Anyone else concerned with Vander?

[LAZER]

Compare Gardner vs Blue.

- 1 comes in highly ranked, one doesn't.
- 1 has an NBA type body and athelticism, one doesn't.
- 1 is a guard, the other is a center.
- 1 is a very good defender, rebounder and passer, the other is a poor defender, average rebounder and average passer
- 1 is a poor shooter and finisher around the rim the other is a decent shooter and fantastic finisher around the rim
- 1 exceeds fan expectations and the other doesn't mean fan expectations
- 1 is really only effective offensively, the other is only effective defensively.

They are polar opposites in a lot of ways, but their net contributions to the team winning are relatively similar.

However, Gardner is often toasted while Blue is roasted.

It's also interesting when you put them into the context of the MU program, MU has always had some great scorers at guard and on the wings, but have rarely had consistent post scoring.  I think this definitely leads to different expectations.

[Lennys Tap]

Compare Gardner vs Blue.

- 1 comes in highly ranked, one doesn't.
- 1 has an NBA type body and athelticism, one doesn't.
- 1 is a guard, the other is a center.
- 1 is a very good defender, rebounder and passer, the other is a poor defender, average rebounder and average passer
- 1 is a poor shooter and finisher around the rim the other is a decent shooter and fantastic finisher around the rim
- 1 exceeds fan expectations and the other doesn't mean fan expectations
- 1 is really only effective offensively, the other is only effective defensively.

They are polar opposites in a lot of ways, but their net contributions to the team winning are relatively similar.

However, Gardner is often toasted while Blue is roasted.

It's all about expectations. A first round draft choice or a national merit scholar has a higher bar than a free agent or a guy with 26 on his ACTs. If the two end up being the same guy (solid but not outstanding) one's a disappointment and the other's a pleasant surprise. Probably not fair - scouts couldn't get far enough past VB's athleticism to see how raw he was offensively, nor were they able to see the incredible offensive skills of DG underneath all that blubber. That said, hating on Vander because he was overrated out of high school makes no sense to me. He's a good college player who works hard - and he's ours. Cheer him for his strengths and hope that his hard work on his deficiencies pays off (already seen it with his FT shooting).

[CTWarrior]

They are polar opposites in a lot of ways, but their net contributions to the team winning are relatively similar.

However, Gardner is often toasted while Blue is roasted.

Good comparison, though I would call Blue an average passer for a G, and I think Gardner is a good passer for a C, at least he was last year.  He wasn't looking to pass at all against Colgate.

Besides incoming reputation, I think the other thing that makes people give Gardner a pass is that he is very unusual and fun to watch.  His offensive game is "traditional" all the way, with old-fashioned good low post footwork and body control making up for his complete lack of athleticism.  There are a lot of fans who lack athleticism and could stand to lose a few pounds (like yours truly) who get a kick out of Gardner.

But you are spot on with regards to their relative value.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Good comparison, though I would call Blue an average passer for a G, and I think Gardner is a good passer for a C, at least he was last year.  He wasn't looking to pass at all against Colgate.

Besides incoming reputation, I think the other thing that makes people give Gardner a pass is that he is very unusual and fun to watch.  His offensive game is "traditional" all the way, with old-fashioned good low post footwork and body control making up for his complete lack of athleticism.  There are a lot of fans who lack athleticism and could stand to lose a few pounds (like yours truly) who get a kick out of Gardner.

But you are spot on with regards to their relative value.

I think Gardner could be a good passer, but he's always been a black hole. He's not good at finding the open player when he gets doubled. He has potential, but learning when he should go to the rim and when he should kick out is going to be an evolution. He has good hands and is a good ball handler, so it's just going to take some practice and some feel for him to get better at it.

Blue isn't a gifted distributor by any means, but I think his vision is good and he's not a ball hog. But, I'm ok with saying he's only average or slightly above average.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

It's all about expectations. A first round draft choice or a national merit scholar has a higher bar than a free agent or a guy with 26 on his ACTs. If the two end up being the same guy (solid but not outstanding) one's a disappointment and the other's a pleasant surprise. Probably not fair - scouts couldn't get far enough past VB's athleticism to see how raw he was offensively, nor were they able to see the incredible offensive skills of DG underneath all that blubber. That said, hating on Vander because he was overrated out of high school makes no sense to me. He's a good college player who works hard - and he's ours. Cheer him for his strengths and hope that his hard work on his deficiencies pays off (already seen it with his FT shooting).

I think you are right, but the problem is all scholarships are equal. It's not like MU spent more to get Vander than it did to have Gardner. It's the same scholarship. Once they walk in the door, it's all about production.

This isn't the draft, and this isn't free agency. They are all first round picks.

I dunno, maybe I'm just expecting too much for fans to use their heads to negate their own biases. Sometimes we just "like" a guy more than others. Human nature I suppose.

