earn it not just be good enough to get a scholarship and get your ass beat.
You can't go off of 7.4 billion people when less than half a billion actually play basketball, thats like saying everyone can be a rockstar, well yeah but not everyone plays an instrument.
I'm not sitting here saying it's not an elite group or that it's not impressive to play at the next level but not everyone earns the right to have "swagger". Example: I was a all conference lacrosse player but my HS team lost a lot, I don't have the right to brag about that thus my name is Bagpipingboxer not Bagpipinglax
Idk what you're talking about with my future kids' student loans as if I don't have them for myself or as if you're much older than me and have to pay them for your kids lol.
I don't want to derail this thread anymore, and I know you're stubborn enough from prior experience to make this go back and forth for another four pages so good day.
-
Why does this surprise anyone? Please make a compelling case of how MU gets into the top 1/2 of the Big East based on the current roster and without assuming crippling injuries to the other teams.
-
I said college basketball players, not D1, I don't believe that being on Grambling or even Depaul gives someone the right have more swag than the players at UW-SP or UW-WW, who are always winning their divisions, just because the crappy D1 players don't pay and the D3 guys do. You seem to have this fixation on the money aspect and once again I'm fixating on the fact that in order to get to walk with swagger you better damn well be performing on the court to earn it not just be good enough to get a scholarship and get your ass beat.
You can't go off of 7.4 billion people when less than half a billion actually play basketball, thats like saying everyone can be a rockstar, well yeah but not everyone plays an instrument.
I'm not sitting here saying it's not an elite group or that it's not impressive to play at the next level but not everyone earns the right to have "swagger". Example: I was a all conference lacrosse player but my HS team lost a lot, I don't have the right to brag about that thus my name is Bagpipingboxer not Bagpipinglax
Idk what you're talking about with my future kids' student loans as if I don't have them for myself or as if you're much older than me and have to pay them for your kids lol.
I don't want to derail this thread anymore, and I know you're stubborn enough from prior experience to make this go back and forth for another four pages so good day.
Lol. This is hilarious. You talk about shifting goal posts then go move goal posts from being a full scholarship basketball player (hence why I said from the beginning if you are good enough at something to get a full scholarship then you're pretty dang good at whatever that thing is) to being any basketball player in college. "Mom, dad, guess what?! My intramural basketball team won the co-ed C basketball league! We killed it out there!" If you're playing at UWW or UWO or UWSP you're paying for your academics. I'll go ahead and say if those teams played in the BE and played MU's schedule they wouldn't be within 25 points of any opponent. But hey, you played at UWO and won some games so go ahead and "have swagger!"
Someone who is given the opportunity to receive a free education (see: division 1 basketball players) because they are good at something has every right to be very confident in their abilities. Full athletic scholarships are not participation trophies. They don't hand them out to just any old player.
Any person can be a division one basketball player. Anyone has the right to try to get there. Only a very select few have the ability to do so. This isn't even a debatable fact.
But yeah, I'm sure you do know what student loans look like. Which is why full scholarships aren't some small deal. You need to be good at something to get one.
Nobody's arguing that Marquette is where they need to be. But to say a kid can't have confidence because he's not competing for a National title? Laughable.
Can't believe someone like Ben Simmons would have the audacity to show such swagger on some of his dunks when he has earned no right to do so! The guy's a big time loser. Same with Henry Ellenson. Big nobodies.
-
Lol. This is hilarious. You talk about shifting goal posts then go move goal posts from being a full scholarship basketball player (hence why I said from the beginning if you are good enough at something to get a full scholarship then you're pretty dang good at whatever that thing is) to being any basketball player in college. "Mom, dad, guess what?! My intramural basketball team won the co-ed C basketball league! We killed it out there!" If you're playing at UWW or UWO or UWSP you're paying for your academics. I'll go ahead and say if those teams played in the BE and played MU's schedule they wouldn't be within 25 points of any opponent. But hey, you played at UWO and won some games so go ahead and "have swagger!"
Someone who is given the opportunity to receive a free education (see: division 1 basketball players) because they are good at something has every right to be very confident in their abilities. Full athletic scholarships are not participation trophies. They don't hand them out to just any old player.
