It's coming down to leadership and ownership by the players

[tower912]

We have an inexperienced team.    And we seem rudderless.   It has been said before and I will say again that we took for granted the leadership provided by Lazar, Mo, and Cubi.      An upperclassman, a non-newcomer, has to start putting the team on his back.    Somebody has to start getting in his teammates' faces and holding them accountable on the floor.    Buzz hasn't suddenly become stupid.    We are running what we ran before, but our breakdowns are far more frequent.   A lot of that is youth, but part of it is that no player is taking the reins and making sure the players hold each other liable.

[4everwarriors]

Absolutely correct and it's Vander's team for the taking. Love to see it happen.

[ChicosBailBonds]

We have an inexperienced team.    And we seem rudderless.   It has been said before and I will say again that we took for granted the leadership provided by Lazar, Mo, and Cubi.      An upperclassman, a non-newcomer, has to start putting the team on his back.    Somebody has to start getting in his teammates' faces and holding them accountable on the floor.    Buzz hasn't suddenly become stupid.    We are running what we ran before, but our breakdowns are far more frequent.   A lot of that is youth, but part of it is that no player is taking the reins and making sure the players hold each other liable.

Agreed.....which is exactly why I said a few weeks ago that Buzz was fortunate to walk into the Big 3 in year one and the "little 3" in year two (of course Lazar isn't little), but those 6 kids were mature, experienced, ready to lead.  Hopefully these guys get there, but Buzz is going to have to push them along as the security blankets are gone.

[willie warrior]

Can't accept that after 11 games we are still calling the team "inexperienced"

That is an excuse.

But, hey, we beat a winless cupcake that is downgrading to D III by 29. Don't worry--be happy.

[tower912]

You wouldn't.    DJO is in a sophomore slump.   Unfortunately, he is a junior and being counted on to lead.   And he is letting his shooting problems affect the rest of his game.   Crowder his finding his way in D1.   Buycks and Butler aren't taking command on the floor yet.    Blue, frosh, Crowder, frosh, Cadougan/Otule, essentially frosh, EWill, arround 100 minutes of game time combined.  Jones, frosh, gave up more than he scored.    Willie, you look at this team and expect them to play at the efficiency we have seen from our two senior laden teams the last two years.    I look at this team and see a whole bunch of young.    And no, 11 games of D1 experience is not enough for freshman to stop making freshman mistakes.    To state otherwise is ridiculous. 

[GGGG]

Can't accept that after 11 games we are still calling the team "inexperienced"

They've played 3 real games...and have yet to play a true road game.  They're inexperienced.

[pillardean]

Agreed.....which is exactly why I said a few weeks ago that Buzz was fortunate to walk into the Big 3 in year one and the "little 3" in year two (of course Lazar isn't little), but those 6 kids were mature, experienced, ready to lead.  Hopefully these guys get there, but Buzz is going to have to push them along as the security blankets are gone.

At this point last year who did we beat, who did we not?

We beat a Michigan team that at the time was ranked but in reality was awful.  Xavier was an average team.  We lost to a Florida State team that never had a point guard and would be eaten for a snack by the likes of Duke, Zags.  We were crushed by Bucky in Bucky and lost at home to a putrid NC State team.

This year we have a tough loss to Bucky at home where we didn't play well.  Lost to undeniably the best team in the country and a Gonzaga team that has had a brutal schedule but is a very solid team.  I am still trying to figure out where the "leadership" came from besides Lazar.  Don't confuse Cubbies flayling of limbs as leadership.

The reality is the expectations for this team are higher than last years and we have mirrored last years productivity besides a NC win against a team like Xavier this year.  But that Vandy game has yet to be played.

[Stretchdeltsig]

After watching the game today, I was encouraged.  I think that we have a high talent level on the team.  Vander Blue is playing at a high level, especially for a freshman.  Crowder is solid.  DJO is solid with or without his outside shot.  With the shot he is great.  Jimmy Butler is solid.  Otule has shown excellent defense down low.  Garnder has shown that he's a gamer.  Dwight can play well if he plays with the flow.  Cadugan has shown weak defense and weak offense.  he is the biggest disappointment so far.  At times he reminds you of Butch Lee, but he falls short because of his lack of defense and offense.  Today Erick and Jamail showed that they can play.  We need their offense and length.  All in all, let's fight like hell to win all we can.  Go Marquette!

[brewcity77]

Can't accept that after 11 games we are still calling the team "inexperienced"

That is an excuse.

But, hey, we beat a winless cupcake that is downgrading to D III by 29. Don't worry--be happy.

