Brew City Ball forum..

[bradley center bat]

There have been some posters this year on scoop that have made me seriously question the value of a MU diploma.   

How do you know they went to Marquette?

[tower912]

Fair point.   

[mu03eng]

So in the first part of this post you make fun of someone for having a different opinion then you.

Then in the second part you criticize others for not allowing other opinions?

The issue the "Pollyanna" posters have with the negative posting is not the content, it's the delivery. It's "we suck," "Jake wouldn't start for a D2 program," "Derrick is the worst PG in Marquette history." In most of the posts, there are no stats, no objective analysis, no reason. It's mostly just angry venting that turns into unnecessary bashing of 18 year old kids. Now, when pressed, the negativos will find stats to back up their opinions, but not without, and also after the bashing.

You, are a special case. You make intelligent, well reasoned arguments to back up your assertions. But you ruin it by posting it over and over and over and over and over...often in threads that don't have anything to do with the point you are trying to make. You also have been known to make things up like "Derrick has shown no improvement from last season."

I was thinking about writing something very similar this morning, thanks for posting this.  I have come to the conclusion that a lot of the negative crowd are fireball throwers that has honest debate as a secondary concern, if that.

I'm willing to bet 95% of the board believes the following facts:
-This season has been a disappointment
-The team has underachieved expectations
-This team struggles on the offensive end
-This team is inconsistent
-We have talented freshmen that have not gotten as much playing time as we would like (the reasons for this are wildly varied)
-This team has had some questionable coaching decisions
-This team has had some issues that were "uncontrollable" that have impacted the results
-This team has a very long shot at the NCAA tournament
-Buzz is having a down year but ultimately is still the coach for this university and team for the foreseeable future.
-Buzz is not above reproach for his decisions, but that doesn't mean every decision can/should be questioned

If the above are true for the vast majority we are arguing on the margins, which is fine but then we can drop the whole "you guys love Buzz and can't question anything he ever does".  Nothing frustrates me more than trying to take a nuanced stance which says yes there are issues but it's not armageddon and have that turned into you are Buzz's best friend.  All it does is stifle debate which is why I think at least at a sub-conscious level it's intentional.

[tower912]

Agree with most of what you say, 03, but I would change the word 'facts' to assertions or postulates. 

[MarquetteDano]

I was thinking about writing something very similar this morning, thanks for posting this.  I have come to the conclusion that a lot of the negative crowd are fireball throwers that has honest debate as a secondary concern, if that.

I'm willing to bet 95% of the board believes the following facts:
-This season has been a disappointment
-The team has underachieved expectations
-This team struggles on the offensive end
-This team is inconsistent
-We have talented freshmen that have not gotten as much playing time as we would like (the reasons for this are wildly varied)
-This team has had some questionable coaching decisions
-This team has had some issues that were "uncontrollable" that have impacted the results
-This team has a very long shot at the NCAA tournament
-Buzz is having a down year but ultimately is still the coach for this university and team for the foreseeable future.
-Buzz is not above reproach for his decisions, but that doesn't mean every decision can/should be questioned

If the above are true for the vast majority we are arguing on the margins, which is fine but then we can drop the whole "you guys love Buzz and can't question anything he ever does".  Nothing frustrates me more than trying to take a nuanced stance which says yes there are issues but it's not armageddon and have that turned into you are Buzz's best friend.  All it does is stifle debate which is why I think at least at a sub-conscious level it's intentional.

Good post.  And to the matter of other forum's censorship, I do like that things are more open here.

That said the near personal attacks on kids (with the exception of something they do off the court, which is fair game) and fans who use words like "we" and "us" when they are really trust trolls is a shame.  Fortunately, both of these are rare.

[GooooMarquette]

The issue the "Pollyanna" posters have with the negative posting is not the content, it's the delivery. It's "we suck," "Jake wouldn't start for a D2 program," "Derrick is the worst PG in Marquette history." In most of the posts, there are no stats, no objective analysis, no reason. It's mostly just angry venting that turns into unnecessary bashing of 18 year old kids. Now, when pressed, the negativos will find stats to back up their opinions, but not without, and also after the bashing.