Any person can be a division one basketball player. Anyone has the right to try to get there. Only a very select few have the ability to do so. This isn't even a debatable fact.
But yeah, I'm sure you do know what student loans look like. Which is why full scholarships aren't some small deal. You need to be good at something to get one.
Nobody's arguing that Marquette is where they need to be. But to say a kid can't have confidence because he's not competing for a National title? Laughable.
Happy you got the last words? Because
(http://memeshappen.com/media/created/I-SAID-GOOD-DAY-SIR-meme-34706.jpg)
-
Happy you got the last words? Because
(http://memeshappen.com/media/created/I-SAID-GOOD-DAY-SIR-meme-34706.jpg)
Look out people, the boxer said good day, that means you must be quiet.
-
I understand there is excitement in D.C. regarding Pryor, Akau, and an improved Govan but all the potential in the world can't overcome the horrendous coaching they have in place. Yet every October for the past half decade, the Hoyas are considered a dangerous team.
Yeah we've sucked in the tournament but Hoyas Are just 4 years removed from winning the conference and Just 2 years removed from a second place finish in the conference. Let's not act like we're DePaul.
-
Why does this surprise anyone? Please make a compelling case of how MU gets into the top 1/2 of the Big East based on the current roster and without assuming crippling injuries to the other teams.
The prediction doesn't surprise me. I think this team has a good chance to surprise doubters on the court.
After Nova and Xavier, there's very little separation between the next 6 teams in the Big East. We finished just 1 game behind Creighton, 2 behind Providence (who might be in for a big fall) and Butler (who also lost some big contributors and team leaders).
Marquette, on the other hand, returns 4/5 of the starting lineup and the entire bench. Plus: transfers Rowsey (who's practiced with the team for an entire year) and Reinhardt. Plus: a strong freshman class. We've added depth and talent across the roster.
Essentially, this Marquette team is every bit as proven on the court as Creighton, Georgetown or Butler.
But it doesn't really matter how compelling a case that is. Or who predicts which team for which spot in the standings. Basketball is won on the court, not in the court of public opinion.
Can't wait for the season to start.
-
Look out people, the boxer said good day, that means you must be quiet.
::) classic Foley.
-
The prediction doesn't surprise me. I think this team has a good chance to surprise doubters on the court.
After Nova and Xavier, there's very little separation between the next 6 teams in the Big East. We finished just 1 game behind Creighton, 2 behind Providence (who might be in for a big fall) and Butler (who also lost some big contributors and team leaders).
Marquette, on the other hand, returns 4/5 of the starting lineup and the entire bench. Plus: transfers Rowsey (who's practiced with the team for an entire year) and Reinhardt. Plus: a strong freshman class. We've added depth and talent across the roster.
Essentially, this Marquette team is every bit as proven on the court as Creighton, Georgetown or Butler.
But it doesn't really matter how compelling a case that is. Or who predicts which team for which spot in the standings. Basketball is won on the court, not in the court of public opinion.
Can't wait for the season to start.
Seems compelling to me
-
::) classic Foley.
I thought you said good day?
PS Once again, that's not a well kept secret.
-
That's true about needing a go-to guy but there may be some confirmation bias here. Don't forget that in some cases we didn't know the go-to guys would actually be dependable enough to carry the team before the season started. I recall there were questions about whether Steve could be "the guy" rather than a role-player when we entered the BE (having D. James and Co. surely helped him in this way). Ditto Lazar after the Three Amigos left. And Crowder didn't emerge as the player he became as a senior until the season got underway; indeed, some of us thought DJO would be the go-to guy before the season started.
The point is: *we* may not see a go-to guy on the roster, but that doesn't mean he isn't there.
I agree somewhat. We didn't know for sure if Steve could be "the man" and maybe you could say the same about Lazar and Jae. But we knew if we were going to be any good Lazar and Steve HAD to be the man. Ditto for Jae if we were going to be great.
I'm not even sure this year which of 8 or 9 guys needs to be "the man".
-
Why does this surprise anyone? Please make a compelling case of how MU gets into the top 1/2 of the Big East based on the current roster and without assuming crippling injuries to the other teams.
Not surprised at all. On paper, it's the exact right pick. Fortunately, basketball isn't played on paper.
