Anyone else concerned with Vander?

[statnik]

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.

All it means is he shot just over 40% last year from the field, despite not taking many perimeter shots.  I would be willing to estimate (although no proof of it) that half his shots were within 4 or 5 feet of the hoop.  That is definitely not an average percentage for a player who does most of his work in transition or off of drives close to the basket.  If he could get his percentage to around 45% and 30% from 3 if he tries many 3s, I'd be happy.

[GGGG]

Why aren't you happy now?  He is the best perimeter defender on the team and rebounds extremely well for his position.  I just don't get how people can be so critical of him because he doesn't score like you expect him to.

OTOH, we have people gushing about Jake Thomas' effort and hustle, even though he didn't do much of consequence offensively either.

Judge players by what they DO ON THE FLOOR...not what you EXPECT them to do based on some recruiting ranking or preconceived notion.  This is my biggest problem with Vander bashers....they are seemingly blind to what he actually does when he plays basketball.

[tower912]

Last year, Vander guarded 4 different positions on the floor and did it well.  I expect no less this year.    Last year, Vander too often drove into traffic and attacked the rim without a plan, a la McNeal.   He also failed to finish through contact well, a la Butler as a sophomore.    If, as a junior, he can improve those two areas, attacking under control and finishing through contact, he will average 12 PPG.   

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Why aren't you happy now?  He is the best perimeter defender on the team and rebounds extremely well for his position.  I just don't get how people can be so critical of him because he doesn't score like you expect him to.

OTOH, we have people gushing about Jake Thomas' effort and hustle, even though he didn't do much of consequence offensively either.

Judge players by what they DO ON THE FLOOR...not what you EXPECT them to do based on some recruiting ranking or preconceived notion.  This is my biggest problem with Vander bashers....they are seemingly blind to what he actually does when he plays basketball.

This.

[statnik]

Why aren't you happy now?  He is the best perimeter defender on the team and rebounds extremely well for his position.  I just don't get how people can be so critical of him because he doesn't score like you expect him to.

OTOH, we have people gushing about Jake Thomas' effort and hustle, even though he didn't do much of consequence offensively either.

Judge players by what they DO ON THE FLOOR...not what you EXPECT them to do based on some recruiting ranking or preconceived notion.  This is my biggest problem with Vander bashers....they are seemingly blind to what he actually does when he plays basketball.

Well, let's see, considering he has a bigger offensive role on the team, I think it is fair to be able to scrutinize his offense.  Why scrutinize someone who only took 3 shots like Jake Thomas on the offensive end?  It may be harsh to hear Vander's offensive game scrutinized, but all the excuses are annoying as well.  I'm not asking for a great or even good offensive player, I'm asking for him to be able to finish more than occasionally.  When you're a liability offensively in big games, that is not a good thing.

[statnik]

Not worried.

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

To me it's not so much about whether he scores a lot, it's about whether he scores efficiently.  As many have pointed out, Vander scores most of his points in transition, which makes his low FG percentage even more surprising and perhaps less forgivable.  What if he didn't get those opportunities to score in transition?  He could quite easily be a 35% FG shooter.

[CTWarrior]

Judge players by what they DO ON THE FLOOR...not what you EXPECT them to do based on some recruiting ranking or preconceived notion.  This is my biggest problem with Vander bashers....they are seemingly blind to what he actually does when he plays basketball.

I see what he does on the floor, and it isn't much in the halfcourt on offense.  He's a poor shooter so he doesn't stretch the defense.  He doesn't command help.  He slashes but those slashes don't turn into points for him or others with any kind of efficiency because he doesn't finish at the rim nor is he a great passer on the move.  We rave about his FT shooting but it was 71% last year, which must be average at best for a 2G and probably a little less than average (I am admittedly talking out of my butt here but it doesn't seem that 71% is anything special for a 2G.  He did hit big FTs several times last year.).  Is he a great screener or something and I am missing it?  The one thing he did better than average in half-court offense last year is find the open guy on the interior from unorthodox angles a couple times a game.  That may be the seams you are talking about.

Look, I LIKE THE GUY.  He always plays hard, he's a plus defender and a great rebounder for a guard.  He brings a lot to the table.  He more than deserves to play.  It's just that he can't be a primary or secondary option on offense in the half court if we are going to be good unless he improves his offense a lot.  Many of you who have seen him more than in just MU games think he will.  Maybe so, but I (and apparently others) haven't seen it yet.

[The Equalizer]

Can't tell anything conclusively with one game, but since we have a 3-page thread discussing it already, I'll throw in that I'm more concerned with Gardner than Blue based on the Colgate game after looking at the +/-.  

http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/2012/11/11/colgate-63-marquette-84/plus_minus

With Gardner on the floor, we played Colgate about even. Most of our big lead was built with Otule in the game--even though Gardner outscored Otule directly.