You, are a special case. You make intelligent, well reasoned arguments to back up your assertions. But you ruin it by posting it over and over and over and over and over...often in threads that don't have anything to do with the point you are trying to make. You also have been known to make things up like "Derrick has shown no improvement from last season."

Well said.  Disagreement is great...as long as it's accompanied by rational discussions or exlanations for the various positions.  That's part of what makes this board more interesting than the other MU boards.  

What gets tiresome are the extreme statements regarding individual players who are busting their butts for MU ("X sucks" or "X is the worst ever")...that get repeated over and over again.

The other thing that bugs me are the categorical labels that get put on people with certain viewpoints.  For example, I have been labeled things like "anti-Dawson" or a "Derrick apologist" on this forum many times.  Neither could be further from the truth.  I am simply a lifelong "Marquette fan" who wants the team to represent Marquette with dignity and fight to win every game we play.  The fact that I usually agree with Buzz's lineup choices doesn't mean I "love Derrick" or "hate Dawson" - it simply means that I generally happen to agree with his approach to meeting these goals.

[Hards Alumni]

I was thinking about writing something very similar this morning, thanks for posting this.  I have come to the conclusion that a lot of the negative crowd are fireball throwers that has honest debate as a secondary concern, if that.

I'm willing to bet 95% of the board believes the following facts:
-This season has been a disappointment
-The team has underachieved expectations
-This team struggles on the offensive end
-This team is inconsistent
-We have talented freshmen that have not gotten as much playing time as we would like (the reasons for this are wildly varied)
-This team has had some questionable coaching decisions
-This team has had some issues that were "uncontrollable" that have impacted the results
-This team has a very long shot at the NCAA tournament
-Buzz is having a down year but ultimately is still the coach for this university and team for the foreseeable future.
-Buzz is not above reproach for his decisions, but that doesn't mean every decision can/should be questioned

If the above are true for the vast majority we are arguing on the margins, which is fine but then we can drop the whole "you guys love Buzz and can't question anything he ever does".  Nothing frustrates me more than trying to take a nuanced stance which says yes there are issues but it's not armageddon and have that turned into you are Buzz's best friend.  All it does is stifle debate which is why I think at least at a sub-conscious level it's intentional.

Probably the post of the year.

[Windyplayer]

There have been some posters this year on scoop that have made me seriously question the value of a MU diploma.   

\
Hmm, you're using this site as a bellweather regarding the value of your MU diploma? Ironic. 

[willie warrior]

Probably the post of the year.

Agree with most of what you have said above--one thing you left out--what about the guys that start the bomb throwing at anybody that does offer criticism of Buzz? I have not seen any evidence that anybody criticizes every decision as you mentioned in your last "fact". The "fact" still remains that some of his decisions can and should be criticized, such as: rotations, starters, some of his "statements"/beliefs that impact performance, and stubbornness on his part. Those should be able to be criticized without the knee jerk insults and slurs that come from a few people on this board who will not tolerate any criticism.

Buzz has done a good job as HC, but this year shows that he still has a lot to improve upon. Hopefully he will, and hopefully some of those that thinks the guy walks on water will be more tolerant of others comments without the smug attitude of how dare you say that.

[mu03eng]

Agree with most of what you have said above--one thing you left out--what about the guys that start the bomb throwing at anybody that does offer criticism of Buzz? I have not seen any evidence that anybody criticizes every decision as you mentioned in your last "fact". The "fact" still remains that some of his decisions can and should be criticized, such as: rotations, starters, some of his "statements"/beliefs that impact performance, and stubbornness on his part. Those should be able to be criticized without the knee jerk insults and slurs that come from a few people on this board who will not tolerate any criticism.

Buzz has done a good job as HC, but this year shows that he still has a lot to improve upon. Hopefully he will, and hopefully some of those that thinks the guy walks on water will be more tolerant of others comments without the smug attitude of how dare you say that.

Willie, I generally refrain from responding to you, but since your post sums up neatly why I made my post in the first place I will respond.

