Vander Blue versus Davante Gardner

[NersEllenson]

Heavy debate in the Haanif thread.  Interesting to see how the board sees this question.

For anyone who argues that Davante Gardner wasn't offensively elite, that seems foolish.  Gardner as a junior finished in The Top 100 players in all of college basketball in 9 different offensive categories.  IN the Top 10 of ALL college basketball players in 2 offensive categories - FG percentage and Free Throw Rate (pretty important categories)

As Juniors, Gardner's O Rating was 62nd in the country.  Blue as a Junior was 992.  For context, Blue's best season (his junior year) he did not finish in the Top 100 players in ANY offensive category NOR Defensive categories.  He was 539th in the country in steals.....did not block 1 shot, nor was he ever known as a guy who EVER would take a charge (a skill most elite defenders master.)

For the above reasons, that is why I vote Gardner a better college player. 

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=davante-gardner&davante-gardner=2012-2013&i=1&p1=vander-blue&vander-blue=2012-2013

[Bocephys]

This will end well.

[Galway Eagle]

I think Gardner was better but being his position and size he was unable to lead a team (not slim/athletic enough to play PF or SF) so while we could count that his numbers were always gonna be good he didn't better the team.  Blue meanwhile was all over and played well in three different positions all the while leading a team to many victories and an elite 8.  The difference between last year being great or bad was a player like Blue able to lead. Gardner was great as a player Blue did a lot of stuff beyond just be a player.

[Aughnanure]

I think Gardner was better but being his position and size he was unable to lead a team (not slim/athletic enough to play PF or SF) so while we could count that his numbers were always gonna be good he didn't better the team.  Blue meanwhile was all over and played well in three different positions all the while leading a team to many victories and an elite 8.  The difference between last year being great or bad was a player like Blue able to lead. Gardner was great as a player Blue did a lot of stuff beyond just be a player.

One year.

[Galway Eagle]

One year.

The year he was looked to. Did you expect him to do it on Jimmy's team? DJO and Crowder's team? I certainly didn't, heck if he did do that stuff we'd all be upset that he was taking possessions from those leaders. He stepped up when it was his turn and unfortunately left before his turn was up. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I get Vander for 3 years in a guard position in which there are other guards that are close to as good, supply and demand.

or

I get DG for 4 years in a post position in which his replacement is more difficult to find at close to that level.


I take DG if I'm thinking big picture, multi-year impact.  If it's for only one year, I think differently.

[tower912]

I saw Gardner as a one-trick pony.   A phenomenally efficient low block scorer.   Great hands, great feet.  Poor defender.  I still shudder thinking about him guarding the perimeter during the Oxtule experiment.  Rebounding stats padded by rebounding his own misses.   A decent passer who chose not to.   Never got serious about his conditioning.   Pouted visibly when he did not get the ball when he wanted it.  Pouted visibly when he didn't get a foul call on the offensive end.   Admitted that he hadn't been practicing hard as a senior.  
    
     I saw Blue as a very talented guard who got steadily better every year.   Played both ends.   Could create his own shot.  Understood the defensive rotations.   Leader when it was his turn.   Wanted the ball at crunch time. I hate to speculate like this, but if his progression arc had continued, he probably would have seen several minutes per game at the point.    According to posters on Dodd's board (right Buzzcrush?) his absence was cited by the team as one of the main reasons for the poor year.   He was a jerk, but the kind of jerk the team followed.

[Slim]

"Vander, how does it feel to make the sweet 16?"

"I don't know.  How does it feel not to?"

[Coleman]

No contest.

Vander Blue.

Gardner was a good offensive college player, who often struggled on defense.

Vander was an outstanding offensive and defensive college player.

[Freeport Warrior]

Vander was an outstanding offensive player.

Would never use outstanding to describe his offensive game. Agree to disagree.

[Galway Eagle]

What bugs me about Gardner is that if he'd really slimmed down taking conditioning and such seriously he could've been playing PF and absolutely demolishing people.  But he didn't he was content. Maybe he has a thyroid thing We don't know about but it just seems like with a bit more serious in preparation he could've been playing athletically enough to lead a team that needed a leader.