-
Lots of needless energy wasted on trying to refute a 7th place, preseason prediction in a sport which crowns an overall champion at it's year end, anyway. Who cares where we are "picked?" All I care about is where we finish after we play........ Results based on performance, not projection.
But, how can anyone expect any lofty predictions anyway. We had a so-so 20 win season with an NBA first rounder who was one and done with us and as we were not invited to any post season dance. Especially the big one, NCAA. Remaining guys don't exactly strike fear into others in the league at this moment to be considered any higher. I think a degree of "homerism" afflicts those of us with lofty thoughts......
Luke is 6' 11", that is all.... If he is our "MVP" we are in a bit of trouble, really. He may be a nice enough guy but is slow, unathletic, has fair hands, poor free throw shooting, is foul prone and isn't really smooth around the basket. Forget about holding his own vs other bigs who are more aggressive. He AND Henry didn't dominate nearly enough when they were on the floor together last year.....really. Why do you think Indiana let him escape in the first place?????
The other guys have a lot to prove this year before we can anoint them improved from last year..... Have to find shooters who can shoot/score. A true point guard to run and control the offense and get us down the court, etc.......... Defense that can create stops....blah, blah, blah...... Much said before by lots of others....
Just my thoughts but let's just start playing and see where we are and where we go. I hope to be better in March than November if we are making progress here............
-
Lots of needless energy wasted on trying to refute a 7th place, preseason prediction in a sport which crowns an overall champion at it's year end, anyway. Who cares where we are "picked?" All I care about is where we finish after we play........ Results based on performance, not projection.
But, how can anyone expect any lofty predictions anyway. We had a so-so 20 win season with an NBA first rounder who was one and done with us and as we were not invited to any post season dance. Especially the big one, NCAA. Remaining guys don't exactly strike fear into others in the league at this moment to be considered any higher. I think a degree of "homerism" afflicts those of us with lofty thoughts......
Luke is 6' 11", that is all.... If he is our "MVP" we are in a bit of trouble, really. He may be a nice enough guy but is slow, unathletic, has fair hands, poor free throw shooting, is foul prone and isn't really smooth around the basket. Forget about holding his own vs other bigs who are more aggressive. He AND Henry didn't dominate nearly enough when they were on the floor together last year.....really. Why do you think Indiana let him escape in the first place?????
The other guys have a lot to prove this year before we can anoint them improved from last year..... Have to find shooters who can shoot/score. A true point guard to run and control the offense and get us down the court, etc.......... Defense that can create stops....blah, blah, blah...... Much said before by lots of others....
Just my thoughts but let's just start playing and see where we are and where we go. I hope to be better in March than November if we are making progress here............
Lol.
-
Unfortunately, you will understand it better on 12-28-16.
Sadly, agree.
-
Look out people, the boxer said good day, that means you must be quiet.
I did not know he spoke Australian.
-
Yeah we've sucked in the tournament but Hoyas Are just 4 years removed from winning the conference and Just 2 years removed from a second place finish in the conference. Let's not act like we're DePaul.
Marquette is also 4 years removed from winning the conference.
-
Marquette is also 4 years removed from winning the conference.
I know that. I never stated Marquette consistently underachieved though. Besides.
#1 seed = true champ everyone knows this. 8-)
-
I'd bet they'll finish better than 7th. Returning 4 starters but they don't mention the 2 transfers that started and played major roles for their respective teams. They'll need to rebound at every position and figure out how to play average defense. I think they're a NIT team and dark horse for the tourney. I'm bullish.
Duane and Sandy started last year too at various times.
-
Duane and Sandy started last year too at various times.
Unless something drastic happened this offseason, Sandy is going to be very low on the totem pole. Especially with the addition of Katin.
Kinda OT but I was looking at the top 100 from 2012 and i'm pretty sure Katin and Teve are the only two that are still in college. Denzel Valentine was also ranked behind both of them.
-
Unfortunately, you will understand it better on 12-28-16.
Even if they beat us, that's just not at all true. I look at the season, not just one game. Same reason I don't overrate a player just because they had a good night against us.
-
Kinda OT but I was looking at the top 100 from 2012 and i'm pretty sure Katin and Teve are the only two that are still in college. Denzel Valentine was also ranked behind both of them.
