Main Menu
collapse

Resources

2024-2025 SOTG Tally


2024-25 Season SoG Tally
Jones, K.10
Mitchell6
Joplin4
Ross2
Gold1

'23-24 '22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

Big East Standings

Recent Posts

Welcome, BJ Matthews by Shooter McGavin
[September 17, 2025, 09:04:04 PM]


Recruiting as of 9/15/25 by Stretchdeltsig
[September 17, 2025, 04:39:09 PM]


Marquette NBA Thread by MU82
[September 17, 2025, 12:15:58 PM]


[Cracked Sidewalks] Previewing Marquette's Schedule by PointWarrior
[September 16, 2025, 08:55:54 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!

Next up: A long offseason

Marquette
66
Marquette
Scrimmage
Date/Time: Oct 4, 2025
TV: NA
Schedule for 2024-25
New Mexico
75

jesmu84

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/seth_davis/01/02/stock.report/1.html

Davis says his Buy/Sell is in looking for "bargins"...

Selling G'Town, Louisville, Marquette, Pitt
Buying Xavier, Washington, Vanderbilt, Nova, Cuse, Butler, UConn, Indiana
Holding Wisconsin

MARQUETTE (12-2, No. 20): SELL

This rating owes more to timing than anything else. The Golden Eagles' two games this week are on the road against Syracuse and Georgetown, and I can't recommend that you buy a team that could very well lose two straight (which would make a total of four out of six). However, if you want to take a chance and buy Marquette right before its home game against Louisville Jan. 16, I won't talk you out of it. Unfortunately, the Golden Eagles were already a small team before they lost starting center Chris Otule to an ACL injury. There's an outside chance Otule could come back, but even if he does it will be too late to make much difference.

CWHoyas

I will eat my hat if Nova turns around this year.

ErickJD08

Are we really that small? Maybe I still remember our team size from a couple of years ago of having two guys on the floor under six foot.

I feel we are average. Right?
Wanna learn how to say "@#(@# (@*" in a dozen languages... go to Professor Crass www.professorcrass.com

Dawson Rental

Syracuse is no bargain when they're ranked number one.  There's only one direction they can go, best they can do is stay put and justify the high price.  Remember Seth, it's buy low, sell high, not the other way around.

Vanderbilt, Washington and probably Xavier are right on as bargains currently, since all three are out of the top 25 but have a great chance to jump back in.  Indiana is more like Syracuse, they have likely hit their high for the year.
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

MerrittsMustache

Quote from: ErickJD08 on January 02, 2012, 09:14:22 PM
Are we really that small? Maybe I still remember our team size from a couple of years ago of having two guys on the floor under six foot.

I feel we are average. Right?

Without Otule, MU's tallest player is 6'8" and he doesn't jump. They also have only 3 other players 6'6" or taller and none of them are true post players. IMO, Marquette is definitely a small team.


Lennys Tap

Quote from: ErickJD08 on January 02, 2012, 09:14:22 PM
Are we really that small? Maybe I still remember our team size from a couple of years ago of having two guys on the floor under six foot.

I feel we are average. Right?
[/quote ]

Our starters are 6'1",6'2",6'4",6'6" and 6'8". Our first 3 guys off the bench are 6'3",6'7" and 6'3". We're small.

brewcity77

Quote from: ErickJD08 on January 02, 2012, 09:14:22 PMAre we really that small? Maybe I still remember our team size from a couple of years ago of having two guys on the floor under six foot.

I feel we are average. Right?

If you're talking about all 345 D1 programs, sure. But if you're talking about high-majors, no way. We have one guy with legit center size and he's injured. Beyond that, only one guy 6'8" or taller (and that's DG, exactly 6'8"). By comparison, the high majors we've already played have...

Ole Miss: 6 players 6'8"+
Wisconsin: 4 players 6'8"+
Washington: 6 players 6'8"+
LSU: 5 players 6'8"+
Vanderbilt: 6 players 6'8"+

As far as the rest of the Big East...

Cincinnati: 5 players 6'8"+
UConn: 6 players 6'8"+
DePaul: 4 players 6'8"+
Georgetown: 7 players 6'8"+
Louisville: 4 players 6'8"+
Notre Dame: 5 players 6'8"+
Pittsburgh: 4 players 6'8"+
Providence: 4 players 6'8"+
Rutgers: 6 players 6'8"+
Seton Hall: 6 players 6'8"+
South Florida: 4 players 6'8"+
Syracuse: 6 players 6'8"+
Villanova: 3 players 6'8"+
West Virginia: 7 players 6'8"+

This is another reason why Otule is such a massive loss. We now have only one player on the roster with that kind of size...every other team in the Big East has at least 2 more bigs than we do. If you count Wilson at 6'7", that still leaves us in a size deficit in every game.