Your post builds the straw man that there are posters that believe Buzz is beyond reproach and shout you down for questioning Buzz.  I would challenge you to find one poster that has done any such thing.  Your issue is not one of pro-Buzz factions attacking anti-Buzz factions but really of people attacking what you say, simply because YOU said it.  If you could find a way to more constructively present your arguments they would not be rejected immediately.  As an example

 

The "fact" still remains that some of his decisions can and should be criticized, such as: rotations, starters, some of his "statements"/beliefs that impact performance, and stubbornness on his part. Those should be able to be criticized without the knee jerk insults and slurs that come from a few people on this board who will not tolerate any criticism.

Entirely reasonable until the bolded part where you invent a segment of the board population that simply doesn't exist

Example number 2

Buzz has done a good job as HC, but this year shows that he still has a lot to improve upon. Hopefully he will, and hopefully some of those that thinks the guy walks on water will be more tolerant of others comments without the smug attitude of how dare you say that.

Extremely relevant and something I agree with, in fact I think we, as a board, should be debating....what can Buzz improve on.  But then you get to the bold part where you can't help but play the victim card of the very activity you engage in.  You create an absolute which frustrates the bejesus out of people especially me.  It's not necessary.

So, to build on the good part of your post, what is one thing you think Buzz could do to improve as a coach after this season?  Do you think that is something someone needs to tell him or something he can/has learned on his own?

[NersEllenson]

Since DePaul inbounded with 8 seconds left and Garrett pulled up from 30' with 5 seconds left, does that mean that Buzz did the right thing by not fouling? Not questioning you specifically. Just asking.

I wasn't referencing MU's choice to not foul specifically, but instead stating the case for what most believe analysts believe to be the best strategy in that situation...as your post was referencing other games over the weekend where strategy wasn't employed.  Given the timeframe left in the game as you point out, MU followed the strategy I'd mentioned.  Was saying that we do see lots of games tied on 3 points shots when the strategy could have been applied in time appropriate situations....a lot more than seeing the 3 necessary things transpire in order for the other team to tie the ball game if fouled.

I didn't have an issue with us not fouling Saturday. 

[NersEllenson]

So in the first part of this post you make fun of someone for having a different opinion then you.

Then in the second part you criticize others for not allowing other opinions?

The issue the "Pollyanna" posters have with the negative posting is not the content, it's the delivery. It's "we suck," "Jake wouldn't start for a D2 program," "Derrick is the worst PG in Marquette history." In most of the posts, there are no stats, no objective analysis, no reason. It's mostly just angry venting that turns into unnecessary bashing of 18 year old kids. Now, when pressed, the negativos will find stats to back up their opinions, but not without, and also after the bashing.

You, are a special case. You make intelligent, well reasoned arguments to back up your assertions. But you ruin it by posting it over and over and over and over and over...often in threads that don't have anything to do with the point you are trying to make. You also have been known to make things up like "Derrick has shown no improvement from last season."

Have no problem or real disagreement with anything your wrote here TAMU.  Though I don't recall saying Derrick hasn't improved over last season...but have made the point there hasn't been any appreciable improvement from the nonconference portion of the season to the conference season statistically speaking.  Derrick has played a little better at times of late than he did earlier in the year, but he also played a couple of decent games in non-con.  

I've never made broad statements about Derrick being the worst PG in MU history, nor that Jake should be at a D-2 school - in fact when Jake transferred here - I felt he'd get PT and be a viable player beyond typical walk on status...one of my usual adversaries here Sultan...thought it was ridiculous to think Jake would ever get any meaningful PT while at MU.  My position on Derrick has been consistent - I believe he's a very good backup PG at this level..but that is his ceiling...it has value to the team, is an important role...he's a high character kid...he has his positives...but I just can't make the reach and stretch some of you guys do to support his overall body of work in 31 minutes per game this season...

[MerrittsMustache]

I've never made broad statements about Derrick being the worst PG in MU history, nor that Jake should be at a D-2 school - in fact when Jake transferred here - I felt he'd get PT and be a viable player beyond typical walk on status...one of my usual adversaries here Sultan...thought it was ridiculous to think Jake would ever get any meaningful PT while at MU.  My position on Derrick has been consistent - I believe he's a very good backup PG at this level..but that is his ceiling...it has value to the team, is an important role...he's a high character kid...he has his positives...but I just can't make the reach and stretch some of you guys do to support his overall body of work in 31 minutes per game this season...

