Where is the leadership?

[DaCoach]

Interesting..the only reason this thread exists is due to the team losing to UW, Duke and Gonzaga.

Not really. Are you suggesting that leadership has no influence on wins and losses? Good leaders make their teams play better than they would otherwise. Particularly this year as we try and blend all the newcomers into a winning team, we clearly have shown an inconsistency that a strong leader might have leveled off. Believe it or not, it's about the play, not about the record.

[Marquette84]

As you and everyone who follows MU with even a modicum of interest knows, Mbakwe had already packed his bags before Crean left. BECAUSE the Tanned One departed he gave the idea of staying a brief thought but Buzz was unable to bridge the chasm TC had created between MU and Trevor.

Brief thought = five months.

And you ignore that Buzz and Trevor well knew each other well because Trevor sat injured on the bench for most of the year while Buzz sat next to him (figuratively speaking) as an assistant coach.  

But here's the bottom line.  If Buzz spends an entire season working with a player as an assistant coach, then can't convince the player to stay when he becomes the head coach, its not the departed coach's fault.

Mbakwe may not have wanted to player for Crean.  But he also didn't want to play for Buzz.  That's not Crean's fault.

I don't know exactly what happened with Christopherson, but I'm sure he was unhappy with his playing time under Crean

So is it intentional misrepresentation to leave out the knee surgery that forced Scott to miss much of the non-conference play, or did you simply forget when you claimed that he was "unhappy with his playing time?"

I mean, most guys I know are rational enough to know that when you miss two months of practice due to knee surgery, you don't play a whole lot of minutes--especially when you were just a frosh behind several of the best players in school history.

And do you seriously think that Christopherson thought he'd get big minutes as a freshman?  Unless he was a complete imbecile, he KNEW he wasn't going to get much playing time his freshman (and probably sophomore) year.  And he came anyway.  It was entirely predicable.

But even if he expected more minutes at MU and took it out on Crean, Crean was gone. What it doesn't explain is why Christopherson left AFTER Buzz was named head coach.  

and was concerned as to what his future was here regardless of who was the coach.

And Buzz apparently did a poor job of giving him the "I play the five hardest working guys in practice" speech.

But once again, we're faced with this: If Buzz spends an entire season working with a player as an assistant coach, but then can't convince the player to stay when he becomes the head coach, its not the departed coach's fault.  

[ChicosBailBonds]

Not really. Are you suggesting that leadership has no influence on wins and losses? Good leaders make their teams play better than they would otherwise. Particularly this year as we try and blend all the newcomers into a winning team, we clearly have shown an inconsistency that a strong leader might have leveled off. Believe it or not, it's about the play, not about the record.

Agree...it's not about the losses or the wins.  I'd argue the play against Duke was very solid while some of the play in our wins we've been lacking in some of that leadership, the kind that demands we put our foot on a weaker team's neck and crushes them rather than put it in cruise control.

[warthog-driver]

I love JB but he is a wing man, not a flight leader.  Nothing wrong with that, either.

When I was flying CJ Falcons the best spot was slot 2 in a battle box. I love hitting gomers in the open.

[NersEllenson]

Not really. Are you suggesting that leadership has no influence on wins and losses? Good leaders make their teams play better than they would otherwise. Particularly this year as we try and blend all the newcomers into a winning team, we clearly have shown an inconsistency that a strong leader might have leveled off. Believe it or not, it's about the play, not about the record.

I'm suggesting that you can have good leadership, with good talent..and still not win games...as was the case in Travis Diener's Junior and Senior year.  Think we all thought Travis to be a good leader, tough, and a competitor...but were the results very good?  No.

And...are you really suggesting that this thread would even be occuring if we'd beaten say Wisconsin and Gonzaga??  No way does this thread exist.  Furthermore...unless this "strong leader" can morph into the DJO of 2009-2010, and shoot it like the 2009-2010 edition of DJO did...I don't care how strong of leader he might be..it wouldn't be enough to get the team past 5 and 3 point defeats to Wisconsin and Gonzaga where DJO shot a combined 25% from the field.

