Just curious

[Doris Burkes Thong]

Is Jimmy Butler's departure a tougher void to fill going into next year than Lazar Hayward's void was to fill coming into this past season. Curious to hear some of your opinions.

[GGGG]

I would say that JFB stepped into Lazar's role quite nicely, even though he isn't as talented.  (He would disappear at times but it never seemed like Lazar disappeared.)  The question I have is, who is our JFB next year?  Jamil?  DJO? 

So while Lazar was the bigger loss...JFB's departure might be felt more because we may not have someone stepping up.

[wadesworld]

No.  O'Tule and Gardner are both going to be much improved next year which will help down low.  Jamil Wilson will fill Butler's shoes better than I think Butler could fill Lazar's shoes.  The defensive end, in my opinion, is where we will miss Butler the most.

[T-Bone]

If I have a problem with Jimmy's last season it was his inability to become a more vocal leader on the floor.  He did a lot of great things by example on both ends of the court, but didn't have that fire that Lazar or the 3 Amigos did before him. 
Crowder showed that a bit last year, and if I can extrapolate Wilson's actions on the bench to the court (I know it's a leap), I think we'll have that fire and leadership on the floor.

I agree his defense will be extremely difficult to replace. 

[Doris Burkes Thong]

See I think Jimmy was a much better leader moreso behind the scenes than actually out on the court and therefore I think people kinda have continuously underrated Jimmy's leadership ability. He seems like he has a real infectious personality and I think his work ethic really rubbed off onto others and they followed his lead just like Jimmy said he did when Wes was here.

[Golden Avalanche]

If I have a problem with Jimmy's last season it was his inability to become a more vocal leader on the floor.  He did a lot of great things by example on both ends of the court, but didn't have that fire that Lazar or the 3 Amigos did before him. 
Crowder showed that a bit last year, and if I can extrapolate Wilson's actions on the bench to the court (I know it's a leap), I think we'll have that fire and leadership on the floor.

I agree his defense will be extremely difficult to replace. 

+1.

MU didn't suffer a let down in terms of production this past season. They suffered from a lack of leadership. There simply was no personality type on the team, in an experienced position, that provided direction. That was disappointing to see.

As for Wilson, I'm not so sure. I think there is a lot on his shoulders already reading some MU fans. He will need time to adjust to playing again. He will need time to adjust being a rookie for MU. He will need time adjusting to a new brand of ball in the conference. To do all that AND be the leader may be too much to ask.

[tower912]

Butler was a better perimeter defender.   He stopped guards this year that nobody else in college basketball could stop.    But he wasn't a leader on the offensive end or on the boards like Lazar was.   At crunch time during Lazar's senior year, even though Jimmy made some gamewinners, you wanted Lazar to touch the ball.   This past season, you just wanted somebody to want the ball.   Next year's team needs somebody, Junior, DJO, Jamil, Jae, WHOEVER, to be the man and make the team follow him. 

[77ncaachamps]

Butler may not have come across as a vocal leader but he was a calming presence.

Still a trait of a leader IMO. The kids didn't panic as much with him in there.

[avid1010]

Crowder plays a role in replacing both Lazar and JFB as well.  Without him I think we feel the loss of both of those players much more than we did/will.  With Otule and Gardner filling the 5 spot and Crowder at the 4, I feel like we have plenty of guards to play 1 through 3.  I really wish E-Will would have been around to be Crowder's reserve...he had some issues with fouls this year (which is why E-Will was starting) and I don't think Wilson is the type of player that can guard or rebound at the 4 spot...hopefully I'm wrong because I think he's going to have to play that position this year.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

We don't have anybody coming back who can do all Jimmy can do defensively, handling the ball, passing, scoring, etc. We will miss him a lot. I loved Lazar...one of my top 5 favorites of all time...but we didn't miss him at all.

Last I checked, we played in the Sweet 16.

[NersEllenson]

+1.

MU didn't suffer a let down in terms of production this past season. They suffered from a lack of leadership. There simply was no personality type on the team, in an experienced position, that provided direction. That was disappointing to see.

-1

MU could have thrown the towel in at numerous times last season, but it kept battling.  It played more ranked oppenents than any other MU team in history.  It was largely competitve all season.  It perservered and made the Sweet 16 when 85% of this board wanted to bury the team after losing to Cincy and St. Johns and Seton Hall.  Teams without leadership very easily could have caved/folded.  The 2010-2011 team had plenty of fight and grit - and to me that indicates there was BETTER leadership than we have had in some time.

[GGGG]

I'm not sure how a team with a lack of leadership got as far in the BE tournament, and to the Sweet 16, while arguably having less talent on the floor than the year before.  If anything, I thought when the season was on the brink after the UC game, that JFB took the bull by the horns and got them as far as they could expect to go.  Maybe early in the year that statement could be made, but when all was said and done, leadership was not the problem.

