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

[Cracked Sidewalks] Previewing Marquette's Schedule by MU82
[Today at 12:05:43 PM]


Welcome, BJ Matthews by dgies9156
[Today at 11:44:59 AM]


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

CrackedSidewalksSays

Double digit wins over Pomeroy Top 10: Wade over Kentucky 2003, Novak over UConn 2006, Amigos over WVU 2009 & Cadougan over Wisconsin yesterday

Written by: noreply@blogger.com (bamamarquettefan1)

Junior Cadougan dominated Wisconsin for a 60-50 win, marking only the 4th time in 32 chances that Marquette has beaten a Pomeroy Top 10 team by double digits.  The other three were Dwayne Wade over Kentucky 83-69 in 2003, Steve Novak over Connecticut 94-79 in 2006 and the Three Amigos over WVU 75-53 in 2009. (complete list of games vs. Pomeroy 32 at bottom)  table.tableizer-table {  border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;  font-size: 12px; }  .tableizer-table td {  padding: 4px;  margin: 3px;  border: 1px solid #ccc; } .tableizer-table th {  background-color: #104E8B;   color: #FFF;  font-weight: bold; }  

Wisconsin entered the game with the 9th best offense in the country at 114.1 points per trip down the court and Marquette shut them down at 75.76 points per 100 trips.  This was largely due to the 2nd best player in the game, Vander Blue, coming up with 4 steals to help force 10 Wisconsin turnovers in the first half - more than their average for a game - and on 20.3% of their trips.  Perhaps more importantly, MU held Wisconsin to a slightly below average 29.3% offensive rebounding percentage - an area where Wisconsin has sometimes dominated MU.  The one item where both teams were awful was at the line, where if both teams had hit the average percent of free throws MU would have won 65-57 instead of 60-50 (FT%+- shows MU hit 5 fewer FT than they should have and Wisconsin 7).

Eff.eFG%TO%OR%FTRFT%+-[/tr]
Marquette90.9151.0%22.0%25.0%32.7%(5)
Average100.0048.0%21.1%32.7%37.6%-  
Wisconsin75.7639.4%20.3%29.3%44.2%(7)
Using the Game NetAvg Cadougan was dominant at 9.89, but when you consider how clutch he was when the Badgers threatened, he was way better than the stats can measure.  A couple of times when the shot clock was about to expire he went to the hoops and scored or got the ball to Vander Blue for a trey.  His 6-to-1 assist to turnover for the game was clutch with the rest of the team struggling with turnovers (including a disturbing 7 by Lockett).  But most importantly, on a night when the rest of the team hit 25% from the line (3 of 12) Cadougan went 4 of 5.

Blue was easily the 2nd best player, but there were also excellent contributions from Davante Gardner, who physically beat up Jared Berggren (22nd best player in Value Add) while holding him scoreless in the first half, Jamil Wilson, and how about Derrick Wilson.  In the Florida game, D. Wilson joined Blue as the only two players with a good game, and his 3 assists made MU point guards 9 assists and 1 turnover for the game.

vs. WisconsinFG (3pt)FGAFTFTAFT%ORDRTPATOBLKSNet Avg[/tr]
Junior Cadougan, G7 10 4 5 0.800041861019.849
Vander Blue, G7 (2) 14 1 3 0.333051720045.941
Davante Gardner, F5 9 -   2 0.000171002301.444
Jamil Wilson, F4 6 -   -   0.00012812011.411
Derrick Wilson, G1 3 -   2 0.00020230021.033
Steve Taylor Jr., NA-   -   -   1 0.00002000000.000
Juan Anderson, F-   1 -   -   0.00013002110.000
Jake Thomas, G-   2 -   -   0.00001000100.000
Chris Otule, C-   -   -   2 0.00003001100.000
Trent Lockett, G1 (1) 7 2 2 1.00022517000.000
TOTAL25527170.41272960131569
Wisconsin17529230.391122150131337
The list of all games Wisconsin has played against teams in Pomeroy's top 10 are listed below.  MU is 8-24 in those games, and they are ordered from most lopsided win to most lopsided loss. Ironically the previous game at Florida was MU's 2nd biggest loss ever to a Top 10 team. Pomeroy's ratings date back to Dwyane Wade's last season, when MU beat Kentucky 83-69.