I don't think there's anyone on Scoop who would disagree with the bolded part above. The issue is that you hitched your wagon to John Dawson early and have since defended anything he does wrong, ignored his faults and overemphasized his strengths (often irrationally) while constantly downplaying Derrick's good games (often irrationally), ignoring the defensive end of the floor and refusing to accept the fact that, despite the Gtown game, Dawson simply isn't ready to take over and play big, significant minutes. You don't just do this sporadically either. You post the same info on thread after thread after thread, over and over and over and over. My question to you, Ners: What are you hoping to accomplish by doing that?

[Galway Eagle]

My question to you, Ners: What are you hoping to accomplish by doing that?

Everybody putting him on ignore probably

[GooooMarquette]

Regarding the debate about agreeing or disagreeing with Buzz, a few thoughts.

Anyone who thinks he's perfect or infallible is wrong.  And anyone who doesn't think he's a great coach who usually makes great basketball-related decisions is wrong.  I'd bet everyone here would agree with those statements...yet some posters' comments make me wonder.

The truth is that Buzz is an excellent young coach who has FAR exceeded most people's expectations since becoming HC at Marquette, and we owe him a great deal of deference and respect for what he has done.  But he is also a young coach, still learning, and it's fine to disagree with some of his decisions.

What I think that should mean is that it's perfectly reasonable and acceptable for Marquette fans to question a relatively small number or proportion of his decisions - individual play calls, strategies for a given game, etc.  But I think it goes to a whole new level when posters criticize playing time that is based on dozens of decisions every single game.  Buzz is a guy who isn't afraid to substitute for someone who makes a defensive mistake, or who doesn't follow his game plan.  And his history shows that he views EVERY deadball situation - before opening tips, fouls, deadball TOs, time outs - as an opportunity to make a decision about who should be on the court.  Heck, most positions ought to come with revolving doors.  So if we're seeing one guy get 30+ mpg while another gets about 10 mpg and people make the statement that the numbers should be reversed, they aren't just questioning one of Buzz's decisions - they're questioning hundreds and hundreds of decisions made over the course of the season...based on what he sees in practices, team meetings and games.  Based on what we've seen over the past 5+ seasons, I think he deserves more respect than that....

[avid1010]

instead stating the case for what most believe analysts believe to be the best strategy in that situation...

i heard majerus discuss it, and he stated he doesn't foul when up 3 because it's the only way you can lose the game.  they also had a statistician show it was essentially a 50/50 call.  you could definitely argue that fouling in certain situations and against certain teams could tilt those odds in your advantage, but the fact that rick said "no" has to at least make you pause.

[jesmu84]

Have no problem or real disagreement with anything your wrote here TAMU.  Though I don't recall saying Derrick hasn't improved over last season...but have made the point there hasn't been any appreciable improvement from the nonconference portion of the season to the conference season statistically speaking.  Derrick has played a little better at times of late than he did earlier in the year, but he also played a couple of decent games in non-con.  

I've never made broad statements about Derrick being the worst PG in MU history, nor that Jake should be at a D-2 school - in fact when Jake transferred here - I felt he'd get PT and be a viable player beyond typical walk on status...one of my usual adversaries here Sultan...thought it was ridiculous to think Jake would ever get any meaningful PT while at MU.  My position on Derrick has been consistent - I believe he's a very good backup PG at this level..but that is his ceiling...it has value to the team, is an important role...he's a high character kid...he has his positives...but I just can't make the reach and stretch some of you guys do to support his overall body of work in 31 minutes per game this season...

For me personally, I am not happy with the performance from the PG position. But, I do acknowledge that it is the best it is going to be this season. Right now, Derrick is the best option. I can accept that and, at the same time, be disappointed in it.

[GGGG]

Regarding the debate about agreeing or disagreeing with Buzz, a few thoughts.