Say what? How you get pretty sure with that? There's a bunch... a couple of I4's... Hollowell & Hanner... Shaq Cleare... LJ Rose... Chicken Knowles
-
Basis for this evaluation?
Just based on watching him play. He seems to me to be a high floor, low ceiling guy.
-
Some pre-season rankings are out:
Matchup Rank: http://www.matchup-zone.com/conferences/BigEast, picked 4th, 57% chance of making the tournament
T-Rank: http://adamcwisports.blogspot.com/p/every-possession-counts.html picked 6th
-
I'll never forget when Tanned Tommy took the 3 freshmen but left Joe Chapman at home.
What a clueless, classless tool
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cufb-yAWEAA-s2Q.jpg)
-
Some pre-season rankings are out:
Matchup Rank: http://www.matchup-zone.com/conferences/BigEast, picked 4th, 57% chance of making the tournament
T-Rank: http://adamcwisports.blogspot.com/p/every-possession-counts.html picked 6th
Interesting. The projections for Marquette are very similar: either 17-12 or 18-11 overall, 9-9 in the Big East.
Matchup Zone has Creighton, Georgetown, MU and Seton Hall separated by the slimmest of margins (8.7 to 9.3 conference wins). T-Rank puts Butler, Georgetown, MU and Seton Hall at 9-9, with Creighton a game better at 10-8.
I have no idea how valid or predictive either of these are. But they do seem to agree with the general consensus that the difference between 4th and 7th in the Big East this season will be razor thin.
-
I agree somewhat. We didn't know for sure if Steve could be "the man" and maybe you could say the same about Lazar and Jae. But we knew if we were going to be any good Lazar and Steve HAD to be the man. Ditto for Jae if we were going to be great.
I'm not even sure this year which of 8 or 9 guys needs to be "the man".
Fair point. In the end, I think this season will tell us more about Wojo's coaching abilities than any individual player's. There are deficiencies on the roster, yes, but there's loads of talent, too.
I know comparisons are odious but let's be honest: this is a team (talented + underestimated) that Buzz and TC would thrive with. It's also the type of team that the post-2000 Marquette program routinely produces, so a successful MU coach will have to be able to win with these ingredients.
-
(http://65.media.tumblr.com/99f7c8b1249a1d28cccda01e55a9c387/tumblr_odeu9tLNuk1utm53vo1_500.jpg)
-
Fair point. In the end, I think this season will tell us more about Wojo's coaching abilities than any individual player's. There are deficiencies on the roster, yes, but there's loads of talent, too.
I know comparisons are odious but let's be honest: this is a team (talented + underestimated) that Buzz and TC would thrive with. It's also the type of team that the post-2000 Marquette program routinely produces, so a successful MU coach will have to be able to win with these ingredients.
Over the last 3 seasons looks like everyone else's "talent" is better than ours on the court.
-
Some would say there is talent there...
-
Over the last 3 seasons looks like everyone else's "talent" is better than ours on the court.
.....wojos talent has only been here for one season and it won 20 games despite being one of the 7 most inexperienced rosters in the country.....
-
.....wojos talent has only been here for one season and it won 20 games despite being one of the 7 most inexperienced rosters in the country.....
My favorite is when everyone freaks out and say it's his second talent. Cause his first recruiting class was technically carlino! 8-)
-
My favorite is when everyone freaks out and say it's his second talent. Cause his first recruiting class was technically carlino! 8-)
And sandy
-
Some would say there is talent there...
Experienced talent, too.
-
Experienced talent, too.
This year, sure. Last year? No.
-
Experienced talent, too.
Yes! We have a senior C and wing scorer, and almost everyone else that will get significant minutes has at least 1 year of BEast experience under their belts along with pedigrees/reputations out of high school. I'm thinking top 4 finish with NCAA berth at minimum this year.
-
Experienced talent, too.
I don't think this can be overstated.
We didn't have a single senior on the active roster last season. We'll have 3 for the 2016-17 campaign, each projected to be a major contributor: Luke Fischer, Jajuan Johnson and Katin Reinhardt. Beyond that, Duane Wilson and Andrew Rowsey are redshirt juniors (effectively seniors as fourth-year players) and Sandy Cohen enters his junior year.
