MU-DePaul Stats

[Henry Sugar]

good news - Marquette's offense was amazing in the 1H and the 2H. It hummed along at all levels.

Bad news - here's your confirmation of how bad the defense was. DPU averages 0.96 ppp in conference play and their average eFG% is 45%.

Did you know? - Marquette has the #1 offense in the Big East as of this morning.

[tower912]

Imagine MU's stats if they had average 3 pt shooting.   Ah, well. 

[Dr. Blackheart]

Sixth best MU offensive game in recorded advanced stats history (16 seasons). Four of these six have been under Buzz...and this is the best offensive game in three seasons, two of which had Sweet 16 teams.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/stats?season1=1997&season2=2012&conf=&team=marquette&stat=efficiency

[GGGG]

I wish they would let you do searches on opponent stats too.  For instance, I would like to see how MU opponents have done efficiency wise this year over previous Buzz years.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I wish they would let you do searches on opponent stats too.  For instance, I would like to see how MU opponents have done efficiency wise this year over previous Buzz years.

You can get at it...just a bit more manual.  Look under game stats and toggle to switch seasons. DePaul was second worst defensive game of this season to UF. 

http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/stats?season1=1997&season2=2012&conf=&team=marquette&stat=efficiency

[GGGG]

Yeah, and I'm struggling to figure out why it was so bad.  Perhaps we just can't match up with quick backcourts and they get too much penetration.  My feeling is that this year we actually play better against teams that want to play slow (Georgetown, Wisconsin, Pitt) and struggle against teams with tempo (DePaul, Louisville, Florida.)

[Henry Sugar]

Tenth worst defensive performance of Buzz's tenure.

Year   Date   Rank   Opponent   Result   Eff
2010-2011   Sat Jan 8   4   Pittsburgh   L, 89-81   141.1
2010-2011   Sat Jan 22   15   Notre Dame   L, 80-75   137.7
2012-2013   Thu Nov 29   1   Florida   L, 82-49   134.7
2008-2009   Tue Feb 10   14   Villanova   L, 102-84   133.2
2008-2009   Wed Mar 4   5   Pittsburgh   L, 90-75   131.9
2009-2010   Fri Mar 12   13   Georgetown   L, 80-57   125.5
2010-2011   Sat Mar 5   59   Seton Hall   L, 85-72   123.9
2008-2009   Wed Feb 25   3   Connecticut   L, 93-82   122
2009-2010   Sat Jan 9   21   Villanova   L, 78-76   121.5
2012-2013   Sat Feb 9   149   DePaul   W, 89-78   121.4

[MarquetteDano]

Yeah, and I'm struggling to figure out why it was so bad.  Perhaps we just can't match up with quick backcourts and they get too much penetration.  My feeling is that this year we actually play better against teams that want to play slow (Georgetown, Wisconsin, Pitt) and struggle against teams with tempo (DePaul, Louisville, Florida.)

Stats and eyeball test backs this up. We do better against slower tempo teams this year.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Yeah, and I'm struggling to figure out why it was so bad.  Perhaps we just can't match up with quick backcourts and they get too much penetration.  My feeling is that this year we actually play better against teams that want to play slow (Georgetown, Wisconsin, Pitt) and struggle against teams with tempo (DePaul, Louisville, Florida.)

Concur. I posted this here a while back on a Paint Touches piece. Junior is magnificent in a wide open man game...but struggles against a quick zone trap team in particular.  But, as has not been the case in years, MU has a set of strong healthy bigs including our forward depth.  MU is a tough match up.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=35673.msg443186#msg443186

[GGGG]

Concur. I posted this here a while back on a Paint Touches piece. Junior is magnificent in a wide open man game...but struggles against a quick zone trap team in particular.  But, as has not been the case in years, MU has a set of strong healthy bigs including our forward depth.  MU is a tough match up.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=35673.msg443186#msg443186

Good read...don't know how I missed it earlier!

Damn, I wish Otule wouldn't have gotten hurt last year. 

[Henry Sugar]

I'm probably getting lost in semantics here, but the UF and UL games were both played at a really slow tempo (pace of 61 possessions). In fact, four of MU's five losses were played at a tempo of 62 possessions or less.

Is it the backcourt matchup?

[T-Bone]

Anyone know where you can find a shot chart from this game?  I was thinking about this reading the SOTG thread and that DePaul didn't even challenge Chris in the middle - but want something to validate.  I was at the game and really can't recall more than a couple inside shots for DePaul.