[Marquette84]

I'm not sure how a team with a lack of leadership got as far in the BE tournament, and to the Sweet 16,

It might help to reverse the argument:  How does a team with enough talent to beat the eventual national champion on the road, go three deep in the BE tournament, and reach the Sweet 16 wind up losing 15 games over the course of the season?

while arguably having less talent on the floor than the year before. 

I'd be interested in hearing that argument, because as I see it we arguably had more talent on the floor than the year before--and I don't think its even close.

Otule was healthy and on the floor all season
DJO, Butler, Williams & Buycks were all a year more experienced.
Cadougan was healthy all year
We added size and inside talent in Crowder and Gardner
Blue was called the most talented freshman recruit at MU since the early 1980's
Butler is identified in some mock drafts as going ahead of where Hayward did.

[GGGG]

Well, first of all, I think last year's team was more talented.  They had an eventual NBA first round pick, and a back court of experienced four-year players.  Yeah, Otule was healthy and that helped, but IMO this basically trumps the "one year of extra experience" that this year's team had.

[NersEllenson]

It might help to reverse the argument:  How does a team with enough talent to beat the eventual national champion on the road, go three deep in the BE tournament, and reach the Sweet 16 wind up losing 15 games over the course of the season?

I'd purport that some teams get better as the season progresses, whereas other teams peak early in the season, and regress down the stretch.  Futhermore, as has been mentioned Marquette played more ranked teams (13) this past season than ever before in its history.

As a matter of context, I believe Bamamarquettefan posted that Al McGuire's MU teams played roughly 15 ranked teams in the regular season over his 10 year time at MU.

I do agree that last year's team had more overall talent than the 2009-2010 team, and did not gel quite as well as the 2009-2010 team - but in the end, being more talented was beared out by the team reaching the Sweet 16.

[Golden Avalanche]

I'm not sure how a team with a lack of leadership got as far in the BE tournament, and to the Sweet 16, while arguably having less talent on the floor than the year before.  If anything, I thought when the season was on the brink after the UC game, that JFB took the bull by the horns and got them as far as they could expect to go.  Maybe early in the year that statement could be made, but when all was said and done, leadership was not the problem.

Firstly, I don't think they got "far" in New York. They had to win a game and did, which was great. But it wasn't mind boggling. They beat two teams they had already beaten and got crap smacked on Thursday night -- not even a token Semi- appearance.

Secondly, you mention that Butler stepped up after the UC game. Granted I was out of the country, but didn't MU get handled by Seton Hall just a few days after that UC game?

Finally, what Buzz and company were able to steal in the Tournament given the mediocrity of the regular season was astounding. But it shouldn't mask the real problems that arose during the 37 game competition. Remember, even with the high of a Sweet Sixteen, MU finished the year getting handled and blown out in three of their final seven contests. Talent wasn't the only issue.

[BCHoopster]

College hoops is all about the point guard.  Cadougan improved the team improved, it was a shame that Bucyks got
worse as the season progressed.  Next year, I expect Cadougan to improve slightly but his back-up is a question mark.
I really believe in 2 years with both point guards having experience,  Otule, Wilson, Blue and others should be the best
team in awhile.

[GGGG]

Firstly, I don't think they got "far" in New York. They had to win a game and did, which was great. But it wasn't mind boggling. They beat two teams they had already beaten and got crap smacked on Thursday night -- not even a token Semi- appearance.

I said they got "as far."  ie, they lost in the same round.

Secondly, you mention that Butler stepped up after the UC game. Granted I was out of the country, but didn't MU get handled by Seton Hall just a few days after that UC game?

Finally, what Buzz and company were able to steal in the Tournament given the mediocrity of the regular season was astounding. But it shouldn't mask the real problems that arose during the 37 game competition. Remember, even with the high of a Sweet Sixteen, MU finished the year getting handled and blown out in three of their final seven contests. Talent wasn't the only issue.

I guess, but can you attribute that to talent or leadership?  I think leadership is kind of a fuzzy concept anyway.  You don't really see it in games.  You see it in the off-season.  The leaders on next year's team are emerging now...they are the ones getting people into the weight room and on the floor.

[Marquette84]

I'd purport that some teams get better as the season progresses, whereas other teams peak early in the season, and regress down the stretch. 

This is true.  I think, however, neither of those applies to Marquette last year.  We neither peaked early nor got better as the season progressed.  We were inconsistent all year.   We play good teams like Duke and Gonzaga to close games, then nearly lose to UWM.  We then soundly beat WVU and Notre Dame, but don't build on those wins and wind up losing at ND and Louisville.  We have a season defining win over UConn, only to lose at Seton Hall the next week.