[warthog-driver]

...as was the case in Travis Diener's Junior and Senior year.  Think we all thought Travis to be a good leader, tough, and a competitor...but were the results very good?  No.

Perhaps Murf was right about Travis, after all...

[rocky_warrior]

Oh, and Santa won't really be sliding down your chimney this year.

You're right, Santa will be squirming down Chicos' chimney.

/sorryhadtosayit

[warthog-driver]

You're right, Santa will be squirming down Chicos' chimney./sorryhadtosayit

I heard Chicos has gerbils squirming down his chimney

[El Duderino]

Not really. Are you suggesting that leadership has no influence on wins and losses? Good leaders make their teams play better than they would otherwise. Particularly this year as we try and blend all the newcomers into a winning team, we clearly have shown an inconsistency that a strong leader might have leveled off. Believe it or not, it's about the play, not about the record.

I don't agree that in general, good leaders get other guys on the team to perform better. What leaders do is help prevent teammates from say not practicing hard, not playing hard in games, to not hang their heads if some guys are struggling, and/or prevent certain players from playing selfish ball over team ball.

A good leader can't make guys shoot better, handle the ball better, or play bigger than is in their skillset.

Marquette is struggling right now IMO not because of some leadership vacuum, but instead mainly because of large amounts of inexperience on the roster, DJO badly struggling from the perimeter on a team that badly needs his jumper to fall, rebounding problems, and Junior plays well in stretches, but currently the team doesn't have a consistently reliable PG.

The PG position is very important in both college and pro ball, but it's so crucial in the college game, especially for a team like MU that has so many inexperienced players getting significant minutes. Put an experienced, high quality, and consistent PG like Jordan Taylor on Marquette and we are a completely different team for the better. I know that's a well duh statement, but MU badly needs Junior to speed up his development to where he can be counted on most night to provide 27-30 consistent minutes or more. That's why his injury last season was such a killer. Instead of Junior entering this year confident and the clear on court leader running the team from the PG spot, he's more like a freshman still trying to find his way on the court.

[ATWizJr]

When I was flying CJ Falcons the best spot was slot 2 in a battle box. I love hitting gomers in the open.

Thanks for your service!  Maybe you can teach our guys to hit some jumpers in the open!

[DaCoach]

I'm suggesting that you can have good leadership, with good talent..and still not win games...as was the case in Travis Diener's Junior and Senior year.  Think we all thought Travis to be a good leader, tough, and a competitor...but were the results very good?  No.

And...are you really suggesting that this thread would even be occuring if we'd beaten say Wisconsin and Gonzaga??  No way does this thread exist.  Furthermore...unless this "strong leader" can morph into the DJO of 2009-2010, and shoot it like the 2009-2010 edition of DJO did...I don't care how strong of leader he might be..it wouldn't be enough to get the team past 5 and 3 point defeats to Wisconsin and Gonzaga where DJO shot a combined 25% from the field.

I never suggested that a good leader couldn't be on a bad team. As for Diener, let's not forget his injury in his senior season. The team went 17-6 with him in the lineup but only 2-6 without him. But it seems you suggest that winning solves everything. That approach is disastrous. Great teams never ignore the flaws that exist in every team and game. To suggest that the leadership issue arose only because of losses is to ignore the team lack of floor leadership. Are discussions about our lack of rebounding only here because of the losses?

In the end, you feel DJO would be having the same struggles if Zar were still here. I disagree. Perhaps it wouldn't be enough to win some games we've lost this year. But perhaps it would. This team lacks the consistency needed to be an impact team in the BE. That seldom was a problem last year and I attribute much of that to Hayward's effect. He made the team better by his presence. Regrettably, I don't see Butler being that type guy.

[GGGG]

In the end, you feel DJO would be having the same struggles if Zar were still here. I disagree. Perhaps it wouldn't be enough to win some games we've lost this year. But perhaps it would. This team lacks the consistency needed to be an impact team in the BE. That seldom was a problem last year and I attribute much of that to Hayward's effect. He made the team better by his presence. Regrettably, I don't see Butler being that type guy.