Bottom line, 2-3 years ago we were miniscule. Now, we're still small, just not as small as we were then.

NYWarrior

Quote from: ErickJD08 on January 02, 2012, 09:14:22 PM
Are we really that small? Maybe I still remember our team size from a couple of years ago of having two guys on the floor under six foot.

I feel we are average. Right?

MU is the 207th tallest team in the nation this season per the Pomeroy analysis.  Only RU, SJU, and Cincy are smaller in the Big East.  That 207 'ranking' presumes that Otule is on the active roster.  Remember that two weeks ago Seth speculcated that Otule tore his ACL and was done for the year.  He was less definitive here but I bet he's going with that to make his point here since that would enhance MU's standing on the vertically challenged list.

Jay Bee

#8
smh
The portal is NOT closed.

BCHoopster

It does not matter the size of the players, but the ability of the players.  When MU had Cubillian and Acker in the backcourt, those dudes could shoot the
ball, this team has 2 players with more size in Blue and Cadougan, that shoot the ball like 8th graders. 

Windyplayer

Quote from: BCHoopster on January 02, 2012, 10:40:41 PM
It does not matter the size of the players, but the ability of the players.
At the end of the day, you need size and ability. 

avid1010

Quote from: BCHoopster on January 02, 2012, 10:40:41 PM
It does not matter the size of the players, but the ability of the players.  When MU had Cubillian and Acker in the backcourt, those dudes could shoot the
ball, this team has 2 players with more size in Blue and Cadougan, that shoot the ball like 8th graders. 

Seriously?  It was nice those two shot the ball well...it still mattered that we had no size.  I don't care how well they can shoot, someone has to board and defend GTown's and Cuse's bigs this week. 

tower912

#12
Buzz made a virtue of necessity with Mo and Cubi.   There were no other options.   That team had 6 guys who could make 3's as well as beat their guys off of the dribble.   Buzz was able to make teams adapt to that team because they were such good shooters and so unselfish.   This team is small and doesn't have a ton of shooters.    Being a small team that relies on slashing actually leaves a smaller margin for error than the 09-10 team.    And remember, that team was 2-4 in the BEast and ticketed for the NIT after they lost to DePaul.
    "Traditional" was a fun word to argue about but this team was actually constructed more traditionally than any other under Buzz.    We have 4 traditional SF's on the team.   We had a traditional starting center and a traditonal back up center.   We have two traditional pass first PG's and 3 traditional shooting guards.    The problem is that we lost the one guy that we didn't have a redundancy for.   Now, our traditional 3 is starting at the 5 and he can't beat his guy off of the dribble, a la Lazar/Jimmy.    One of our traditional long distance shooting 3's hasn't shot well so he never gets off of the bench.
 So there has been a lack of skill development as well as a failure by Buzz to land 'traditional' 6'9 switchables.   If we were running 6'9 versions of Jae/JWilson/Juan out there, it would be easier.  FWIW,   TC wasn't particularly good at it, either, landing only Fitz.

So I don't blame Seth for putting us in his sell catergory.    
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

Windyplayer

Quote from: tower912 on January 03, 2012, 08:10:34 AM
And remember, that team was 2-4 in the BEast and ticketed for the NIT after they lost at home to DePaul.  
Definitely not at home. Don't make it any worse than it already was.

tower912

Oops.   Thanks.   Fixed.   
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

Stretchdeltsig

Jamil Wilson should be listed taller than 6'7".  When standing next to Davante, Jamil is an inch taller!

hoyasincebirth

Seth is a tool who "broke his rule about not rooting for players" for known woman beater Fab Melo.  ::) Why does anyone care what the dukie troll thinks?

MarquetteDano

Quote from: tower912 on January 03, 2012, 08:10:34 AM
   Being a small team that relies on slashing actually leaves a smaller margin for error than the 09-10 team.    And remember, that team was 2-4 in the BEast and ticketed for the NIT after they lost to DePaul. 

I agree with your assessment with the "small ball" team a couple of years ago.  And maybe I am inferring something incorrect but it would seem you are saying that team was actually better than this team (I get this by you saying the current team has less margin for error).

This team is better than that "small ball" team we had even without Otule.  That team was not good defensively.  Sure that team probably had a little better offense but the current team is a much better defensive team.  It is not even close.

This year's team beats the 09-10 team.  Even without Otule.  Though it would be weird to see 09-10 DJO versus 11-12 DJO!

muwarrior69

Steve Taylor is 6'8 or 9. Hope he can jump. I just don't understand why we can't recruit guys 6'9 or taller. Even Seton Hall  has 6 guys as tall or taller than 6'8.

Previous topic - Next topic