DateSeasonPom RnkopponentResultLocationMargin[/tr]
Sat Jan 1020099West VirginiaW, 75-53Home22
Tue Jan 320064ConnecticutW, 94-79Home15
Sat Mar 2920032KentuckyW, 83-69Neutral14
Sat Dec 820139WisconsinW, 60-50Home10
Sat Dec 320125WisconsinW, 61-54Away7
Thu Feb 24201110ConnecticutW, 74-67OTAway7
Sat Dec 820085WisconsinW, 81-76Away5
Thu Mar 2720033PittsburghW, 77-74Neutral3
Tue Dec 2920108West VirginiaL, 63-62Away-1
Sat Mar 120087GeorgetownL, 70-68OTHome-2
Thu Feb 1720055LouisvilleL, 64-61Home-3
Sun Mar 2220096MissouriL, 83-79Neutral-4
Wed Nov 2120088DukeL, 77-73Neutral-4
Sat Dec 920078WisconsinL, 70-66Home-4
Sun Mar 120094LouisvilleL, 62-58Away-4
Sat Dec 2020045WisconsinL, 63-59Away-4
Mon Nov 2220112DukeL, 82-77Neutral-5
Sat Dec 1120117WisconsinL, 69-64Home-5
Sat Jan 2320104SyracuseL, 76-71Away-5
Sat Feb 420067VillanovaL, 72-67Away-5
Sat Jan 720126SyracuseL, 73-66Away-7
Tue Jan 25201110ConnecticutL, 76-68Home-8
Sat Jan 820114PittsburghL, 89-81Away-8
Sat Dec 1220109WisconsinL, 72-63Away-9
Wed Feb 2520093ConnecticutL, 93-82Home-11
Mon Feb 420086LouisvilleL, 71-57Home-14
Wed Mar 420095PittsburghL, 90-75Away-15
Sat Feb 1020075GeorgetownL, 76-58Away-18
Thu Jan 1720086LouisvilleL, 71-51Away-20
Sat Apr 520031KansasL, 94-61Neutral-33
Thu Nov 2920132FloridaL, 82-49Away-33
Wed Jan 2620055LouisvilleL, 99-52Away-47


http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2012/12/double-digit-wins-over-pomeroy-top-10.html

g0lden3agle

"Wisconsin entered the game with the 9th best offense in the country at 114.1 points per trip down the court and Marquette shut them down at 75.76 points per 100 trips."

Should this read 114.1 points per 100 trips down the court?

Also, is it just a matter of preference when you use pts/100 trips rather than pts/trip? 

brewcity77

Quote from: g0lden3agle on December 09, 2012, 08:44:31 AMShould this read 114.1 points per 100 trips down the court?

Also, is it just a matter of preference when you use pts/100 trips rather than pts/trip?

To the first...yes. To the second, that's how Pomeroy rates it.

MU82

I know that every ranking system has its good parts and bad parts, but any ranking system that could have this Wisconsin team in its top 10 is seriously -- wait, make that fatally -- flawed.
"It's not how white men fight." - Tucker Carlson

"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." - George Washington

"In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell


brewcity77

Quote from: MU82 on December 09, 2012, 09:51:17 AM
I know that every ranking system has its good parts and bad parts, but any ranking system that could have this Wisconsin team in its top 10 is seriously -- wait, make that fatally -- flawed.

No, it's not. Almost all of the computer systems have UW ranked overly high because of their style and their proficiency against cupcakes. Pomeroy's best explanation (and he's said he doesn't personally believe UW is as good as his system rates them) is imagine you are really good at something and you do it 345 times. Let's say you're a lights out free throw shooter, you take 345 free throws, make 320 of them, hit backboard or rim out 24, and airball one. That airball is effectively Wisconsin. That's the really bad outlier. If you say his system is fatally flawed, that's the same as saying that a 92.8% free throw shooter that airballed one out of 345 attempts is fatally flawed as a free throw shooter. It wouldn't be accurate, nor would it be a fair statement.

ChicosBailBonds

Warren Nolan ratings has Wisconsin 94th.

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2013/npi

RPI has them at 104 right now.

Gasser really kills them.  Even with him, in that conference (easily the best in college hoops this year), they are going to struggle mightily.