That's 6 upperclassmen versus just 3 a year ago (Fischer, Johnson and Wally). And they've all seen significant playing time:
Reinhardt: 2822 minutes
Rowsey: 2166 minutes
Wilson: 1838 minutes
Fischer: 1766 minutes
Johnson: 1613 minutes
Cohen: 1210 minutes
Combined, that's almost 300 games of on-court time. Compare that to fewer than 50 games worth of playing time between Fischer, Johnson and Wally going into last season.
That kind of experience is invaluable in college basketball — especially in dealing with pressure situations and helping younger players (like Traci Carter, Haanif Cheatham, Markus Howard, Matt Heldt or Sam Hauser) play smarter, protect the ball, know where to be on defense, et cetera. Wojo should be able to count on the upperclassmen as coaches on the court.
No guarantees, of course. Years on campus don't automatically translate into wins. But it's potentially another very strong positive indicator for this team.
-
I don't think this can be overstated.
We didn't have a single senior on the active roster last season. We'll have 3 for the 2016-17 campaign, each projected to be a major contributor: Luke Fischer, Jajuan Johnson and Katin Reinhardt. Beyond that, Duane Wilson and Andrew Rowsey are redshirt juniors (effectively seniors as fourth-year players) and Sandy Cohen enters his junior year.
That's 6 upperclassmen versus just 3 a year ago (Fischer, Johnson and Wally). And they've all seen significant playing time:
Reinhardt: 2822 minutes
Rowsey: 2166 minutes
Wilson: 1838 minutes
Fischer: 1766 minutes
Johnson: 1613 minutes
Cohen: 1210 minutes
Combined, that's almost 300 games of on-court time. Compare that to fewer than 50 games worth of playing time between Fischer, Johnson and Wally going into last season.
That kind of experience is invaluable in college basketball — especially in dealing with pressure situations and helping younger players (like Traci Carter, Haanif Cheatham, Markus Howard, Matt Heldt or Sam Hauser) play smarter, protect the ball, know where to be on defense, et cetera. Wojo should be able to count on the upperclassmen as coaches on the court.
No guarantees, of course. Years on campus don't automatically translate into wins. But it's potentially another very strong positive indicator for this team.
And this is why I don't get how so many are automatically down on this team before the season starts. There is a potential they stink, but it is at least as likely if not more that this team will exceed expectations based on the significant improvement in experience.
-
And this is why I don't get how so many are automatically down on this team before the season starts. There is a potential they stink, but it is at least as likely if not more that this team will exceed expectations based on the significant improvement in experience.
I don't see why so many are automatically optimistic about this team. If we played the stock market on past performance we would all be rich. I'll be more than happy to see them prove me wrong on the court.
-
And this is why I don't get how so many are automatically down on this team before the season starts. There is a potential they stink, but it is at least as likely if not more that this team will exceed expectations based on the significant improvement in experience.
Because pessimism is a no-lose proposition. If they are right, they get to moan about how they knew it all along, if they are wrong, they get to enjoy the wins regardless.
We have experience and talent, but we are still lacking some of the physicality and rebounding other teams in the league have. In addition, this team doesn't look anything like other Marquette teams of the past 15 years that had so much success. Based more on shooting and diverse scoring than the toughness and grit that characterized many of our previous teams.
I'm bullish, but I feel that way just about every October, so take it with a grain of salt.
-
I'm cautiously optimistic about this season. But this team has a lot of unknowns. Could finish in 7th again, could finish 4th.
Either way, I expect us to be within a game of the #5 spot in the conference standings. Chances of making the Big Dance: 50/50. If not, I'd say we're a good bet for the NIT.
Here's the counter-argument to an experienced roster: Buzz Williams' last year at Marquette. During the 2013-14 season, we had 4 seniors: Davante Gardner, Chris Otule, Jake Thomas and Jamil Wilson. And 3 juniors: Juan Anderson, Todd Mayo and Derrick Wilson. But even with all those upperclassmen — fresh off an Elite 8 season, no less — MU lost its last 4 games in stumbling to a 17-15 (9-9) finish and missed the postseason entirely. Ouch. That one still hurts.