Again, the argument is that if we had enough talent to beat UConn and reach the Sweet 16, we had too much talent to suffer 15 losses.

As a matter of context, I believe Bamamarquettefan posted that Al McGuire's MU teams played roughly 15 ranked teams in the regular season over his 10 year time at MU.

If we showed enough talent to beat UConn on the road (the eventual national champion), we should have enough talent to beat Seton Hall on the road.  And if we have enough talent to beat Notre Dame and Syracuse at home, we should also have enough talent to beat St. Johns or Cincinnati at home--even if they were ranked. 

I do agree that last year's team had more overall talent than the 2009-2010 team, and did not gel quite as well as the 2009-2010 team - but in the end, being more talented was beared out by the team reaching the Sweet 16.

I'm glad we agree on something.

[NersEllenson]

This is true.  I think, however, neither of those applies to Marquette last year.  We neither peaked early nor got better as the season progressed.  We were inconsistent all year.   We play good teams like Duke and Gonzaga to close games, then nearly lose to UWM.  We then soundly beat WVU and Notre Dame, but don't build on those wins and wind up losing at ND and Louisville.  We have a season defining win over UConn, only to lose at Seton Hall the next week.

Again, the argument is that if we had enough talent to beat UConn and reach the Sweet 16, we had too much talent to suffer 15 losses.

If we showed enough talent to beat UConn on the road (the eventual national champion), we should have enough talent to beat Seton Hall on the road.  And if we have enough talent to beat Notre Dame and Syracuse at home, we should also have enough talent to beat St. Johns or Cincinnati at home--even if they were ranked. 


I'm glad we agree on something.

I don't think anyone would disagree with the fact that last season was a roller coaster ride..and had some definite high moments and low moments.  But to me, the leaqdership of last year's team was being called into question - and to me - the fact last year's team went through so many peaks/valleys, and managed to finish with a Sweet 16 appearance - and never threw the towel in after some maddening losses...says the leadership was at minimum adaquete, and more likely very good.

Last thought 84 - Will yiou ever be satisfied with a Marquette season - or will you always complain??!!  This is sports, and you are gonna win some and lose some...but if you want to dissect things:  Did a team with 3 of Marquette's Top 10 all-time scorer's, games played, etc. lack leadership due to it having only won 2 NCAA tourney games in 4 years?  Is it fair to say Jimmy Butler must be a better leader than Jerel, Dominic, Wes and Lazar due to Jimmy having a Sweet 16 and 3 NCAA tourney wins compared to any of the Big 3??

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Is it fair to say Jimmy Butler must be a better leader than Jerel, Dominic, Wes and Lazar due to Jimmy having a Sweet 16 and 3 NCAA tourney wins compared to any of the Big 3??

Can I just say I think he was a more complete basketball player than any of them.

[NersEllenson]

Can I just say I think he was a more complete basketball player than any of them.

I tend to agree...with Wes Matthews being right there with Jimmy in terms of completeness.  It would not surprise me to see Jimmy have an NBA career somewhere between Lazar and Wes - don't see him exceeding Wes's results thus far - but Jimmy is only 21 - so quite young to be headed to the league. 

[Marquette84]

I don't think anyone would disagree with the fact that last season was a roller coaster ride..and had some definite high moments and low moments.  But to me, the leaqdership of last year's team was being called into question - and to me - the fact last year's team went through so many peaks/valleys, and managed to finish with a Sweet 16 appearance - and never threw the towel in after some maddening losses...says the leadership was at minimum adaquete, and more likely very good.

We can disagree on that point.  

I just didn't see anyone stepping up in a role similar to Diener or Hayward or James did.   I think we had talent to do more damage all season, and the roller coaster was at least in part due to the lack of that "floor general" who could take over a game.

Last thought 84 - Will yiou ever be satisfied with a Marquette season - or will you always complain??!!  This is sports, and you are gonna win some and lose some...but if you want to dissect things: 

I'm pleased that we reached the Sweet 16.  I'm disappointed because I think we had the talent do do more all season long.  

I'm also pragmatic enough to see that we were lucky enough to have our worst season since joining he Big East coincide with a season in which it didn't matter that we lost 14 games.  And that we got lucky with an extremely favorable 1st and 2nd round draw in the tournament.

Did a team with 3 of Marquette's Top 10 all-time scorer's, games played, etc. lack leadership due to it having only won 2 NCAA tourney games in 4 years?  Is it fair to say Jimmy Butler must be a better leader than Jerel, Dominic, Wes and Lazar due to Jimmy having a Sweet 16 and 3 NCAA tourney wins compared to any of the Big 3??

