Anyone else concerned with Vander?

[jsglow]

Coach really didn't ask much of Vander today.  Time was spent evaluating our two big guys following injuries while giving max minutes to both Juan and Jake in an effort to see if they can combine to fill Todd's shoes for now.  Both Vander and Lockett took backseats.  Coach has a pretty good handle on what they can do.  Vander's fine.

[Knight Commission]

Coach really didn't ask much of Vander today.  Time was spent evaluating our two big guys following injuries while giving max minutes to both Juan and Jake in an effort to see if they can combine to fill Todd's shoes for now.  Both Vander and Lockett took backseats.  Coach has a pretty good handle on what they can do.  Vander's fine.

What makes you think Coach didn't ask much of Vander? Lets stop making excuses for him and Junior.

[ATWizJr]

After one game?  Against Colgate?  C'mon man.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

What makes you think Coach didn't ask much of Vander? Lets stop making excuses for him and Junior.

Dude...everyone is getting some minutes. Vander didn't look great, but he didn't need to. Just relax...start bitching if he looks like that in 3 weeks.

[Daniel]

Vander will be fine.  Let's see on Tuesday.

[NersEllenson]

Jake Thomas seemed more active defensively and from a rebounding perspective than did Vander today.  I'm not expecting much of a jump from Vander this year over last - but hope I'm wrong.  If Vander can take a nice step up - MU will be very, very good.  I just don't see anything in Vander's game that leads me to believe he'll be able to score consistently in the half-court, or off the bounce in the half-court.  His jumper did look better today, and his misses were online, which was encouraging.  He'll always be awesome in transition.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

I was impressed with how active Thomas was not just in rebounding but overall hustle. he was in the mix of things most of the time out there. Loved his positioning under the boards and the diving for contested balls

[GoldenZebra]

Ill be worried if he keeps this performance up for several games. But he wont, he will prove all dem haters wrong!

[Rudy]

NOPE.

Not concerned at all. First game against a tight zone that has read the book on him. Alley oops were thrown to high and behind. He should have been at the line on one of them too. He played good defense.

[Goose]

Vander and Jamil are the two guys we need to step up this season and I believe both will have great years. Little worries about Vander having a great season.

[CTWarrior]

Vander and Jamil are the two guys we need to step up this season and I believe both will have great years. Little worries about Vander having a great season.

If we need Blue to have a big year offensively to be successful we are not likely to be successful.  He is a nice complementary player who provides good defense and excellent rebounding for a guard, but to this point in his college career has not shown the smallest inkling whatsoever that he can be a focal point on offense for a successful team.  He must improve quite a bit from last year just to not be a detriment on offense.  He must vastly improve to be helpful and vastly, vastly improve to be a focal point.  Not impossible of course, but that certainly did not appear to be the case yesterday.   It's only one game, though, and I could be singing a different tune after Maui.

[Hards Alumni]

If we need Blue to have a big year offensively to be successful we are not likely to be successful.  He is a nice complementary player who provides good defense and excellent rebounding for a guard, but to this point in his college career has not shown the smallest inkling whatsoever that he can be a focal point on offense for a successful team.  He must improve quite a bit from last year just to not be a detriment on offense.  He must vastly improve to be helpful and vastly, vastly improve to be a focal point.  Not impossible of course, but that certainly did not appear to be the case yesterday.   It's only one game, though, and I could be singing a diferent tune after Maui.

Based on what?  Clearly the offense was being run through Jae and DJO last year, and DG when he was in.  Vander had to look for openings.  He managed 8.4 points per game on 41.3% as a sophomore.  I realize he was a 5 star recruit, but cut the guy some slack.  He hasn't been asked to do more than play solid D and find openings.  Would it be nice for him to hit some more shots?  Absolutely, but lets be honest with ourselves.

[brewcity77]

He must improve quite a bit from last year just to not be a detriment on offense.  He must vastly improve to be helpful and vastly, vastly improve to be a focal point.

I think this general type of statement is vastly made about Vander and is a MASSIVE overstatement. Vander was a 41.3% shooter from the field last year. Not great, but not far off the senior number of DJO at 44.7% or Jerel at 44.2%. From three, he shot 16% as a freshman and 26% last year. I think getting to 30% this year and 33% next year is realistic. Those numbers are already at "not a detriment" level and there's no reason to think he can't take his 8.4 ppg and increase to double digits this year and 12-13 ppg next year, which are solid starter numbers.

He is already very good at getting to the line, and after a rocky start, has become our best free throw shooter. From the Villanova game where he iced the game at the line he led the team in FT%, ahead of Crowder, DJO, and Gardner.

Defensively he's a stud and is also one of the better rebounding guards in the country. I think far too many people look at Vander and see his freshman Big East season without seeing how much he has already improved. 