Now I happen to think our current roster has more talent and depth than that 2013-14 team. But at the time, most thought we had plenty of talent to challenge for the league title. Guess that's why they actually play the games instead of just speculate.
-
Markus 2 FF
-
Reinhardt: 2822 minutes
Rowsey: 2166 minutes
Wilson: 1838 minutes
Fischer: 1766 minutes
Johnson: 1613 minutes
[/quote]
I find this interesting. The two transfers have played significantly more minutes than our three most experienced players.
-
What I believe about this team is that we have a real possibility to win a game against the top 3 teams in the league. However, on the flip side I can still see us having another unexpected loss to DePaul. Losing at home to DePaul last years cost us a .500 finish in the Big East and an NIT bid. This team to be successful has to win every game against the teams predicted to finish behind us. Go 6-0 against the bottom 3 only requires us to go 4-8 against the teams predicted to finish above us to go 10-8.
-
I find this interesting. The two transfers have played significantly more minutes than our three most experienced players.
Same here. Fischer's not too hard to figure, since he barely saw the court during his freshman year at Indiana. But depending on how they adjust to the team and the Big East, Reinhardt and Rowsey could be real difference-makers this season.
-
Because pessimism is a no-lose proposition. If they are right, they get to moan about how they knew it all along, if they are wrong, they get to enjoy the wins regardless.
(https://usatftw.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/winner.gif?w=640&h=350)
-
What I believe about this team is that we have a real possibility to win a game against the top 3 teams in the league. However, on the flip side I can still see us having another unexpected loss to DePaul. Losing at home to DePaul last years cost us a .500 finish in the Big East and an NIT bid. This team to be successful has to win every game against the teams predicted to finish behind us. Go 6-0 against the bottom 3 only requires us to go 4-8 against the teams predicted to finish above us to go 10-8.
I'm thinking about this in a very similar way.
Go 4-0 against the bottom 2 teams (Depaul and St. John's). Absolutely mandatory. Then get at least 1 win to go 1-5 against the top 3 teams (say Nova, Xavier and Seton Hall).
That would put us at 5-5, with 8 games to play against the rest: Butler, Creighton, Georgetown and Providence. Split them and we're 9-9 — on the bubble at best.
If we can find one more win somewhere to finish 10-8, I think we're in. (Assuming we hold our own during the non-conference slate and the Big East tournament).
-
I'm thinking about this in a very similar way.
Go 4-0 against the bottom 2 teams (Depaul and St. John's). Absolutely mandatory. Then get at least 1 win to go 1-5 against the top 3 teams (say Nova, Xavier and Seton Hall).
That would put us at 5-5, with 8 games to play against the rest: Butler, Creighton, Georgetown and Providence. Split them and we're 9-9 — on the bubble at best.
If we can find one more win somewhere to finish 10-8, I think we're in. (Assuming we hold our own during the non-conference slate and the Big East tournament).
Make it 6-0 vs. the Bottom 3. I don't see Providence being any good. Possibly worse than St. John's.
-
Make it 6-0 vs. the Bottom 3. I don't see Providence being any good. Possibly worse than St. John's.
That would definitely help. We did sweep Providence last year.
-
I am also cautiously optimistic.....
Because of last years total collapse.....how could you not be.....
Worst defensive team in 40 years that I have been watching them......
Never saw a lack of confidence spread from Cohen to the rest of the team like last year.....
I think Rousey will be a stud.....Our version of Stephan Curry......The kid can flat out shoot.....and does not need much space and can get his own shot.....
This should help Duane out tremendously.....
Cheatum will do what he does on the offensive end......He can just not get lacadasical on the defensive end as he did last year.....
If Sam and Reinhardt can hold down the 4's.....and score 6 to 10 a game......we will sufficient at PF.....
The centers need to be RIM protectors.....Luke needs to score against favorable matchups.....and stay out of foul trouble....
There are a lot of 'ifs'.....But if those "ifs" turn positive.....we can be at least 10 and 8 in conference.....possibly 11-7 or in a perfect world 12-6......(blue cool-aide in large amounts there)
A lot of this is determined by defense.....Because we certainly have the offense to be an 80 point a game team.....
We shall see.....But hopeful......