[NersEllenson]

I think Gardner could be a good passer, but he's always been a black hole. He's not good at finding the open player when he gets doubled. He has potential, but learning when he should go to the rim and when he should kick out is going to be an evolution. He has good hands and is a good ball handler, so it's just going to take some practice and some feel for him to get better at it.

Blue isn't a gifted distributor by any means, but I think his vision is good and he's not a ball hog. But, I'm ok with saying he's only average or slightly above average.

The concept of a ball hog is rather interesting - generally a ball hog tends to think he has a great chance at putting the ball in the basket on a consistent basis - Kobe comes to mind.  Gardner's offensive efficiency is one of the best in the country - Blue's is one of the worst in the Big East.  It bodes well for MU if Gardner is a ball hog, and Blue isn't a ball hog.

At the end of the day, Blue fans are going to see/evaluate things to fit their longstanding defense of him, and Gardner fans the same.  Blue is a solid college basketball player.  However,  I don't see him being close to as good as Jerel McNeal was at MU.  Gardner is a slightly more gifted Jerrod Lovette, who is simply fun to watch.  Good things usually happen with the ball in Gardner's hands....Blue's on the other hand...its been a crapshoot.  Here's to hoping Blue's halfcourt/perimeter game has improved and that his shooting is improved...by all accounts he's putting in the work, and for that alone he is to be commended/respected.

[Dawson Rental]

Compare Gardner vs Blue.

- 1 comes in highly ranked, one doesn't.
- 1 has an NBA type body and athelticism, one doesn't.
- 1 is a guard, the other is a center.
- 1 is a very good defender, rebounder and passer, the other is a poor defender, average rebounder and average passer
- 1 is a poor shooter and finisher around the rim the other is a decent shooter and fantastic finisher around the rim
- 1 exceeds fan expectations and the other doesn't mean fan expectations
- 1 is really only effective offensively, the other is only effective defensively.

They are polar opposites in a lot of ways, but their net contributions to the team winning are relatively similar.

However, Gardner is often toasted while Blue is roasted.

Gardner is much better than an average passer, and better than a decent shooter. 

Saying that Vander is only effective defensively would put you in the roaster of Vander school in the opinion of some.

[Goose]

I wish Gardner dished the ball more. He is obviously tough to stop some nights but it really is no doubt what he will do with the ball. I also am somewhat surprised that with all the training these guys do that he could not drop 20-30lbs. Have seen him several times this school year at Broken Yoke and can confirm he does not cheated at the table.

[ringout]

Get the frack outta here with your fancy facts, don't you know message boards are for nonsense, jackassery, and places to peddle your CD's that teach people how to swear in different languages??

And don't forget douchebaggery.

[Lennys Tap]

I think you are right, but the problem is all scholarships are equal. It's not like MU spent more to get Vander than it did to have Gardner. It's the same scholarship. Once they walk in the door, it's all about production.

This isn't the draft, and this isn't free agency. They are all first round picks.

I dunno, maybe I'm just expecting too much for fans to use their heads to negate their own biases. Sometimes we just "like" a guy more than others. Human nature I suppose.

Scholarships may technically be equal but it's unrealistic to think a fanbase's expectations aren't (or shouldn't) be colored by a player's ranking coming in. Jimmy Butler is one of the greatest success stories in MU recruiting history. If Jabari Parker becomes Jimmy Butler in college he'll be considered a disappointment. That's just reality.

[Hards Alumni]

The concept of a ball hog is rather interesting - generally a ball hog tends to think he has a great chance at putting the ball in the basket on a consistent basis - Kobe comes to mind.  Gardner's offensive efficiency is one of the best in the country - Blue's is one of the worst in the Big East.  It bodes well for MU if Gardner is a ball hog, and Blue isn't a ball hog.

At the end of the day, Blue fans are going to see/evaluate things to fit their longstanding defense of him, and Gardner fans the same.  Blue is a solid college basketball player.  However,  I don't see him being close to as good as Jerel McNeal was at MU.  Gardner is a slightly more gifted Jerrod Lovette, who is simply fun to watch.  Good things usually happen with the ball in Gardner's hands....Blue's on the other hand...its been a crapshoot.  Here's to hoping Blue's halfcourt/perimeter game has improved and that his shooting is improved...by all accounts he's putting in the work, and for that alone he is to be commended/respected.

Comparing one of Marquette's top scorers of all time to Blue is a little off, but I get your point.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The concept of a ball hog is rather interesting - generally a ball hog tends to think he has a great chance at putting the ball in the basket on a consistent basis - Kobe comes to mind.  Gardner's offensive efficiency is one of the best in the country - Blue's is one of the worst in the Big East.  It bodes well for MU if Gardner is a ball hog, and Blue isn't a ball hog.

At the end of the day, Blue fans are going to see/evaluate things to fit their longstanding defense of him, and Gardner fans the same.  Blue is a solid college basketball player.  However,  I don't see him being close to as good as Jerel McNeal was at MU.  Gardner is a slightly more gifted Jerrod Lovette, who is simply fun to watch.  Good things usually happen with the ball in Gardner's hands....Blue's on the other hand...its been a crapshoot.  Here's to hoping Blue's halfcourt/perimeter game has improved and that his shooting is improved...by all accounts he's putting in the work, and for that alone he is to be commended/respected.