How did Hayward make the team better by his "presense?"  That's just silly.  He made the team better because he was NBA first round pick talent.  It was his inside/outside offensive game, his ability to guard big, and his ability to rebound that made the team better.

I think a big reason that DJO is struggling this year is simply because he is now scoring option #1 or #2, whereas last year he was often option #3 or #4.  Maybe he just has trouble mentally accepting that fact...or maybe he was just very hot last year and is reverting back to his norm.  But I think we are missing Zar's talent more than anything else.

[MerrittsMustache]

How did Hayward make the team better by his "presense?"  That's just silly.  He made the team better because he was NBA first round pick talent.  It was his inside/outside offensive game, his ability to guard big, and his ability to rebound that made the team better.

I think a big reason that DJO is struggling this year is simply because he is now scoring option #1 or #2, whereas last year he was often option #3 or #4.  Maybe he just has trouble mentally accepting that fact...or maybe he was just very hot last year and is reverting back to his norm.  But I think we are missing Zar's talent more than anything else.

Zar's leadership would have willed in at least 1-2 of DJO's 3s per game.

Sarcasm aside, I agree with Sultan. While Lazar was a great leader, he was also an outstanding player. That's what MU misses more than anything else. Put Zar back on this team, even without Acker and Cubillan, and this team likely beats Gonzaga and Wisco...and it wouldn't have been because of his leadership.

As far as DJO is concerned, I think that he got off to slow start and his confidence is shaken. Instead of just catching and shooting, he looks like he's tense and aiming his shots. Just from watching his body language after some of his shots, it just looks like he's really, really hoping that the shot goes in. He just doesn't look like the same confident player as last season.

[NersEllenson]

But it seems you suggest that winning solves everything. That approach is disastrous. Great teams never ignore the flaws that exist in every team and game. To suggest that the leadership issue arose only because of losses is to ignore the team lack of floor leadership. Are discussions about our lack of rebounding only here because of the losses?

In the end, you feel DJO would be having the same struggles if Zar were still here. I disagree. Perhaps it wouldn't be enough to win some games we've lost this year. But perhaps it would. This team lacks the consistency needed to be an impact team in the BE. That seldom was a problem last year and I attribute much of that to Hayward's effect. He made the team better by his presence. Regrettably, I don't see Butler being that type guy.

Sorry..but I disagree entirely.  Perhaps you are the type of fan who will find something to complain about even if his team in undefeated.  It was seems ridiculous to suggest that the approach of winning solves everything is disasterous.  Really?  Ever been on a team that was said to have "bad chemistry," but then it starts winning..and all of a sudden the chemistry becomes good, no more finger pointing, etc.?


Lastly someone's "presence" largely has to do with the talent and skill set they bring to the floor..and what that talent translates nito in terms..in terms of how it makes the game easier for the other players on the team.  See D-Wade.  Perhaps see Lazar Hayward...but to suggest it is his "leadership" that was responsible for the team winning more/or being better..is just wrong.  You could say that you believe Lazar is a bettter all-around player than Jimmy..and as a result the team is struggling...but to suggest it is leadership as for why we are struggling...in my opinion..that is the LEAST of our problems.  DJO getting back on track and shoring up the rebounding are the 2 most critical to this team playing winning basketball.

[DaCoach]

Sorry..but I disagree entirely.  Perhaps you are the type of fan who will find something to complain about even if his team in undefeated.  It was seems ridiculous to suggest that the approach of winning solves everything is disasterous.  Really?  Ever been on a team that was said to have "bad chemistry," but then it starts winning..and all of a sudden the chemistry becomes good, no more finger pointing, etc.?