Again, don't know if this is a one-game aberration or not. I think we saw something similar over the past two seasons when both were healthy and splitting minutes--Gardner was stronger offensively, and Otule stronger defensively. For whatever reason, the rest of the team seems to score more easily with Otule in the game than Gardner.

I don't think Blue is going to be a problem for us this year. I don't see him developing into the next Dwyane Wade or DJO, but he's going to be solid and an asset when he's in the game. Probably time to stop obsessing over him.

[tower912]

An interesting thought about DG.    It did seem that every time DG was in the game, the emphasis was feeding the post, whereas with Otule it was more about the motion with the occasional feed to the post.    Plus, when DG got it, he seemed to feel obligated to go to the rack.   I don't recall him kicking it out.     But, again, it was just one game.   

[GGGG]

An interesting thought about DG.    It did seem that every time DG was in the game, the emphasis was feeding the post, whereas with Otule it was more about the motion with the occasional feed to the post.    Plus, when DG got it, he seemed to feel obligated to go to the rack.   I don't recall him kicking it out.     But, again, it was just one game.   

Colgate let him go one-on-one...and DG made them pay.  However when they started to double, they never did off of Thomas, but always from the opposite side.  They knew Thomas well enough not to double off him.

[ErickJD08]

I see what he does on the floor, and it isn't much in the halfcourt on offense.  He's a poor shooter so he doesn't stretch the defense.  He doesn't command help.  He slashes but those slashes don't turn into points for him or others with any kind of efficiency because he doesn't finish at the rim nor is he a great passer on the move.  We rave about his FT shooting but it was 71% last year, which must be average at best for a 2G and probably a little less than average (I am admittedly talking out of my butt here but it doesn't seem that 71% is anything special for a 2G.  He did hit big FTs several times last year.).  Is he a great screener or something and I am missing it?  The one thing he did better than average in half-court offense last year is find the open guy on the interior from unorthodox angles a couple times a game.  That may be the seams you are talking about.

Look, I LIKE THE GUY.  He always plays hard, he's a plus defender and a great rebounder for a guard.  He brings a lot to the table.  He more than deserves to play.  It's just that he can't be a primary or secondary option on offense in the half court if we are going to be good unless he improves his offense a lot.  Many of you who have seen in more than in just MU games think he will.  Maybe so, but I (and apparently others) haven't seen it yet.

+1

Few people hate the guy but he just doesn't bring much to the table on offense.  And I am worried because even against a poor team last night, he showed the same weaknesses from prior years in that he struggles mightily with shooting, decision making, ball control, and finishing.  Yesterday, he had some poor turnovers, he missed layups, and missed open shoots.  Maybe it was an off day.  Every player can have an off day and most people can live with that.  The problem is that his "off day" looked like most games from last season.  So fans, like myself, are concerned he just isn't developing.

If you think about development, I think Juan looked better, Wilson looked better, Garnder looks effecient, and Otule looked better.  Quite frankly, I think Junior's shot looked improved too.  Until Blue learns to finish around the rim, he is going to be limited on offense.  

[Clam Crowder]

Buzz was playing with a goofy rotation, guys that won't get many minutes were getting them. Vander was pretty passive out there, and Buzz was hardly coaching just standing off to the side. I am not worried about Vander yet. If he doesn't get to 10 pts against a SE Louisiana team that gave up 80+ to Madison then I will be very concerned.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

+1

Few people hate the guy but he just doesn't bring much to the table on offense.  And I am worried because even against a poor team last night, he showed the same weaknesses from prior years in that he struggles mightily with shooting, decision making, ball control, and finishing.  Yesterday, he had some poor turnovers, he missed layups, and missed open shoots.  Maybe it was an off day.  Every player can have an off day and most people can live with that.  The problem is that his "off day" looked like most games from last season.  So fans, like myself, are concerned he just isn't developing.

If you think about development, I think Juan looked better, Wilson looked better, Garnder looks effecient, and Otule looked better.  Quite frankly, I think Junior's shot looked improved too.  Until Blue learns to finish around the rim, he is going to be limited on offense.  

I don't think this is unfair, but we probably should revisit this after about 10 games and see what we think in terms of "development".

Last year at this point, a lot of people were enamored with Jamail Jones shooting.

[Lennys Tap]

OTOH, we have people gushing about Jake Thomas' effort and hustle, even though he didn't do much of consequence offensively either.

Judge players by what they DO ON THE FLOOR...not what you EXPECT them to do based on some recruiting ranking or preconceived notion.  This is my biggest problem with Vander bashers....they are seemingly blind to what he actually does when he plays basketball.

Some of the experts on this board told us that Jake wouldn't/couldn't play, was basically a walk on (think Rob Frozena). Others said he was better than that and thought he could contribute. Given the disparity of opinion, it's not surprising that some are "gushing" over Thomas. It's only one game, but considering how some here valued his game I was VERY pleasantly surprised, especially with his athleticism.

Regarding Vander, I agree that people here focus on his weaknesses. They're obvious, but he's still one of the most talented/important players on the team.

