collapse

* Resources


UDM 4

* Butler SOTG

No Stud when we lose.
2019-20 Season SoG Tally
Howard10
Anim1
Bailey1
Cain1
McEwen1

'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

Bottom Line On Wojo by 79Warrior
[Today at 12:20:20 AM]


Bracketology 2019-2020 by GoldenEagles32
[Today at 12:05:09 AM]


Big East Conference Results by Goose
[Today at 12:03:20 AM]


[Cracked Sidewalks] Oh-no-vertime! by WhoaJoe2020
[January 28, 2020, 11:39:21 PM]


MJS coverage: UW vs. MU / King vs. Morrow by GB Warrior
[January 28, 2020, 11:28:13 PM]


The Verdict Is In by Pakuni
[January 28, 2020, 11:23:12 PM]


Xavier opens -2.5 by BM1090
[January 28, 2020, 11:06:45 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 register NOW!

* Next up: @ Xavier

Marquette
85
Marquette @

Xavier

Date/Time: Jan 29, 2019 - 7:30pm
TV: FS1
Schedule for 2019-20
Butler
89

Author Topic: MU and Bigs  (Read 6628 times)

ZiggysFryBoy

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4175
  • MEDITERRANEAN TACOS!
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #25 on: January 05, 2012, 09:29:41 PM »

Right, kemosabe.

I thought you were from the Ukraine.  or is that just the missus?
Unless Sultan says differently that is, then we’d obviously have to go with that....

--Lighthouse 84, 9/16/18

MattyWarrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #26 on: January 05, 2012, 09:30:42 PM »
Size has been our nemesis for 8 years or more. Its really frustrating with all the good players we have not to have a 7 footer.
Even Green Bay has one. How many top twenty teams don't have a center or 2? I just don't understand why that isn't the
number 1 prority in recruiting?

augoman

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1081
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #27 on: January 05, 2012, 09:52:59 PM »
agree..., needum aircraft carrier, and how.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 20480
  • Alan Bykowski
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #28 on: January 05, 2012, 10:01:40 PM »
Size has been our nemesis for 8 years or more. Its really frustrating with all the good players we have not to have a 7 footer.
Even Green Bay has one. How many top twenty teams don't have a center or 2? I just don't understand why that isn't the
number 1 prority in recruiting?

We have one. He's on the bench with an undisclosed injury. Okay...6'11", but Otule would make a huge difference right now. We'd have 2 less losses with him, that's for sure.

AZWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1676
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #29 on: January 05, 2012, 10:02:30 PM »
...what mean "we", paleface?
All this talk of rights.  So little talk of responsibilities.

Ellenson Family Reunion

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #30 on: January 05, 2012, 10:21:05 PM »
We have one. He's on the bench with an undisclosed injury. Okay...6'11", but Otule would make a huge difference right now. We'd have 2 less losses with him, that's for sure.

This. Exactly this. We miss Otule BADLY. We'd have a solid 8 man rotation with no one playing out of position and a drastic reduction in the need for double downs and defensive breakdowns.

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #31 on: January 05, 2012, 10:51:25 PM »
We'd have 2 less losses with him, that's for sure.

C'mon, really?

I mean, I love the guy, but he's not Wilt.


Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #32 on: January 06, 2012, 12:22:27 AM »
We don't get bigs because Buzz wants "switchables".  There are plenty of good bigs, hell every team we play has them!
Agree with your post except for this part... Why did TC struggle the same way at MU? At Indiana, Indiana he's recruiting them and successfully.

Just seems like the one constant is the school, and it makes no sense why a great big man wouldn't want the playing time and support at other positions that he gets here. With a complete roster we're in the Sweet Sixteen regularly, and contending for BE titles.
"Half a billion we used to do about every two months...or as my old boss would say, 'you're on the hook for $8 million a day come hell or high water-.    Never missed in 6 years." - Chico apropos of nothing

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 20480
  • Alan Bykowski
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #33 on: January 06, 2012, 04:47:17 AM »
C'mon, really?