All I can say is that if Butler broke his hand in the last week or two of the season (like McNeal did in 2007) or DJO broke a foot (like James did in 2009), I would not be using the subsequent lack of NCAA success as the definition of leadership or talent.

I'm also more willing to factor in the serendipity or luck of the draw--good or bad.  Even though we were stopped short of the Sweet 16 in 2008, I think that team was better than 2011.  I think we got a lucky draw this year, and we got an extremely poor matchup against the Lopez twins in 2008.  

Am I happy with the Sweet 16 this year?  You bet.  Am I disappointed we lost 15 games and finished in a 9th place tie?  Yes.

I would much rather we had not let St. Johns and Cincinnati pass us this year.  I take no consolation in the fact that they were ranked.  I would much rather we beat them as unranked teams than lose to them as ranked teams.

[NersEllenson]

84 - So basically every leader MU has had was recruited under Tom Crean...you list Diener, James, Hayward - and we were the beneficiaries of good luck this year with regard to our NCAA bracket draw?  Hmm.

And as far as if DJO broke his foot, like James, etc... Buzz was able to get us a first round win in 2009 without Dominic, and darn near a 2nd round win against Mizzou...pretty much the exact same results MU got the year prior in the Big 3's Junior year under Crean WITH Dominic James.  Was Mizzou any better of a match up than a Stanford??  Doubtful.

Last thought - I loved Lazar, still do, and think he's a GREAT kid - but to say he was a floor general, or commanded the ball..and executed at crunch time a la a DeSean Butler at WVU..that is false.  Jimmy hit more game winning shots as a Junior than Zar did in his whole career.  Tip your cap to Jimmy.  The kid has worked his ass off, and been a great player and representative of MU..and I'd say a very solid leader much like Lazar - in that both have great character and work ethic.

[Marquette84]

84 - So basically every leader MU has had was recruited under Tom Crean...you list Diener, James, Hayward - and we were the beneficiaries of good luck this year with regard to our NCAA bracket draw?  Hmm.

No.  I think guys like Michael Wilson, Cordell Henry, Kerry Trotter, Tony Miller, and Brian Wardle exhibited those leadership characteristics as well.

You know, if you weren't trying so hard to spin everything into your pro-Buzz/anti-Crean view, we might actually get somewhere. 

BTW, who was coach when Lazar's leadership skills emerged? 

And as far as if DJO broke his foot, like James, etc... Buzz was able to get us a first round win in 2009 without Dominic, and darn near a 2nd round win against Mizzou...pretty much the exact same results MU got the year prior in the Big 3's Junior year under Crean WITH Dominic James. 

First, the Amigos, Lazar and Burke had five years collective less D1 experience in 2008 than in 2009.

Second, as I outline below, Missouri was an ideal matchup for our undersized, uptempo team--along with Villanova, the best 3 seed we could face.  Syracuse and Kansas would have had us for lunch.

Was Mizzou any better of a match up than a Stanford??  Doubtful.

I'd really like to know what you base this comment on.

As I see it, in 2008 our biggest weakness was lack of size and inside play. Stanford strength was size--they started two 7' lottery picks.  Our strength was generating turnovers, Stanford protected the ball well. 

In 2009, as I see it our biggest weakness was still lack of size and inside play. Meanwhile the tallest starter for Missouri was only 6'8", and tallest roster player was 6'9".  With their 3 guard lineup and uptempo style, they matched up perfectly for our own 3 guard lineup and uptempo style.  In addition, Missouri was foul-prone, ranked 3rd nationally in 2009 in the number of fouls committed--a truly ideal situation for team who's offensive strategy is to get to the foul line as often as possible and make more FTs that your opponent attempts.

We can go through year by year if you'd like.  In 2011, our achilles' heel was defending the 3 point shot.  Our first round draw was Xavier--a team ranked 240th nationally and 11th in the A10 in 3 point shooting.   Our second round opponent was a team we already beat. 

If you don't agree that 2011 was a good draw for us, I'd really like to hear why, and who you would have rather faced. 

Please spare me your typical accusations of my motivations,  but instead share your honest, thought out reasoning.

Last thought - I loved Lazar, still do, and think he's a GREAT kid - but to say he was a floor general, or commanded the ball..and executed at crunch time a la a DeSean Butler at WVU..that is false. 

Did say Lazar was a better leader than DeSean Butler?   Not sure why you brought him into the discussion.

Jimmy hit more game winning shots as a Junior than Zar did in his whole career. 

Novak hit more game winners than Lazar as well.  I'm still putting Hayward's leadership ahead of Novak.

Tip your cap to Jimmy.  The kid has worked his ass off, and been a great player and representative of MU..and I'd say a very solid leader much like Lazar - in that both have great character and work ethic.

I tip my hat to Jimmy--had great character, work ethic and skills. 

But he was not a leader like Lazar.