Anyone who thinks he's perfect or infallible is wrong.  And anyone who doesn't think he's a great coach who usually makes great basketball-related decisions is wrong.  I'd bet everyone here would agree with those statements...yet some posters' comments make me wonder.

The truth is that Buzz is an excellent young coach who has FAR exceeded most people's expectations since becoming HC at Marquette, and we owe him a great deal of deference and respect for what he has done.  But he is also a young coach, still learning, and it's fine to disagree with some of his decisions.

What I think that should mean is that it's perfectly reasonable and acceptable for Marquette fans to question a relatively small number or proportion of his decisions - individual play calls, strategies for a given game, etc.  But I think it goes to a whole new level when posters criticize playing time that is based on dozens of decisions every single game.  Buzz is a guy who isn't afraid to substitute for someone who makes a defensive mistake, or who doesn't follow his game plan.  And his history shows that he views EVERY deadball situation - before opening tips, fouls, deadball TOs, time outs - as an opportunity to make a decision about who should be on the court.  Heck, most positions ought to come with revolving doors.  So if we're seeing one guy get 30+ mpg while another gets about 10 mpg and people make the statement that the numbers should be reversed, they aren't just questioning one of Buzz's decisions - they're questioning hundreds and hundreds of decisions made over the course of the season...based on what he sees in practices, team meetings and games.  Based on what we've seen over the past 5+ seasons, I think he deserves more respect than that....

Very well stated.

[NersEllenson]

I don't think there's anyone on Scoop who would disagree with the bolded part above. The issue is that you hitched your wagon to John Dawson early and have since defended anything he does wrong, ignored his faults and overemphasized his strengths (often irrationally) while constantly downplaying Derrick's good games (often irrationally), ignoring the defensive end of the floor and refusing to accept the fact that, despite the Gtown game, Dawson simply isn't ready to take over and play big, significant minutes. You don't just do this sporadically either. You post the same info on thread after thread after thread, over and over and over and over. My question to you, Ners: What are you hoping to accomplish by doing that?

Bolded is not true...I've pointed out Dawson's shortcomings..acknowledged he was awful against Seton Hall, that he wasn't good defensively against DePaul Saturday (yet Derrick also wasn't very good either against Garrett/DePaul's offensive execution).  I've said Dawson carried us to the winner's circle against GTown..he did basically win that game for us in OT.  Said he's a better 3 point shooter and FT shooter than Derrick and much better on offensive end...and by virtue of Dawson requiring to be guarded and the team not playing 4 on 5..that makes every other teammates job to execute offensively easier.  I've also voted Derrick SOTG..have noted he had a nice 3 game stretch of games against Hall, Butler and Xavier...these are all truths of what I've said/posted, etc.  

What I don't understand is how you and the others are so convinced Dawson isn't ready to take over and play significant minutes - because the ONE game he was given the opportunity - he sure didn't lay a brick.  Of course you can defer to Buzz and Buzz's judgement...but it isn't beyond the realm of possibility or never been before that a coach has been overly loyal, and too long loyal to a veteran player.  Will be interesting to see what happens against GTown - if Derrick gets 30+ and we lose at home...then what??

As for what I'm hoping to accomplish - nothing different than those of you who see it the other way - to engage in a debate, offer contrasting opinions, and fueling discussion...which in my view is why a message board exists, no?  Look how much more active this board is than Scout or BrewCity BB - it's because of the uncensored debate/viewpoints allowed..

[CTWarrior]

What I don't understand is how you and the others are so convinced Dawson isn't ready to take over and play significant minutes - because the ONE game he was given the opportunity - he sure didn't lay a brick.  

I don't know if the stats will back me up, but I get the feeling against pressure Dawson will be very, very turnover prone.  I like the idea of him seeing minutes against Georgetown if they pay zone again.

I'll say this, if Dawson plays little or no minutes against Georgetown and we lose at home, your head might explode!

[NersEllenson]

I don't know if the stats will back me up, but I get the feeling against pressure Dawson will be very, very turnover prone.  I like the idea of him seeing minutes against Georgetown if they pay zone again.

I'll say this, if Dawson plays little or no minutes against Georgetown and we lose at home, your head might explode!

No need to put the last sentence in teal CT!  It will explode. 