Is it bad that I felt embarrassed by this at the end of the game? My feeling was we should have won by 50, and anything less than 40 was a failure. This Centenary team was awful, and we let them stay in the game for most of the first half. Incredibly poor performance today, our turnover numbers were awful, shooting performance from both the field and line was poor, and it was only masked by the combination of our rebounding against a much smaller and less athletic team and the simply incredible bad that is Centenary.

29 may be a large margin, but I think it's one Centenary should take more pride in than Marquette should. Even Tulane beat this team by 40. Not at all impressed by today's performance. And I'd say Buzz probably agrees, I think that's the first time I've seen the team back out three minutes before the opponents for second half shoot-around. My thought was that he felt they looked awful the first half (they did) and needed to amend for it in the second (they didn't).

I really hope we beat Vandy, but I can't see it happening.

[mviale]

At this point last year who did we beat, who did we not?

We beat a Michigan team that at the time was ranked but in reality was awful.  Xavier was an average team.  We lost to a Florida State team that never had a point guard and would be eaten for a snack by the likes of Duke, Zags.  We were crushed by Bucky in Bucky and lost at home to a putrid NC State team.

This year we have a tough loss to Bucky at home where we didn't play well.  Lost to undeniably the best team in the country and a Gonzaga team that has had a brutal schedule but is a very solid team.  I am still trying to figure out where the "leadership" came from besides Lazar.  Don't confuse Cubbies flayling of limbs as leadership.

The reality is the expectations for this team are higher than last years and we have mirrored last years productivity besides a NC win against a team like Xavier this year.  But that Vandy game has yet to be played.

Finally, +1

[brewcity77]

At this point last year who did we beat, who did we not?

We beat a Michigan team that at the time was ranked but in reality was awful.  Xavier was an average team.  We lost to a Florida State team that never had a point guard and would be eaten for a snack by the likes of Duke, Zags.  We were crushed by Bucky in Bucky and lost at home to a putrid NC State team.

This year we have a tough loss to Bucky at home where we didn't play well.  Lost to undeniably the best team in the country and a Gonzaga team that has had a brutal schedule but is a very solid team.  I am still trying to figure out where the "leadership" came from besides Lazar.  Don't confuse Cubbies flayling of limbs as leadership.

The reality is the expectations for this team are higher than last years and we have mirrored last years productivity besides a NC win against a team like Xavier this year.  But that Vandy game has yet to be played.

Two major disagreements I have with this. First, that Xavier team that went to the Sweet Sixteen and took Kansas State to the absolute limit last year was not an average team. They were a very good team that nearly made the Elite Eight. Second, I'll admit I didn't see the Zags win today that makes them look a bit better, but in the games I've watched, they certainly haven't been a very solid team. They were awful against Kansas State, unimpressive against a San Diego State team that has largely climbed the rankings on the strength of a win against an obviously overrated Gonzaga team (Seriously, who else has SDSU beat, look at their schedule), and got trounced by the likes of Washington State, not exactly a high-level team.

In summary, Xavier last year, proven to be very good. Gonzaga this year, not yet proven to be very solid.

[Marquette84]

At this point last year who did we beat, who did we not?

We beat a Michigan team that at the time was ranked but in reality was awful.  Xavier was an average team.  We lost to a Florida State team that never had a point guard and would be eaten for a snack by the likes of Duke, Zags.  We were crushed by Bucky in Bucky and lost at home to a putrid NC State team.

This year we have a tough loss to Bucky at home where we didn't play well.  Lost to undeniably the best team in the country and a Gonzaga team that has had a brutal schedule but is a very solid team.  I am still trying to figure out where the "leadership" came from besides Lazar.  Don't confuse Cubbies flayling of limbs as leadership.

The reality is the expectations for this team are higher than last years and we have mirrored last years productivity besides a NC win against a team like Xavier this year.  But that Vandy game has yet to be played.

I think is a mischaracterization to call Michgan "awful".  They weren't a top 25 team by any stretch, but they were certainly a middle of the pack in the Big Ten. In the BE, they would have been similar to UConn or Cincinnati, on par compared to Gonzaga this year.

Gonzaga will wind up with a better record because they play in a weaker conference. 

[Pakuni]

At this point last year who did we beat, who did we not?

We beat a Michigan team that at the time was ranked but in reality was awful.  Xavier was an average team.  We lost to a Florida State team that never had a point guard and would be eaten for a snack by the likes of Duke, Zags.  We were crushed by Bucky in Bucky and lost at home to a putrid NC State team.

