Davante Gardner vs Green Bay

[Silkk the Shaka]

We got crushed on the boards and defensive eFG% has been terrible since Otule went down.  That tells me all I need to know about Otule's value to the team. 

I'm not on either side of the debate.  What's sad is that it has become if you favor Devante, you bash Chris to make your point and vice versa.  Both of thier games are flawed on one side of the court, but what's clear is that we aren't as good without Chris, just like we wouldn't be as good without Davante.  For years we have been playing without any semblance of production from a true center at the 5 spot.  This season we were finally getting 40 quality minutes from the 5, with the option of subbing offense/defense as matchups, time, and score dictated.  That is a LUXURY we no longer have.  Now we're back to playing a PF at center at least some of the time, and that would be the case if Gardner had gone down instead.  Teams like that have ceilings due to a lower margin for error.  We need BOTH of those guys healthy for this team to reach its full potential, which I think is a final four/national championship.

[MUMac]

What's sad is that it has become if you favor Devante, you bash Chris to make your point and vice versa. 

Yep.  Very sad indeed.

Their skills compliment each other.  Why drag one down to support the other? 

[brewcity77]

Yep.  Very sad indeed.

Their skills compliment each other.  Why drag one down to support the other?

Both are important, and there's no doubt that not only do they compliment each other, but neither can provide the skills the other does. Chris can't score, shoot, or pass like Davante, and Gardner can't defend, block shots, or close the lane like Otule.

We are simply a much better team with both guys in the lineup.

[Henry Sugar]

We got crushed on the boards and defensive eFG% has been terrible since Otule went down.  That tells me all I need to know about Otule's value to the team. 

I'm not on either side of the debate.  What's sad is that it has become if you favor Devante, you bash Chris to make your point and vice versa.  Both of thier games are flawed on one side of the court, but what's clear is that we aren't as good without Chris, just like we wouldn't be as good without Davante.  For years we have been playing without any semblance of production from a true center at the 5 spot.  This season we were finally getting 40 quality minutes from the 5, with the option of subbing offense/defense as matchups, time, and score dictated.  That is a LUXURY we no longer have.  Now we're back to playing a PF at center at least some of the time, and that would be the case if Gardner had gone down instead.  Teams like that have ceilings due to a lower margin for error.  We need BOTH of those guys healthy for this team to reach its full potential, which I think is a final four/national championship.

A few points.

We did not get crushed on the boards, except against Washington.  Defensive rebounding has been an issue all season so far, for reasons that I can only think of as being strategic.

It's also too early to draw any conclusions as to how effective Marquette will be defensively (or offensively).  The Washington game was the first in-game adjustment, and the 1H defensive eFG% against UWGB was very good.

Like it or not, how Buzz uses Gardner and Otule makes the situation a zero sum conversation.  Before last week, Buzz chose to play one or the other.  That situation creates a winner and a loser and a better/worse discussion.

I don't think anyone disputes that Chris is a valuable member of the team and Marquette is better with him and Gardner together.  That's a strawman argument.

To me, the question is, "how much of a dropoff will occur for Marquette?" if we only use Gardner. 

[Silkk the Shaka]

Both are important, and there's no doubt that not only do they compliment each other, but neither can provide the skills the other does. Chris can't score, shoot, or pass like Davante, and Gardner can't defend, block shots, or close the lane like Otule.

We are simply a much better team with both guys in the lineup.

Exactly right. They are both excellent on one side of the ball and mediocre to serviceable on the other side.  They're both at their best with 20-25 mpg while playing in offense/defense situations that suit them best.  As a tandem they gave our team a dimension it had been lacking for a long time.  Buzz does not have the option to play a center for 40 minutes any more, and that hurts the team a great deal.  REALLY hope Chris can make it back by February to get into the flow of things somewhat in time for March, even if he can only give us 10-15 minutes.  It's the difference between this team being very good and great.

[Silkk the Shaka]

To me, the question is, "how much of a dropoff will occur for Marquette?" if we only use Gardner. 

My answer to the question is that the dropoff would be the same if you asked the question with Otule in place of Gardner.  On the one hand we're better on offense but worse on defense.  On the other hand we're worse on defense but better on offense.  I would think the person harping on defensive eFG% (and I agree with you) would recognize the value Otule brings to that part of the equation.  This team is appreciably better with 40 minutes from a true center, however you want to split that between Davante and Otule, 25/15, 20/20, or 15/25. 