I mean, I love the guy, but he's not Wilt.

Absolutely. No, he's not Wilt, but we would have won the LSU game if someone had bothered to EVER box out Storm Warren or could have challenged their bigs, despite our offensive inadequacies, and we would have beat Georgetown if anyone could have made driving the lane even remotely difficult for Jason Clark at the end. I have no doubt in my mind that we would be 14-1 (2-0) and probably right outside the top-10 if CO is still in the lineup.

You don't have to be Wilt to make a massive difference on this team. CO's defense is the single biggest difference making ability of anyone on this team and on offense it's really nice having a guy who can open up the lane and doesn't need the ball to be effective.

CTWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3588
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #34 on: January 06, 2012, 08:48:15 AM »
Absolutely. No, he's not Wilt, but we would have won the LSU game if someone had bothered to EVER box out Storm Warren or could have challenged their bigs, despite our offensive inadequacies, and we would have beat Georgetown if anyone could have made driving the lane even remotely difficult for Jason Clark at the end. I have no doubt in my mind that we would be 14-1 (2-0) and probably right outside the top-10 if CO is still in the lineup.

You don't have to be Wilt to make a massive difference on this team. CO's defense is the single biggest difference making ability of anyone on this team and on offense it's really nice having a guy who can open up the lane and doesn't need the ball to be effective.
Don't know for sure if we would have won without him, but I think it is very likely. 
1.  Need the 8th guy for the rotation
2.  Desperately need him for defense
3.  minimizes foul trouble for J Wil
4.  More players playing the correct postion
Calvin:  I'm a genius.  But I'm a misunderstood genius. 
Hobbes:  What's misunderstood about you?
Calvin:  Nobody thinks I'm a genius.

tower912

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 15480
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #35 on: January 06, 2012, 08:57:42 AM »
Dingdingdingding.....we have a winner.    With a healthy Otule, we have an 8 man rotation, we have a more effective DG playing in shorter bursts., we have JWil spending 3 minutes at the 5, Jae gets more rest so he doesn't get so easily off of the dribble by a 6'10 guy, resulting in a wide open 3 from the corner.    And yes, we would have 2 more wins.    I acknowledge the difference in the quality of competition, but I will bet that when Henry Sugar runs the 7 games with Otule playing the whole game vs the 6 games he hasn't played at all, plus the Washington game, the offensive and defensive efficiencies are going to show a marked difference.   
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.

Golden Avalanche

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #36 on: January 06, 2012, 09:26:36 AM »
C'mon, really?

I mean, I love the guy, but he's not Wilt.



Otule has turned into Hasheem Thabeet over the last month during his absence.

ZiggysFryBoy

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4175
  • MEDITERRANEAN TACOS!
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #37 on: January 06, 2012, 09:33:53 AM »
Otule has turned into Hasheem Thabeet over the last month during his absence.

that's not bad, considering the whole ACL thing.   ;D
Unless Sultan says differently that is, then we’d obviously have to go with that....

--Lighthouse 84, 9/16/18

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 20480
  • Alan Bykowski
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #38 on: January 06, 2012, 09:49:59 AM »
Otule has turned into Hasheem Thabeet over the last month during his absence.

In terms of value added, absolutely. We have a replacement for everyone else.

Henry Sugar

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2003
  • There are no shortcuts
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #39 on: January 06, 2012, 10:05:22 AM »
Dingdingdingding.....we have a winner.    With a healthy Otule, we have an 8 man rotation, we have a more effective DG playing in shorter bursts., we have JWil spending 3 minutes at the 5, Jae gets more rest so he doesn't get so easily off of the dribble by a 6'10 guy, resulting in a wide open 3 from the corner.    And yes, we would have 2 more wins.    I acknowledge the difference in the quality of competition, but I will bet that when Henry Sugar runs the 7 games with Otule playing the whole game vs the 6 games he hasn't played at all, plus the Washington game, the offensive and defensive efficiencies are going to show a marked difference.   

you rang?