This year we have a tough loss to Bucky at home where we didn't play well.  Lost to undeniably the best team in the country and a Gonzaga team that has had a brutal schedule but is a very solid team.  I am still trying to figure out where the "leadership" came from besides Lazar.  Don't confuse Cubbies flayling of limbs as leadership.

The reality is the expectations for this team are higher than last years and we have mirrored last years productivity besides a NC win against a team like Xavier this year.  But that Vandy game has yet to be played.

Stellar post.
Thanks for injecting some reason into the Chicken Little hyperbole.

[Pakuni]

Two major disagreements I have with this. First, that Xavier team that went to the Sweet Sixteen and took Kansas State to the absolute limit last year was not an average team. They were a very good team that nearly made the Elite Eight. Second, I'll admit I didn't see the Zags win today that makes them look a bit better, but in the games I've watched, they certainly haven't been a very solid team. They were awful against Kansas State, unimpressive against a San Diego State team that has largely climbed the rankings on the strength of a win against an obviously overrated Gonzaga team (Seriously, who else has SDSU beat, look at their schedule), and got trounced by the likes of Washington State, not exactly a high-level team.

In summary, Xavier last year, proven to be very good. Gonzaga this year, not yet proven to be very solid.

San Diego State beat Cal by 20 (Cal, which beat a ranked Temple team and Iowa State, despite the presence of you know who). They also beat Wichita State, which beat Virginia handily, got a road win over LSU and was a Kemba Walker miracle away from knocking off UConn. SDSU hasn't beaten a lot of great teams, but they've beaten everyone on the schedule, and for the most part has done it with relative ease.
And I would suggest that beating a top 10 team in what was essentially a road game should make the Zags look more than a "bit" better.
Will the Zags beat a Sweet 16 team by season's end? No idea. But they're definitely a solid team that's held its own against a brutal schedule and has only one slightly questionable loss - on the road, in-state rivalry - on its record.

[ChicosBailBonds]

At this point last year who did we beat, who did we not?

We beat a Michigan team that at the time was ranked but in reality was awful.  Xavier was an average team.  We lost to a Florida State team that never had a point guard and would be eaten for a snack by the likes of Duke, Zags.  We were crushed by Bucky in Bucky and lost at home to a putrid NC State team.

This year we have a tough loss to Bucky at home where we didn't play well.  Lost to undeniably the best team in the country and a Gonzaga team that has had a brutal schedule but is a very solid team.  I am still trying to figure out where the "leadership" came from besides Lazar.  Don't confuse Cubbies flayling of limbs as leadership.

The reality is the expectations for this team are higher than last years and we have mirrored last years productivity besides a NC win against a team like Xavier this year.  But that Vandy game has yet to be played.

I'm not confusing Cubbie's flayling limbs as leadership and quite frankly think that dig on his is inappropriate. 

Last year there were go to guys that came up big in critical situations.  I would argue that with Acker and Hayward hitting big shots, it also took a huge amount of pressure off DJO and Butler to do their thing.  Now those two guys are being asked to be in the pressure cooker and it's tough.  Hopefully they can take it to a higher level soon.

In terms of your run down of who we played, well I wouldn't categorize Xavier in the manner you did.  They had a successful season....won 25+ games, made the NCAAs, etc, etc.  Florida State was a NCAA team and a game we should have won but gagged on it.  I don't see where we've even been in a position to gag our losses this year.  That's a difference in my opinion because we have played from behind in key games this year, where last year even some games we lost we played ahead only to collapse in the final minute(s).

FSU, NC State, West Virginia, Villanova, DePaul, etc...we had leads in each of those games and lost.  Against Duke, Gonzaga, Wisconsin, we have trailed (sometimes badly) and constantly playing catchup.  I see that as significantly different than last year.

[brewcity77]

FSU, NC State, West Virginia, Villanova, DePaul, etc...we had leads in each of those games and lost.  Against Duke, Gonzaga, Wisconsin, we have trailed (sometimes badly) and constantly playing catchup.  I see that as significantly different than last year.

I think this is a very good point. Yes, the margins of loss may be similar, but the way we are losing this year is much more discouraging. We're making late runs that make the final score look more respectable. I'm reminded a lot of last year's Syracuse game. We do enough in the final minutes to make it look to the casual observer that we were in the game, but for those that watched, you know that it was always a bit out of reach. That's why last year's losses were more encouraging, they were games we actually had a real chance to win throughout, not just because of a late run that made it seem that way in the scoreline.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I think this is a very good point. Yes, the margins of loss may be similar, but the way we are losing this year is much more discouraging. We're making late runs that make the final score look more respectable. I'm reminded a lot of last year's Syracuse game. We do enough in the final minutes to make it look to the casual observer that we were in the game, but for those that watched, you know that it was always a bit out of reach. That's why last year's losses were more encouraging, they were games we actually had a real chance to win throughout, not just because of a late run that made it seem that way in the scoreline.