[jeffreyweee]

Can't tell anything conclusively with one game, but since we have a 3-page thread discussing it already, I'll throw in that I'm more concerned with Gardner than Blue based on the Colgate game after looking at the +/-.  

http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/2012/11/11/colgate-63-marquette-84/plus_minus

With Gardner on the floor, we played Colgate about even. Most of our big lead was built with Otule in the game--even though Gardner outscored Otule directly.

Again, don't know if this is a one-game aberration or not. I think we saw something similar over the past two seasons when both were healthy and splitting minutes--Gardner was stronger offensively, and Otule stronger defensively. For whatever reason, the rest of the team seems to score more easily with Otule in the game than Gardner.

I don't think Blue is going to be a problem for us this year. I don't see him developing into the next Dwyane Wade or DJO, but he's going to be solid and an asset when he's in the game. Probably time to stop obsessing over him.

Gardner plays with the 2nd unit more often than not.

[ErickJD08]

I don't think this is unfair, but we probably should revisit this after about 10 games and see what we think in terms of "development".

Last year at this point, a lot of people were enamored with Jamail Jones shooting.

Very true.  But then he played more, and we all saw.  We have seen alot of Blue in the last two years.

Both the haters and lovers need to realize one thing.  He is a role player.  That's it.  He is a defensive specialist.  He isn't critical for this team's success.  If Wilson, Junior, Otule, Gardner, and Lockett can have solid seasons (which they look like they will), we will have another solid season.  I would like to see more Taylor and get him more minute before the BEast season starts.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Very true.  But then he played more, and we all saw.  We have seen alot of Blue in the last two years.

Both the haters and lovers need to realize one thing.  He is a role player.  That's it.  He is a defensive specialist.  He isn't critical for this team's success.  If Wilson, Junior, Otule, Gardner, and Lockett can have solid seasons (which they look like they will), we will have another solid season.  I would like to see more Taylor and get him more minute before the BEast season starts.

Few things:

#1 We have seen the "frosh. Vander" and the "soph. Vander." We have only seen one game of "Jr. Vander." Before we roll our eyes and say "same 'ol Vander", we might want to actually let him play several games, right?

#2 Vander was a role player for the past 2 seasons, but so was every other player on this team. That's it. None of them were as critical to MU's success as Lazar, Butler, Jae or DJO. Role players. All of them. That's it.

#3 I don't think anybody is really being unfair in their evaluation of Vander at this point, but for whatever reason he is a lighting rod for commentary. If (insert player) didn't play well, I have a feeling we wouldn't be hearing as much about it from a handful of posters, including you.

[avid1010]

Saw nothing from him that makes me think that this year will be any different.  He needs to get more confident and just attack.

you're the same guy that wrote lockett off after the scrimmage right?

[Bocephys]

you're the same guy that wrote lockett off after the scrimmage right?

And demanded a harem of hookers for recruits on official visits. 

[Lennys Tap]

#3 I don't think anybody is really being unfair in their evaluation of Vander at this point, but for whatever reason he is a lighting rod for commentary. If (insert player) didn't play well, I have a feeling we wouldn't be hearing as much about it from a handful of posters, including you.

Vander will always draw more scrutiny:

1. He's local
2. He originally verballed to our most hated rival
3. He's the highest rated Wisconsin player we've signed since Jim Chones in 1969 and one of the highest rated players period to come to MU in the last 40 years.
4. He's had trouble off the court.
5 His game is unorthodox.

He didn't come here claiming to be the Messiah but some won't forgive the fact that he isn't.

[The Process]

And demanded a harem of hookers for recruits on official visits. 

No wonder why we weren't in the final five last week...

On subject, not worried here.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Vander will always draw more scrutiny:

1. He's local
2. He originally verballed to our most hated rival
3. He's the highest rated Wisconsin player we've signed since Jim Chones in 1969 and one of the highest rated players period to come to MU in the last 40 years.
4. He's had trouble off the court.
5 His game is unorthodox.

He didn't come here claiming to be the Messiah but some won't forgive the fact that he isn't.

You're right, and that's dumb.

We aren't meatheads. Most people have MU degrees and took logic. Engage your brain, folks.

Understand the performance you are seeing, and comment appropriately. Let's not apply a bunch of preconceived notions when we try to discuss a player's actual production.

I hope we are better than "I told you Vander can't shoot... derp derp derp". That's the kind of great commentary you get from genius NFL fans on sports radio.

Let's aim higher.

[muwarrior69]

Did'nt DJO struggle in Non-conference last year?

[tower912]

Did'nt DJO struggle in Non-conference last year?

If you want to go that way........... wasn't Jae erratic and foul prone as a junior to the point that Buzz was starting EWilliams and bringing Jae off of the bench?

[teamdee]

Kenosha Warrior, there is a lot of concern.  Vander is all about the flash, he would rather look good than be good.