[Dr. Blackheart]

I am a big Vander fan. His strength in the half court is as a seam finder, not as a shooter-scorer like DJO or Jerel. He has the most NBA athletic skill set on the team. We need to remember he is still very young and developing, but with Todd out, he will be continued to be called out for not being the SG that he is now slotted as, especially against a zone, as unfair as that is. It is MU Achilles heel right now and Buzz is asking Vander and Jake to step in and fill that role.  

So, fan expectations fall into those two reality chasms...and will continue to all season.  I am betting on Vander to step up based on the work he has put in.  Yet, he will continue to look bipolar for a bit of the early OOC--great against a man defense, struggling against a zone.

[MerrittsMustache]

Not worried.

To meathead fans, if a player doesn't score a lot that means he's not very good.

[CTWarrior]

An additional difference between Vander's shooting percentages and those of Crowder or DJO is that those guys HAD to shoot and were the guys we relied on to take or force shots when the offense broke down.  Vander last year (wisely) wouldn't shoot unless he had a lay-up (usually off a drive) or a wide-open, uncontested shot, generally from close range.  Then, if you take away the creampuff games (creampuff = Mount Saint Mary's, Winthrop, Jacksonville, Green Bay, Northern Colorado & Milwaukee) he shot 38.4% last year, and when you consider he rarely took anything but very high percentage shots, that is pretty bad.  I agree he improved a great deal last year, but he was basically unplayable against good teams as a freshman.  I think he deserves his playing time because he certainly adds value on the defensive end of the floor and on the boards, but I remain very skeptical about his ability to score/distribute/be an asset on offense. 

I don't pretend to know everything, and I've been wrong before, and I hope I'm wrong this time, but so far I just don't see what so many of you do.  I still think when I see him with the ball trying to do something in the half court something bad is more much likely to happen than something good.

[CTWarrior]

Not worried.

To meathead fans, if a player doesn't score a lot that means he's not very good.

I didn't say he wasn't good, I said we can't rely on him as a focal point on offense.  Big difference, don't you think?

[brewcity77]

I am a big Vander fan. His strength in the half court is as a seam finder, not as a shooter-scorer like DJO or Jerel.

I agree with that, and must have deleted the part saying that I didn't see him becoming a DJO or Jerel, merely meant to use their numbers to illustrate that Vander doesn't have a woeful shooting percentage. He penetrates and gets points in the paint and at the line. If he can just become a 30% shooter from range, he'll be a legitimate second or third option, and with guys like Lockett and Jamil around, that's all he needs to be.

[Goose]

CT Warrior
Excellent point on the shooting % difference between Blue and Jae/DJO. You are completely correct that VB's lower % were based off better opportunities to some extent. I am a big VB fan and I base that off of what I hear from people who know ball better than me. Numerous times last year Mike Kelly commented on his D and overall skill set in a positive way. In fact, several times he really spooned out the praise and I would think Kelly could have negative bias towards VB due to UW blow off.

I am not saying that VB is AA type player at this point, but do think he still has real upside. He was a young recruit and I am going to give him rope to prove himself. Honestly after watching the game yesterday he appears not to be my biggest concern foreward.

[Marqevans]

Lets just judge a player on one game against a nobody opponent where everyone got minutes and the offense never really played as they would in a 'real' game.

It will be much clearer after we play East Cupcake on Tuesday night.

[Hards Alumni]

It will be much clearer after we play East Cupcake on Tuesday night.

Nah, I look at these cupcakes as preseason football games.  You don't show your hand until the games start to count.. or are more difficult.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I realize he was a 5 star recruit, but cut the guy some slack.

This is the problem for most people.

If Vander was a walk-on transfer like Jake, everybody would be drooling.

I know it's hard to compartmentalize for fans, but what a player did before he gets to MU doesn't mean ANYTHING, and what he does after he leaves MU doesn't really mean anything either. It's simply about the performance and production for the years the player is in school.

Don't let HS rankings or pro-potential skew your vision, guys. Look at what the player is actually accomplishing.

Vander didn't look good yesterday. Well, Otule's jump hook looked good, but he didn't rebound or play any meaningful defense. He also had some ugly possessions when he was double teamed. So. What.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

NOPE.

+3

[statnik]

Dude...everyone is getting some minutes. Vander didn't look great, but he didn't need to. Just relax...start bitching if he looks like that in 3 weeks.

It's a viable comment.  It's Vander's junior year, I would hope he could play better than he did yesterday considering his talent.  Hopefully he puts it all together, but he will not be a really good player on this team until he can become at least an average efficiency offensive player.  I'm rooting for him, it's as frustrating for us as it is for him.

[Hards Alumni]

It's a viable comment.  It's Vander's junior year, I would hope he could play better than he did yesterday considering his talent.  Hopefully he puts it all together, but he will not be a really good player on this team until he can become at least an average efficiency offensive player.  I'm rooting for him, it's as frustrating for us as it is for him.

You are totally ignoring the fact that Buzz wanted to see what he had from his bench.  He knows what he has in Vander.

Average efficiency offensive player.  Please explain this.  This seems to be a statement that gets tossed around and repeated enough times that people just believe it without looking at the numbers.