Sorry, but I still don't believe there is a statistically significant relationship between Otule's absence and any of our Offensive/Defensive efficiency or eFG%.* 

Beyond that, I don't believe the absence of Otule allowed Georgetown to shoot an eFG% of 70% (and 86% in the second half).  I also do not believe the absence of Otule allowed LSU to shoot an eFG% of 62% and Vandy to shoot 57%.  All three teams would have shot excessively well against MU with or without Otule. 

*MATHS
If you look at just the absence of Otule on those four areas, there is a statistically significant relationship between the Defensive Efficiency and Otule being gone.  There is a weak statistical relationship between our offensive eFG% and Otule being gone (not 95% confident, but close).  There is no relationship on our defensive eFG% or Offensive Efficiency.

However, I then ran an analysis that controlled for quality of the opponent.  After all, the avg Pomeroy ranking of opponents pre-absence was 185 and it is 90 during-absence.  When I include the Pomeroy rank of our opponent, the relationship of Otule being gone disappears in every analysis.  There is a statistically significant relationship between quality of opponent and our offensive/defensive eFG%.  We are more likely playing worse because we are playing better opponents. 

Interestingly, neither quality of opponent or Otule's absence are correlated with the decline in Offensive and Defensive Efficiency with both sets of data are included. 
A warrior is an empowered and compassionate protector of others.

hoyasincebirth

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 415
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #40 on: January 06, 2012, 10:34:42 AM »
Absolutely. No, he's not Wilt, but we would have won the LSU game if someone had bothered to EVER box out Storm Warren or could have challenged their bigs, despite our offensive inadequacies, and we would have beat Georgetown if anyone could have made driving the lane even remotely difficult for Jason Clark at the end. I have no doubt in my mind that we would be 14-1 (2-0) and probably right outside the top-10 if CO is still in the lineup.

You don't have to be Wilt to make a massive difference on this team. CO's defense is the single biggest difference making ability of anyone on this team and on offense it's really nice having a guy who can open up the lane and doesn't need the ball to be effective.

Well the logic of this argument is that everything else would have gone exactly the same if Otule was there. But that's not necessarily the case. Changing one variable like that changes everything. It would've changed how Marquette and Georgetown played. Maybe Georgetown never gets down that big lead if Otule played. Maybe Marquette's plan would've been to pound the ball in to Otule on offense rather than push it up the court for easy scores like they did. Maybe Georgetown comes out more focused defensively because the other team had a true Center to match up against.


Anyway, the reason why bigs don't go to Marquette is because most want programs with proven track records of putting big into the NBA. And some of the best of the big men want something that only Uconn, Cuse, and Kentucky are willing to supply them with($$$). Marquette can't offer the first and won't offer the second. It's a vicious cycle. You can't successfully recruit big men because you don't have a track record of success with bigs, and you can't get a track record unless you successfully recruit bigs.

WarriorHal

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 627
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #41 on: January 06, 2012, 10:41:23 AM »
Anyway, the reason why bigs don't go to Marquette is because most want programs with proven track records of putting big into the NBA. And some of the best of the big men want something that only Uconn, Cuse, and Kentucky are willing to supply them with($$$). Marquette can't offer the first and won't offer the second. It's a vicious cycle. You can't successfully recruit big men because you don't have a track record of success with bigs, and you can't get a track record unless you successfully recruit bigs.

In other words, we're hopelessly screwed.

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #42 on: January 06, 2012, 11:30:09 AM »

If MU is going to make a serious run at a conference title or deep tourney run, they will need Otule.

BUT, I don't think I'm willing to say "MU would have 2 more wins with Otule". WAYYYYY too many variables for that kind of statement.

Hell, with that line of thinking, MU would have won the national championship if Dominic James didn't get hurt, right?