Of our first 8 one or two possession games last season, we were 1-7.  That was discouraging.  JFB turned us around, and he is still here (and has already hit two clutch threes to pull us back into games).  We have guys who don't even know their roles yet.  We actually have better match-up depth this season.  We are assisting more hoops.  Our offense is efficient.  I talked to some Duke players in KC, they thought we would vie for the BE title--we were a tough match-up for them.  Got to let the wine age though to see what we have.

[pillardean]

Two major disagreements I have with this. First, that Xavier team that went to the Sweet Sixteen and took Kansas State to the absolute limit last year was not an average team.

Xavier was not playing at that level at the time.  They "grew" into that type of team.

Perhaps my comment about Michigan being awful was overboard, but not by much.

I'm not confusing Cubbie's flayling limbs as leadership and quite frankly think that dig on his is inappropriate.  

FSU, NC State, West Virginia, Villanova, DePaul, etc...we had leads in each of those games and lost.  Against Duke, Gonzaga, Wisconsin, we have trailed (sometimes badly) and constantly playing catchup.  I see that as significantly different than last year.

Does that matter?  How we lose?  I thought you said that there are no small victories.  I know you have, in particular last year, now you are using the opposite argument?  

I should not have made that dig at Cubes.  That was unnecessary.

There was not a time in which we were down by 15-20 like we were in Nova or Cuse (I cannot remember off hand what one) to come back and lose like 1 in which we did last year.  We were down by small margins to better teams this year and have continued to battle and make clutch shots, being accountable during those strings and they just haven't quite gotten the bounces and the plays.  Sure a bit of that is on the players, but I do not see something too worrisome.  

If you are saying that DJO's slump is a lack of leadership I would say that you do not understand the definition of leadership.  If you are saying that leaders on this team do not exist I would point you to Pakuni's post to show how JFB is still here and is, as is apparent in the final minutes of the Wisconsin, stepping up as that player the rest of the team circles around when things get tough.

I see a victory in Nashville.  Optimistic, sure, but not that far-fetched.

And I hate to say it but it is easier for Bucky to come into our building then it is for MU to enter into the Kohl center.  That's a bit on us as fans.

Edit: Some Spelling and Grammar

[ChicosBailBonds]

Of our first 8 one or two possession games last season, we were 1-7.  That was discouraging.  JFB turned us around, and he is still here (and has already hit two clutch threes to pull us back into games).  We have guys who don't even know their roles yet.  We actually have better match-up depth this season.  We are assisting more hoops.  Our offense is efficient.  I talked to some Duke players in KC, they thought we would vie for the BE title--we were a tough match-up for them.  Got to let the wine age though to see what we have.

Yes, but we still led in almost all of those games going down to the wire, or had a significant lead at some point.  This year, we are playing catchup in the critical games and even some of the non-critical games.

We were 1-7 in one or two possession games last year but could have been 8-0.  In this year's 3 losses, did we ever truly have a chance to win any of them?  Did we ever have a second half lead of more than 2 points?

That's what I was referencing.  Doesn't mean we won't get there, we will.  We had some serious senior leadership last year that hasn't quite come to the surface yet.  We had a 1st round NBA player on last year's team, we don't have anyone that will be drafted in the NBA next year and that means we're going to look lost at times.  Hopefully that changes in the coming weeks.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Yes, but we still led in almost all of those games going down to the wire, or had a significant lead at some point.  This year, we are playing catchup in the critical games and even some of the non-critical games.

We were 1-7 in one or two possession games last year but could have been 8-0.  In this year's 3 losses, did we ever truly have a chance to win any of them?  Did we ever have a second half lead of more than 2 points?

That's what I was referencing.  Doesn't mean we won't get there, we will.  We had some serious senior leadership last year that hasn't quite come to the surface yet.  We had a 1st round NBA player on last year's team, we don't have anyone that will be drafted in the NBA next year and that means we're going to look lost at times.  Hopefully that changes in the coming weeks.

I would think a thread entitled "It's coming down to leadership and ownership by the players" would make you remember that blowing many double digit leads and going 1-7 in those "close" games--was a sign our leadership hadn't stepped up yet.  This board was rightly on melt down mode after that 8th game--the DePaul loss--yourself included.