Lastly someone's "presence" largely has to do with the talent and skill set they bring to the floor..and what that talent translates nito in terms..in terms of how it makes the game easier for the other players on the team.  See D-Wade.  Perhaps see Lazar Hayward...but to suggest it is his "leadership" that was responsible for the team winning more/or being better..is just wrong.  You could say that you believe Lazar is a bettter all-around player than Jimmy..and as a result the team is struggling...but to suggest it is leadership as for why we are struggling...in my opinion..that is the LEAST of our problems.  DJO getting back on track and shoring up the rebounding are the 2 most critical to this team playing winning basketball.

Again, I never suggested that leadership alone wins ball games. But I am of the firm opinion that most all great teams have someone who they look to for inspiration. Not to dismiss Hayward's abilities on the court, but clearly the team looked to him for leadership. It was mentioned time and again by players, coaches and fans. So how can you dismiss that element of his effect on last year's team. It's also been said on many occasions that Butler had the mantle of leadership passed to him. Of course DJO is having a terrible year and our rebounding isn't adequate. But it's my opinion that the mere presence of Zar would inspire this team to rebound more ferociously and even reassure DJO that he is expected to pick up his game.

[brewcity77]

You could say that you believe Lazar is a bettter all-around player than Jimmy..and as a result the team is struggling...but to suggest it is leadership as for why we are struggling...in my opinion..that is the LEAST of our problems.

I really think this is a bit unfair to Jimmy. The comparison shouldn't be Lazar and Jimmy, because Jimmy is still being asked to play the same role he did last year. Granted, his role would be expected to expand as a senior, but no one expected Jimmy to suddenly become a go-to guy from three-point range or to defend big men in the post like Lazar did.

Jimmy's ability is really not what should be questioned, but more the guys around him. Jimmy's numbers are very similar to what they were last year. The problem is more that he doesn't have the support Lazar did. Hayward had Butler, an on-the-mark DJO, and two reliable senior point guards. Butler has an off-the-mark DJO and a number of guys that have yet to step in as consistent options on either the offensive or defensive ends. While we only lost three major contributors, this is clearly not even remotely the same team we had last year.

[NersEllenson]

I really think this is a bit unfair to Jimmy. The comparison shouldn't be Lazar and Jimmy, because Jimmy is still being asked to play the same role he did last year. Granted, his role would be expected to expand as a senior, but no one expected Jimmy to suddenly become a go-to guy from three-point range or to defend big men in the post like Lazar did.

Jimmy's ability is really not what should be questioned, but more the guys around him. Jimmy's numbers are very similar to what they were last year. The problem is more that he doesn't have the support Lazar did. Hayward had Butler, an on-the-mark DJO, and two reliable senior point guards. Butler has an off-the-mark DJO and a number of guys that have yet to step in as consistent options on either the offensive or defensive ends. While we only lost three major contributors, this is clearly not even remotely the same team we had last year.

Very good analysis..agree 100%..and the bolded part 1000%

[RawdogDX]

If you're going to take my words out of context, you obviously have few facts to present. I said After Michael left, Pippen was never able to assume a good leadership role on the teams he played for. That's not the same as calling him bad.I suppose

Pippen, in his 2 years without Jordan, was dumped in the 2nd round of playoffs. They were one crappy foul away from going to the conference finals.  On a team that just lost the best player of all time and hadn't picked up rodman yet.  Who was the 3rd best player on that team?  And there was only 1 playoffs without jordan, he came back for year 2.In his only year with the Rocketsso was jordan a bad leader based on his time with the wizards?, the team lost in the 1st round.

In his 4 years with Portland, which he joined after finishing 1st in the Pacific the prior year, they never made it out of the 1st round 3 years straight. He hurt his back in his 2nd year there that is why his stats dived.No evidence of great leadership based upon those results.
your standards are out crazy high for calling someone a good leader.  He made it past the first round of the playoffs a few times and never missed the playoffs.  There are plenty of people who have had similar success but are considered great leaders. (ie. Nash)

Pippen doesn't get any respect! 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I heard Chicos has gerbils squirming down his chimney

Not since I gave them up for Lent earlier in the year.

[Lennys Tap]

Pippen doesn't get any respect! 

He's a top 50 of all time guy. Those in the know respect Scottie.