I understand that a big man is a rare commodity on this team, but let's not make the guy out to be Chuck Norris Trevor Mbakwe.

lab_warrior

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1718
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #43 on: January 06, 2012, 11:34:09 AM »
Next season, MU should have four that are 6'8" or taller...with JWilson being the 0.5 to get MU to 4.5 players.


Beyond that, I don't believe the absence of Otule allowed Georgetown to shoot an eFG% of 70% (and 86% in the second half).  I also do not believe the absence of Otule allowed LSU to shoot an eFG% of 62% and Vandy to shoot 57%.  All three teams would have shot excessively well against MU with or without Otule. 


Again, these are facts, getting in the way of WILD CONJECTURE.  

Let's get back to conversations about timeouts taken midway through halves losing us games, high fiving ettiquite, why 99.9% of Marquette basketball fans like a guy who scores lots of points in the post, Vander Blue not living up to completely unrealistic expectations, and why MU can't recruit big men.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 11:37:31 AM by lab_warrior »

Golden Avalanche

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #44 on: January 06, 2012, 11:40:38 AM »
In terms of value added, absolutely. We have a replacement for everyone else.

Desperation when a serviceable center getting 5 and 4/game is considered irreplaceable.


Ellenson Family Reunion

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #45 on: January 06, 2012, 12:08:42 PM »
Desperation when a serviceable center getting 5 and 4/game is considered irreplaceable.



He was also blocking shots at a level only bettered by Melo, Drummond, and Dieng, the Big East's premier defensive centers.  Not that that should be considered in the evaluation or anything.

Plus we're starved for height and at 6' 11" he's our only player over 6' 8".  Not that that should be considered in the evaluation or anything.

We also have to play Jamil Wilson, a 3/4 switchable at center for 15-20 mpg now.  Not that that should be considered in the evaluation or anything. 

I love numbers and appreciate Sugar's evaluations, but hypothesis testing through regressions can't explain everything in basketball or life.

Henry Sugar

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2003
  • There are no shortcuts
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #46 on: January 06, 2012, 12:17:08 PM »
He was also blocking shots at a level only bettered by Melo, Drummond, and Dieng, the Big East's premier defensive centers.  Not that that should be considered in the evaluation or anything.

Plus we're starved for height and at 6' 11" he's our only player over 6' 8".  Not that that should be considered in the evaluation or anything.

We also have to play Jamil Wilson, a 3/4 switchable at center for 15-20 mpg now.  Not that that should be considered in the evaluation or anything. 

I love numbers and appreciate Sugar's evaluations, but hypothesis testing through regressions can't explain everything in basketball or life.

In other words, you're good with numbers and analysis as long as they conform to your pre-existing biases. 
A warrior is an empowered and compassionate protector of others.

Ellenson Family Reunion

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4798
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #47 on: January 06, 2012, 12:28:21 PM »
In other words, you're good with numbers and analysis as long as they conform to your pre-existing biases. 

I just think there's MORE than just numbers.  For instance, what's the R-squared of these regressions you're running?  If it's not 1, then there are other things that explain the outcome of a game than a linear equation.

Henry Sugar

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2003
  • There are no shortcuts
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #48 on: January 06, 2012, 12:42:56 PM »
I just think there's MORE than just numbers.  For instance, what's the R-squared of these regressions you're running?  If it's not 1, then there are other things that explain the outcome of a game than a linear equation.

So your point is that regression analysis has limitations?  Not disputing that.

Because what I thought you were saying was, "I know that right now there's no proof of a relationship between Otule being gone and Marquette playing worse, but I believe it to be true even though the numbers don't agree with me".
A warrior is an empowered and compassionate protector of others.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: MU and Bigs
« Reply #49 on: January 06, 2012, 12:58:18 PM »
I do think we have at least two more wins, if Otule had not got hurt. However, on the flip side Gardner and Wilson are benefiting greatly by the increased responsibility. It hurts in the short run, but we will see the benefit of this next year.