It also gave us insurance in case one got in foul trouble.  Now if Davante picks up a few quick ones we're looking at 20-25 minutes at the C from JWilson and/or Crowder, and that's not a formula for deep tournament runs.

[bilsu]

All in all I was pleased with Gardner's play against Green Bay. The first thing I expected to happen was that he would foul out. I think he ended up with only one foul. Second of all when he was on Alec Brown he used his body to keep him away from the basket. When Brown got inside position at least Gardner did not make it worse by fouling him. I think most of Brown's point's came against someone else besides Gardner. The first time Gardner went out Alec scored two straight times, once over Crowder and once over Jones. In the second half he also hit a 25ft three. Brown was very mobile. It will be interesting to see how Gardner does against a stronger less moible center.

[Henry Sugar]

My answer to the question is that the dropoff would be the same if you asked the question with Otule in place of Gardner.  On the one hand we're better on offense but worse on defense.  On the other hand we're worse on defense but better on offense.  I would think the person harping on defensive eFG% (and I agree with you) would recognize the value Otule brings to that part of the equation.  This team is appreciably better with 40 minutes from a true center, however you want to split that between Davante and Otule, 25/15, 20/20, or 15/25. 

It also gave us insurance in case one got in foul trouble.  Now if Davante picks up a few quick ones we're looking at 20-25 minutes at the C from JWilson and/or Crowder, and that's not a formula for deep tournament runs.

No one is disputing that Marquette is better with both Otule and Gardner than with just Gardner.

As for the offensive/defensive tradeoff between Gardner and Otule, I'm curious to see how things change with Otule out.  I'm not convinced that Otule plays an irreplaceable role in the early season defensive eFG% improvement.    He's basically had the same overall stats (blocks, defensive rebounds, etc) from last year.  And, last year's team was not good defensively.

I'm really not trying to knock Otule here.  If anything, it's more about wanting to see the data of this "experiment", with a wistful hope that Marquette doesn't have a significant dropoff.

[Lennys Tap]

No one is disputing that Marquette is better with both Otule and Gardner than with just Gardner.

As for the offensive/defensive tradeoff between Gardner and Otule, I'm curious to see how things change with Otule out.  I'm not convinced that Otule plays an irreplaceable role in the early season defensive eFG% improvement.    He's basically had the same overall stats (blocks, defensive rebounds, etc) from last year.  And, last year's team was not good defensively.

I'm really not trying to knock Otule here.  If anything, it's more about wanting to see the data of this "experiment", with a wistful hope that Marquette doesn't have a significant dropoff.

I know it's a really small sample, but how do MU"s pre and post Otule injury defensive stats compare?

[kmwtrucks]

Rebounding is a Huge problem for us.  The only solution I see is gving J Wilson more minutes on the floor some of which come at 3.  I would like him out there 30 minutes a game once healty.  10 mins at the 3, 10 mins at the 4, and 10 mins at the 5 or have Crowder slid over at the 5.

If you look at our team what player's are good rebounder's for there postion?  Crowder and Otule and Gardner are average at there postion.  Crowder due to HT, Gardner due to leaping, and Otule does not have good hands.

[Henry Sugar]

I know it's a really small sample, but how do MU"s pre and post Otule injury defensive stats compare?

Depends on how you look at it.

For the season.

Def Eff - 0.89 ppp
eFG% - 43% (#26)
TO% - 27% (#15)
DR% - 35% (#242)
FTR - 24.6% (#8)

UW wasn't good by any stretch.  1.08 ppp allowed; 53% def eFG%; 22% TO, 47% DR%; 15% FTR

UWGB depends on how you look at it.  0.80 ppp allowed; 47% def eFG%; 35% TO, 36% DR%; 16% FTR.  Overall ppp and turnover rate were good.  Def RB% was fine.  Def eFG% was poor.  However, the 1H def EFG% was 41%.

[bilsu]

While I would not consider Otule a good rebounder, I think he would have kept Washington's center from getting so many offensive rebounds. Also MU will get better as they adjust to playing without Otule. However, I felt we were a three seed with Otule and it is hard to say were we are now.

[Silkk the Shaka]

I'm really not trying to knock Otule here.  If anything, it's more about wanting to see the data of this "experiment", with a wistful hope that Marquette doesn't have a significant dropoff.

I can get behind that.  Would love to see us end the season in the coveted top 25 slot of adjusted D with or without Otule.