[GGGG]

I'm probably getting lost in semantics here, but the UF and UL games were both played at a really slow tempo (pace of 61 possessions). In fact, four of MU's five losses were played at a tempo of 62 possessions or less.

Is it the backcourt matchup?

That is what I am thinking.  I really wish that Buzz would try to put Vander on an opposing point if Junior has trouble keeping them out of the lane.

[MUDPT]

DePaul's 3PA/FGA was 34%.  On the year MU allows 36% on average.  DePaul shot 12.2% better than MU's average opponent on the year from 3s.  If DePaul shoots the average of the Marquette opponent, Marquette wins 89-72.  DePaul's efficiency goes from 1.22 to 1.125

[MarquetteDano]

I'm probably getting lost in semantics here, but the UF and UL games were both played at a really slow tempo (pace of 61 possessions). In fact, four of MU's five losses were played at a tempo of 62 possessions or less.

Is it the backcourt matchup?

How many posessions were in the first half against UF?  I think in that game UF simply slowed down because they were destroying us.

Even though the Louisville game was not a fast tempo, they do score in transition, which killed us.  Louisville slowed it down in the second half as well.

Throwing off the numbers is the Green Bay and Butler losses, who do play really slow tempo.  Both of those were incredibly close games.  I think re-match against UW-Green Bay would be a win.

Were we completely outmatched versus Florida and Louisville who score in transition and secondary transition.

I think teams who play faster usually have good guard play anyways so maybe we are just arguing semantics.

[mu03eng]

That is what I am thinking.  I really wish that Buzz would try to put Vander on an opposing point if Junior has trouble keeping them out of the lane.

And put Junior on who, the shooting guard?  Junior doesn't rotate or go over screens well, our 3 pt defense would have been even worse.  I think Buzz tried to stem the tired with the 2-3 zone limiting Junior's exposure, but against quick 1s, he is hopeless on defense, which is funny because he can usually smoke the other guy on offense.

Seems, his mental reactions are slow, and not just physically slow.

[GGGG]

And put Junior on who, the shooting guard? 

Yeah, that's the hole in my plan.

[Lennys Tap]

When teams play to the scouting report against us we can be really good defensively, especially if they are deliberate. When teams throw out their playbook and play uptempo we struggle (see down the stretch at Louisville and at Gtown last year and late vs Butler this year). Maybe it's because opponents are playing with urgency, maybe we're not athletic enough to be great one on one defenders. DePaul attacks early in the shot clock also, and for the most part got pretty good looks.

[mug644]

I'm probably getting lost in semantics here, but the UF and UL games were both played at a really slow tempo (pace of 61 possessions). In fact, four of MU's five losses were played at a tempo of 62 possessions or less.

Is it the backcourt matchup?

That could well emphasize the importance of Junior. When he is taken out of the game, particularly by a quick, smothering defensive opponent, MU reacts by slowing it down with someone else (typically Vander) bringing the ball up court. Truth is, though, we play better when Junior plays better and can push the ball into the front court.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I'm probably getting lost in semantics here, but the UF and UL games were both played at a really slow tempo (pace of 61 possessions). In fact, four of MU's five losses were played at a tempo of 62 possessions or less.

Is it the backcourt matchup?

MU plays at a pace that is 64.6 this season compared to 71.4 last season.  So, overall MU has slowed it down for attrition via the MU bigs to be successful....see the number of free throws.  That is MU's tendency.

I think in every MU loss, there was an aggressive zone played against MU...as seen by turnover rates in every loss (except UC) in the 20%++ range ..and very poor trey shooting.  In other words, bad match ups.

Why?  They had the personnel to double down low as MU's shooters cannot shoot...and that negates MU 's strength.  Then our guards are left to penetrate the zone via the dribble drive and the opponents quickness turns into Turnover City with high pressure.  However, when MU has a match up advantage, it is into the bigs for the game of attrition...which is why MU is surprising this year.  They can manhandle most teams in the paint. 

I hope that provides more context.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Against the Georgetown zone, MU with a 29.7% turnover rate, with our Point Guard at 50%.  Gardner with only three shot attempts.  Incredible really how Junior cannot play well against a zone.

[4everwarriors]

Besides his lack of good decision making, Jr. is neither quick enough nor can he shoot well enough to be effective, on this level, against both zone or man defenses.