MU82

Quote from: brewcity77 on December 09, 2012, 01:27:29 PM
No, it's not. Almost all of the computer systems have UW ranked overly high because of their style and their proficiency against cupcakes. Pomeroy's best explanation (and he's said he doesn't personally believe UW is as good as his system rates them) is imagine you are really good at something and you do it 345 times. Let's say you're a lights out free throw shooter, you take 345 free throws, make 320 of them, hit backboard or rim out 24, and airball one. That airball is effectively Wisconsin. That's the really bad outlier. If you say his system is fatally flawed, that's the same as saying that a 92.8% free throw shooter that airballed one out of 345 attempts is fatally flawed as a free throw shooter. It wouldn't be accurate, nor would it be a fair statement.

I don't follow the Pomeroy rankings, so I'll accept your word that this is an aberration.

Fact is, Wisconsin is not a very good team. They will have to work to be top 10 in the Big Whatever. (That is intended hyperbole, sans teal.)
"It's not how white men fight." - Tucker Carlson

"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." - George Washington

"In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

bamamarquettefan

Quote from: g0lden3agle on December 09, 2012, 08:44:31 AM
"Wisconsin entered the game with the 9th best offense in the country at 114.1 points per trip down the court and Marquette shut them down at 75.76 points per 100 trips."

Should this read 114.1 points per 100 trips down the court?

Also, is it just a matter of preference when you use pts/100 trips rather than pts/trip? 
Ah yes, bounce back and forth between NBA and college where they are listed differently, but it is 1.141 points per trip.

On Pomeroy and Wisconsin:

In 2009, he had them 29th they won their first round game, which is what the top 32 should do, and in the other 4 years they were knocked out one game earlier than their Pomeroy level would have picked them, and in light of that including a narrow loss to Syracuse last year and eventual runner up Butler the year before, I think Pomeroy usually is more accurate on Wisconsin than others.

The reason I believe Nolan and other are way off on them is I believe they all use point spreads, which is very distroting when dealing with a team that plays at a slower pace.  If Wisconsin beats a team 48-40 and another team beats the same common opponent 96-80, a rating system relying on spreads believes Wisconsin is much worse than the other team, but I woudl say they are not (though I am not going to actually run Pythagorean to figure out the exact).  I really believe Wisconsin is cheated by other systems not unfairly helped by Pomeroy in most years, but someone could study to compare.

As for this year, I do believe they are a bit high because part of his rating through the first several games is based on preseason perception and I'm not sure he really factored Gasser leaving.  That's why I like Value Add (obviously i'm biased).  Gasser is a top 100 projected player at a 5.88%, so when you take him out Wisconsin drops from the 25th best projected team to the 53rd best team, but I believe Ryan has them solidly in the tournament by the end, which would be good for MU's resume.
The www.valueaddsports.com analysis of basketball, football and baseball players are intended to neither be too hot or too cold - hundreds immerse themselves in studies of stats not of interest to broader fan bases (too hot), while others still insist on pure observation (too cold).

Lennys Tap

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 09, 2012, 01:38:51 PM
Warren Nolan ratings has Wisconsin 94th.

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2013/npi

RPI has them at 104 right now.

Gasser really kills them.  Even with him, in that conference (easily the best in college hoops this year), they are going to struggle mightily.

I can't speak to the accuracy of the Nolan Ratings, don't know anything about them.

RPI is an extremely flawed system in March and totally worthless in December.

BIG has 6 good teams and 6 not good teams. I'm sure the computer will rank them #1 all year. They're likely the best, but if it's as much a no brainier as you think they should have done better than a tie in the ACC/ Big 10 challenge.

ChicosBailBonds

Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 10, 2012, 01:27:59 AM
I can't speak to the accuracy of the Nolan Ratings, don't know anything about them.

RPI is an extremely flawed system in March and totally worthless in December.

BIG has 6 good teams and 6 not good teams. I'm sure the computer will rank them #1 all year. They're likely the best, but if it's as much a no brainier as you think they should have done better than a tie in the ACC/ Big 10 challenge.

All the systems are flawed.  Honestly, Sagarin is still my favorite rating system.  It has Wisconsin 24th.

The ACC B1G challenge is about matchups, but generally don't disagree with you. There were four games (I believe) that featured both teams ranked.  Big Ten won three of those, only losing the Duke OSU game at Duke.  The ACC seemed to make their hay in games that featured lesser teams (BC vs Penn State, Maryland vs Northwestern, Va Tech vs Iowa, etc).  Yes, I would agree with you that the B1G is a bit top heavy...having 3 teams in the top 4 like they did last week is deinitely going to do that.

Big Ten is number one in Sagarin with the Big East at number 2.  Seems about right to me.  Big East could have a nice year in it's final assembled together with the power schools.

Previous topic - Next topic