[MU82]

The year he was looked to. Did you expect him to do it on Jimmy's team? DJO and Crowder's team? I certainly didn't, heck if he did do that stuff we'd all be upset that he was taking possessions from those leaders. He stepped up when it was his turn and unfortunately left before his turn was up. 

Very nice point.

FWIW, I would take 4 years of Gardner over 3 years of Blue, but I would take the junior Vander with the game on the line.

[bilsu]

I voted Gardner. You can base your argument on Blue's junior year, but Gardner was also on that team. My thoughts is that Gardner's senior year would have been much more successful with Blue at the two instead of Thomas. On the flip side what if Blue stayed and Gardner left? I do not think the team would have been any better in that case.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Very nice point.

FWIW, I would take 4 years of Gardner over 3 years of Blue, but I would take the junior Vander with the game on the line.

That's where I land

[muwarrior69]

Devante played above expectations; Vander played below expectations.
Just my opinion.

[BallBoy]

Very nice point.

FWIW, I would take 4 years of Gardner over 3 years of Blue, but I would take the junior Vander with the game on the line.

From a point of view of someone who could lead a team and someone you could build a team around it is Vander by far. Vander could be successful without Gardner. Gardner needs someone to get him the ball and score as was shown last yr.

In relative comparison to position neither are on the all-MU team but Gardner would be on the all-decade team while Blue most likely would not. In the last ten yrs our power forwards/centers were Ox, Tule, Hayward, Butler, Jackson, Ousmane and Burke. In comparison to that list he is arguably our 3-4 best player. Blue light be top 15 as a guard.  

Gardner appears better because our lack of front court makes him look better while our plethora of quality guards makes Blue looks worse.

I think college is a guards game so Blue without OX would be better than OX without Blue.

[Johnny B]

Gardner played better in college and over 4 years was great, so i voted for him. Now however Blue is and NBA border line player and is way better.

[BallBoy]

Devante played above expectations; Vander played below expectations.
Just my opinion.

I agree with this.

[flash]

Team success, clutch gene, and leadership make this an easy decision for me. Vander Blue

[WarriorFan]

Vander was an outstanding offensive and defensive college player.
[/quote]
... in 4 or 5 games.

which, admittedly were important games.

Gardner was limited by Buzz and could have been better.  We got the best Vander will ever produce.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Well, I started this in the other thread so thanks to Ners for moving it to it's own thread.

Here's where I land on this:  When I think of what makes a great basketball player -- athletic (can run and jump and cover large areas of the court with ease), good (and willing) defender, killer instinct/leadership -- Vander has more of these qualities than Davante.  Davante was unique...he was very good at his best attribute, but frankly he kind of stunk at most everything else.  

Davante was one of the most fun and by far the most frustrating to watch player at MU that I can remember.  He could put it in the bucket like nobody else, but his body language was terrible and more often than not he looked less than interested.  Vander was also frustrating to watch early in his career, but at least I never got the impression that he didn't care/wasn't trying his hardest to win.

[ChicosBailBonds]

 
 Vander was also frustrating to watch early in his career, but at least I never got the impression that he didn't care/wasn't trying his hardest to win.

I think there were moments when people questioned that....refusing the high five's, the body language after a tough shooting night his freshman year, the Vander Orange incident with another student.

[mu_hilltopper]

Vander was, spare a few games here and there, mediocre for 2/3rds of his college career.   Vander's signature move his Freshman and Sophomore years was to drive the lane and put up a prayer that had zero chance of going in.   Hell, he looked like he hadn't progressed at all the first month of his, later quite superlative Junior year.

Davante, no contest.  He had a steady progression of being an out of shape foul machine to a solid junior and outstanding senior.

[4everwarriors]

Blue's a better playa. Gardner was a waste of space. Havin' said that, both were disappointin', albeit, for different reasons.

[bilsu]

What I like about Wojo's recruits is they say they know how to make good decisions. Blue often did not make good decisions, which drove me nutts.