As for JD playing against pressure...I believe he can handle it...he just had a really off game against Seton Hall right from the second he came in the game.  DePaul tried a few possessions of full court pressure and JD had no problems with it, and actually penetrated through it at one point to get a good look 3-2 type situation for the team.  MU as a whole has seen very little full court pressure this year..which has surprised me...I am not sure Derrick is very good against tenacious D either...when a guy gets up in his face in halfcourt...he usually doesn't attack the guy and usually gets rid of ball quickly...

[MerrittsMustache]

What I don't understand is how you and the others are so convinced Dawson isn't ready to take over and play significant minutes - because the ONE game he was given the opportunity - he sure didn't lay a brick.  Of course you can defer to Buzz and Buzz's judgement...

There you have it. It may be difficult for some to understand but in addition to watching and understanding basketball, I also trust the opinion of a guy who has been coaching basketball for 25 years and sees these players on an every day basis over the opinion of a fan on a message board. Color me stupid if you will but that's how I feel about it. Sure, I may disagree with a specific decision from time to time but big picture, over the course of an entire season, I'm going to side with the professional.

Will be interesting to see what happens against GTown - if Derrick gets 30+ and we lose at home...then what??

Then you write 500 posts pretending that the outcome of that game means that Dawson should have played 30 minutes all season long. What if Derrick plays all 40 minutes and MU wins by 20? What if Dawson plays 30 minutes and MU loses by 20? Truthfully though, it would mean nothing. It's a completely different game, at a different point in time, at a different location with a different gameplan.

As for what I'm hoping to accomplish - nothing different than those of you who see it the other way - to engage in a debate, offer contrasting opinions, and fueling discussion.

Not buying it. Why do you consistently repeat the same info over and over and over and over regarding Derrick-Dawson even on threads unrelated to that topic? Simply to fuel discussion?

[PGsHeroes32]

Lots to read on here right now lol.

But for now I'll just say I saw no problem in not fouling Garret at the end. As ners said, most thing it should happen at 5 secs or less. This was on the defense not challenging the shooter, not Buzz.

[ChicosBailBonds]

On Saturday, Nova didn't foul up 3 against St. John's and it worked out. Memphis didn't foul up 3 on Temple and it worked out. Were Wright and Pastner still "wrong" for not fouling? Different coaches view that situation differently. Some feel that there are too many negative variables to fouling (off rebound, foul on their team after the miss, foul as player chucks up a 3, extends the game, etc) while others believe that the low odds of a team executing a make-then-miss on FTs and scoring are worth the foul. It can often depend on the team and the opponent. There's no clear-cut right or wrong. If your strategy works, it was right. If it doesn't, it was wrong.

Question I would have is whether Wright or Pastner still had guys challenging the shot.  We seemed to take the approach of not fouling AND giving them an open look at a 3.  Of course the danger of challenging the shot is fouling the shooter.

[NersEllenson]

There you have it. It may be difficult for some to understand but in addition to watching and understanding basketball, I also trust the opinion of a guy who has been coaching basketball for 25 years and sees these players on an every day basis over the opinion of a fan on a message board. Color me stupid if you will but that's how I feel about it. Sure, I may disagree with a specific decision from time to time but big picture, over the course of an entire season, I'm going to side with the professional.

Then you write 500 posts pretending that the outcome of that game means that Dawson should have played 30 minutes all season long. What if Derrick plays all 40 minutes and MU wins by 20? What if Dawson plays 30 minutes and MU loses by 20? Truthfully though, it would mean nothing. It's a completely different game, at a different point in time, at a different location with a different gameplan.

Not buying it. Why do you consistently repeat the same info over and over and over and over regarding Derrick-Dawson even on threads unrelated to that topic? Simply to fuel discussion?

Wow..you can't even engage in a reasonable debate on the reasonable post I made...and to suggest playing the same team at home because it is a different point in time 4 weeks later isn't a good comparison/benchmark??  Wow!  But, I promise I'll limit any such comments regardless of outcome either way to less than 500.

Question:  Do you feel there has ever been an instance in sports where a coach has stuck with a veteran player too long?