The only good win last season at this point was the X win...where we matched up well.  Our three losses this season were to big teams with active frontlines. Lost two of them on the defensive boards as we had to adjust as GU and UW were on fire from the perimeter in the 1st halves. The Badgers worked their spacing to perfection against us. GU beat us by going to a zone. Duke we actually matched up well with but Plumlee destroyed us inside.  Guess what?  Their match-up advantage beat us.  Not every team we will face will have a potential NBA big on the frontline like these three. 

Our problems are three point shooting and defensive rotations/positioning.  On the reverse side, we are a tough match-up because of our depth.  Everyone waiting for a set line-up is going to be upset.  Buzz's line-ups will be situational it seems.

[NersEllenson]

I would think a thread entitled "It's coming down to leadership and ownership by the players" would make you remember that blowing many double digit leads and going 1-7 in those "close" games--was a sign our leadership hadn't stepped up yet.  This board was rightly on melt down mode after that 8th game--the DePaul loss--yourself included.

Amen - thank you for providing Mr. Knee-Jerk with some perspective.  If you want to be trite like our resident sky is falling poster - we could spin it (as everything with Chicos is a spin job) - that last year's team lacked leadership for BLOWING so many leads. 

The reactions of the sky is falling faction - championed, captained and co-captained by Chicos and Marquette 84 - are comedic.  It is as though if the team doesn't go 36-0, then there must be legitimate blame to be placed on either the players or the staff.  Thankfully, most here have more perspective, have played sports, and realize..some days you just get beat..due to the other team being better..or by having an off game a as a team.  Nobody likes losing....but some of what gets posted around here is just comical.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I would think a thread entitled "It's coming down to leadership and ownership by the players" would make you remember that blowing many double digit leads and going 1-7 in those "close" games--was a sign our leadership hadn't stepped up yet.  This board was rightly on melt down mode after that 8th game--the DePaul loss--yourself included.

The only good win last season at this point was the X win...where we matched up well.  Our three losses this season were to big teams with active frontlines. Lost two of them on the defensive boards as we had to adjust as GU and UW were on fire from the perimeter in the 1st halves. The Badgers worked their spacing to perfection against us. GU beat us by going to a zone. Duke we actually matched up well with but Plumlee destroyed us inside.  Guess what?  Their match-up advantage beat us.  Not every team we will face will have a potential NBA big on the frontline like these three. 

Our problems are three point shooting and defensive rotations/positioning.  On the reverse side, we are a tough match-up because of our depth.  Everyone waiting for a set line-up is going to be upset.  Buzz's line-ups will be situational it seems.

Fair points Blackheart, and you did them all without attacking.  Some people here could learn from that, including myself.

Now, my argument against would be the following.  The senior leadership last year got them into the position where we were winning those games, but with basically only 7 or 8 guys, we wore out too much at the end.  I believe they were just gassed at the end of games and that was an opinion shared by Buzz on multiple interviews, as well as a number of MU fans here.  Was it leadership (a lack thereof) or was it a team that was running on fumes the last 5 to 7 minutes of each game and couldn't hang on?

I'd argue the leadership got them into those positions but the lack of bodies couldn't sustain it.

Of course your opinion is valid as well.

[MerrittsMustache]

Fair points Blackheart, and you did them all without attacking.  Some people here could learn from that, including myself.

Now, my argument against would be the following.  The senior leadership last year got them into the position where we were winning those games, but with basically only 7 or 8 guys, we wore out too much at the end.  I believe they were just gassed at the end of games and that was an opinion shared by Buzz on multiple interviews, as well as a number of MU fans here.  Was it leadership (a lack thereof) or was it a team that was running on fumes the last 5 to 7 minutes of each game and couldn't hang on?

I'd argue the leadership got them into those positions but the lack of bodies couldn't sustain it.

Of course your opinion is valid as well.

I agree that the team ran out of gas due to a lack of depth. However, I'd argue that limited TOs, deadly outside shooting and a soon-to-be NBA 1st Round pick had infinitely more to do with MU being in position to win those games than leadership.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Was it leadership (a lack thereof) or was it a team that was running on fumes the last 5 to 7 minutes of each game and couldn't hang on?

I'd argue the leadership got them into those positions but the lack of bodies couldn't sustain it.

MU was 6-1 to end the season in one-two possession games...running on fumes still with a lack of bodies or just figuring it out and having guys like JFB step up with the seniors?  MU has a lot of growing up to do yet.  Vandy will be a litmus test...I don't like the match-up for us, but let's see if MU steps up. 

[mu_hilltopper]

Last year we had a guy who was months away from a 1st round NBA draft pick.  This year, we do not.

Major difference.