PS.....WOJO needs to be a better in game coach also.....Third year learning curve.....So he should be.....
-
I think Rousey will be a stud.....Our version of Stephan Curry......The kid can flat out shoot.....
Be prepared to be disappointed.
His EFG% his last year at UNCA was .508. There were SIX Marquette players who exceeded that last year: Luke, JJJ, Haanif, Sandy, Sacar and Duane.
I'm not saying he's not a player by any means but the dude is nowhere near our version of Curry. I'm hoping we get solid ball handling, decent scoring and serviceable defense out of the guy.
-
Be prepared to be disappointed.
His EFG% his last year at UNCA was .508. There were SIX Marquette players who exceeded that last year: Luke, JJJ, Haanif, Sandy, Sacar and Duane.
I'm not saying he's not a player by any means but the dude is nowhere near our version of Curry. I'm hoping we get solid ball handling, decent scoring and serviceable defense out of the guy.
I'm not going to pick on our 89 post friend who might have been typing on his phone. I will say that from what I've seen Rowsey can ball. He's got great court vision, outstanding form on his jumper, good hands and does a good job staying in front of his man on D. He'll be limited against guys much taller that he might be asked to guard on ballpoint. He'll see significant minutes (20+) this year in my estimation and be a huge threat from the perimeter opening things for Cheatham and JjJ.
-
I don't see why so many are automatically optimistic about this team. If we played the stock market on past performance we would all be rich. I'll be more than happy to see them prove me wrong on the court.
I saw Michael Lewis (the writer of Moneyball) speak a couple of nights ago, and he had a great quote from one of the psychologists that inspired the whole "Moneyball" philosophy (and I am paraphrasing here because I don't remember the quote word-for-word):
"I don't see the point in being a pessimist. Pessimists suffer twice: once while thinking about the bad thing that might happen, and again when it actually happens."
-
I saw Michael Lewis (the writer of Moneyball) speak a couple of nights ago, and he had a great quote from one of the psychologistd that inspired the whole "Moneyball" philosophy (and I am paraphrasing here because I don't remember the quote word-for-word):
"I don't see the point in being a pessimist. Pessimists suffer twice: once while thinking about the bad thing that might happen, and again when it actually happens."
“The man who is a pessimist before 48 knows too much; if he is an optimist after it he knows too little.”
― Mark Twain
-
“The man who is a pessimist before 48 knows too much; if he is an optimist after it he knows too little.”
― Mark Twain
The optimist views the glass as half full
The pessimist views the glass as half empty
I view the glass as having just the right amount of space for my alcohol.
-
“The man who is a pessimist before 48 knows too much; if he is an optimist after it he knows too little.”
― Mark Twain
To each his own. Personally, I think worrying about something that might not happen and is completely out of your control is pointless.
-
The optimist views the glass as half full
The pessimist views the glass as half empty
I view the glass as having just the right amount of space for my alcohol.
Those who think of the glass as half empty have forgotten that the glass is refillable.
-
Same here. Fischer's not too hard to figure, since he barely saw the court during his freshman year at Indiana. But depending on how they adjust to the team and the Big East, Reinhardt and Rowsey could be real difference-makers this season.
Fischer lost a year of eligibility by transferring at semester break.
-
To each his own. Personally, I think worrying about something that might not happen and is completely out of your control is pointless.
What? Me worry. It's only a game.
-
What? Me worry. It's only a game.
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/250x250/52973596.jpg)
-
To each his own. Personally, I think worrying about something that might not happen and is completely out of your control is pointless.
Agree in theory, word to try to live by. However, if the surgeon says it's 50/50 before he puts you under I think normal folks would give some thought (and a bit of worry) to the something that might not happen
-
Fischer lost a year of eligibility by transferring at semester break.
Plus he was injured that first semester at IU and could not play 2nd semester frosh year after transferring to MU. Pretty much nothing at all to infer from that year.
-
Be prepared to be disappointed.
His EFG% his last year at UNCA was .508. There were SIX Marquette players who exceeded that last year: Luke, JJJ, Haanif, Sandy, Sacar and Duane.
I'm not saying he's not a player by any means but the dude is nowhere near our version of Curry. I'm hoping we get solid ball handling, decent scoring and serviceable defense out of the guy.