Fair.

I don't mean to imply that Gardner is too much of a ball hog.

He's a gifted scorer, so he looks to get his shot (which is his job). To continue to be effective, he's going to have to watch how teams double him and know where to look for an open player. This isn't to say he's not good right now (he is), but he's not a complete player offensively. He's effective in his role, but teams are going to blitz him hard, and he's going to have to give it up sometimes.

To put this differently:

On offense, Vander is a crapshoot, Gardner is dependable.
On defense, Gardner is a crapshoot, Vander is dependable.

Each has value, but one is certainly more celebrated than the other.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Gardner is much better than an average passer, and better than a decent shooter. 

Saying that Vander is only effective defensively would put you in the roaster of Vander school in the opinion of some.

I'm using a bit of hyperbole to illustrate the point.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Scholarships may technically be equal but it's unrealistic to think a fanbase's expectations aren't (or shouldn't) be colored by a player's ranking coming in. Jimmy Butler is one of the greatest success stories in MU recruiting history. If Jabari Parker becomes Jimmy Butler in college he'll be considered a disappointment. That's just reality.

I know you are right, but I'm just pushing for MU fans to be better than this. We don't have to be some meat head fanbase. We can be smart, educated and understand basketball. Let UK fans be the meat heads. MU has a relatively small, loyal fanbase. We can be better than the rest if we challenge each other to use our brains.

[tower912]

Testify, guns and ammo!

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Testify, guns and ammo!

Well, I'm up on the soapbox, and ultimately I probably should get shoved off, but I tired of fans simply choosing to be ignorant because they don't want to actually engage their brain.

Leave that to the fans of (insert NFL franchise).

[Pakuni]

Damn you, Vander, for failing to meet the lofty expectations I created because someone said something on the Internet.

[Lennys Tap]

Well, I'm up on the soapbox, and ultimately I probably should get shoved off, but I tired of fans simply choosing to be ignorant because they don't want to actually engage their brain.

Leave that to the fans of (insert NFL franchise).

I love your (refreshing) passion, commitment and lack of equivocation. And I agree that those who constantly rip Vander are plain wrong about what how important he is to our team. That said, I don't think being mildly disappointed about where Vander's game is right now (considering that less than 3 years ago he was part of a three guard starting lineup on a national USA team that included Kyrie Irving and Austin Rivers) make one a meathead or an ignoramus.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I love your (refreshing) passion, commitment and lack of equivocation. And I agree that those who constantly rip Vander are plain wrong about what how important he is to our team. That said, I don't think being mildly disappointed about where Vander's game is right now (considering that less than 3 years ago he was part of a three guard starting lineup on a national USA team that included Kyrie Irving and Austin Rivers) make one a meathead or an ignoramus.

Agreed. There is room for accurate critiques. He's not a good shooter, and his touch around the rim isn't natural. He's gifted, but he doesn't have the strength or built in feel for the game that great guards have.

Definitely room for improvement. He's one game into his junior year. He has time.

[esotericmindguy]

This is my last time saying this because you still seem to struggle with basic basketball analysis....

There is more to the game of basketball than offense, so your statement "He's just not that good, it's pretty plain and simple. He never has been," is ABSURD when you base it only on offensive statistics.

Understand???  I'm no John Wooden, but it's pretty f*cking obvious that he's a "good" basketball player.  Buzz seems to think so.

I just gave you analysis, but that's fine. When you put it in bold and capitalize it starts to make sense...so thanks for that. I think we have a different opinion on good, that much is obvious.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Man, I can't wait until after the game tonight so we can have another 5-page thread on Vander's inadequacies!

[NersEllenson]

I know you are right, but I'm just pushing for MU fans to be better than this. We don't have to be some meat head fanbase. We can be smart, educated and understand basketball. Let UK fans be the meat heads. MU has a relatively small, loyal fanbase. We can be better than the rest if we challenge each other to use our brains.

I'm all for it - just be careful though if you are too pro-MU and aren't critical at all, you get labeled as a fanboy, who wears gold colored glasses, drinks the kool aid etc.  Many here completely knee jerk after a loss, crap on our players and coaches...yet in my experience, if you defend them...the above labels get thrown around...which is totally fine, yet ironically funny - because when a fanboy like myself actually does criticize a player or write a less than glowing post - you then get called a hater.  Been an amusing ride here on Scoop at times..for all of us I'm sure.

[hairy worthen]

Vander, punked the grinch and Wisconsin to come to MU. That alone makes him my favorite player right next to Wes.

[Goose]

Hairy

Great point. That alone should give him free pass.

[JakeBarnes]

I am super concerned with Vander.  Last night he tweeted that he got an instagram page.  INSTAGRAM.  What, now he's going to only play basketball ironically.  The program is doomed.