They have a drill where they have to make ten 3 pointers from each of the 5 spots that are in a 3 point contest.....Rousey took only 55 shots to make the prescribed 50......
I know that is unguarded.....But that shows a "stroke".....
Anything over 50%in a game is over 66% from 2.....That will win most games......and you "have" to pay special attention to that if you are the opposing coach/team.....That should free up a lot of other players that have other specific abilities.....
-
Be prepared to be disappointed.
His EFG% his last year at UNCA was .508. There were SIX Marquette players who exceeded that last year: Luke, JJJ, Haanif, Sandy, Sacar and Duane.
...but 54.1% as a frosh. Excluding fake games (non D1 opps, the figures were 49.6% & 54.6%, respectively. Huge drop & I hope a lot of it was the lack of a good #2 scoring option as a sophomore. May be luck 41% 3 in year 1 vs 37% in year 2 makes a big diff - both reasonably in the reasonable projection discussion for 2016-17
-
Agree in theory, word to try to live by. However, if the surgeon says it's 50/50 before he puts you under I think normal folks would give some thought (and a bit of worry) to the something that might not happen
True enough. I said it was pointless; I didn't say it was always easy to do. But I will say that any fan who wastes emotional energy worrying about Marquette's performance in the upcoming season is a fool in more ways than one.
-
They have a drill where they have to make ten 3 pointers from each of the 5 spots that are in a 3 point contest.....Rousey took only 55 shots to make the prescribed 50......
I know that is unguarded.....But that shows a "stroke".....
Anything over 50%in a game is over 66% from 2.....That will win most games......and you "have" to pay special attention to that if you are the opposing coach/team.....That should free up a lot of other players that have other specific abilities.....
I don't disagree with this. However that just makes him a good shooter, not "our version of Steph Curry." If he can give us what Cubillan gave us his senior year from outside, that would be sufficient.
-
But I will say that any fan who wastes emotional energy worrying about Marquette's performance in the upcoming season is a fool in more ways than one.
I see the wisdom in your statement - and over time I've let go of most of my emotional attachments to sports teams. But I can't kick Marquette basketball - I still have loads of emotional energy invested. As the song says, "I'm a fool to care".
-
I see the wisdom in your statement - and over time I've let go of most of my emotional attachments to sports teams. But I can't kick Marquette basketball - I still have loads of emotional energy invested. As the song says, "I'm a fool to care".
There is a difference between caring and worrying. I care, but I assume that they are going to be a good team until proven otherwise.
-
There is a difference between caring and worrying. I care, but I assume that they are going to be a good team until proven otherwise.
Sadly for me, "I care, therefore I worry" is as etched in stone as "I think, therefore I am".
-
There is a difference between caring and worrying. I care, but I assume that they are going to be a good team until proven otherwise.
You're right about this, chickadee.
In addition, there's the "not making myself crazy about what I can't control" factor.
I care deeply about the Warriors, I want us to play well and coach well and win. And yes, while watching a game, I get frustrated and overjoyed and upset and exhilarated.
But once the game ends (or the season ends), I move on. I can't influence a single thing the boys do, and I refuse to get worked up about any of it. I'm happy when I hear we sign a heralded recruit, but I don't get overly bummed when we miss one; that's college basketball.
All of that doesn't mean I love the Warriors any more or any less than others here. I guess it just means I'm wired a little differently from some who live, eat, sleep and breathe it.
At this time of year, I see absolutely no reason to be anything other than optimistic. I'm also pragmatic; I'm not predicting a Final Four run. But if some things break right, I believe the NCAAs are very possible.
Sure, if things go bad, we could miss both the NCAAs and NIT again. That would be disappointing but again, I'll just wish we did better and go on with my life.
There are plenty of folks here who think 2015-16 was a "wasted" season because we didn't make the tourney. I thoroughly enjoyed most of the season. My wife and I went to Brooklyn and had a blast watching the lads win the title, we enjoyed several outings with the local MU club, and I thought the team made progress in Wojo's second season. To me, it wasn't a waste at all.
Hey, as much as I love the Warriors, there are too many other "real" things in this real world of ours to focus on - including some I actually can control.
Caring but not worrying ... excellent statement, chickadee!