Vander Blue versus Davante Gardner

[Skatastrophy]

+10000000.  People who voted Vander .. please read the above, over and over and over. 

There is a 1000 point limit on +'s on the internet. Please check yourself before you wreck yourself, sir.

[reinko]

I live in the real world, where emotion and memories exist, that is what I care about.  Not someones eFG% on 2pt shots, outside of 12 feet, but inside of 19 feet, or whatever you are spewing.  Nothing against him, Gardner was a fine player, and was an important player on some great teams.  But in 3, 5, 10 years, will you have one moment of DG, of like damn, remember when Davante Gardner (insert memory).  I won't.

I will vividly remember these two things, have anything close for the big fella?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-nH5o--3dU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QygEB3AYu2g

[tower912]

MU had a successful stretch when Gardner was hurt his sophomore year but Blue was playing.   MU had a lousy year with Gardner and without Blue.    Yes, Jamil stepped up and did yeoman work at the 5 with CO and DG out.   Which is my point. The team never missed a beat when Gardner wasn't on the floor.   At any point during his entire career.   But how did the team that was supposed to have Blue do without him?
Gardner= great low post scorer.
Blue= complete guard.  Leader. 

And when you say that the lack of guards hindered Gardner his senior year, you actually make the case for Blue. 

[ATL MU Warrior]

+10000000.  People who voted Vander .. please read the above, over and over and over.  

Find whatever stats you want to try to prove that Gardner was "elite" -- whatever that means.  He had great (maybe even "elite") hands and a big body.  That combination allowed him to be a very effective low post scorer, unless he was matched up against an athletic big...then he had all kinds of trouble.  He was also a very good (maybe even "elite") FT shooter, especially for a guy of his size.  

Other than that, he was severely limited in every other facet of the game.  He could barely get up and down the court.  He couldn't rebound outside the area in which he happened to be standing at the time.  His interior/help/team defense was just terrible because he couldn't move.  He was weak mentally.

These things don't show up in the stats.  They are still real.

Vander maybe wasn't "elite" at anything, but he was far better than Davante at almost everything.

[Galway Eagle]

Repeating the same things over and over...

Did Gardner develop a jump hook?  Did he shoot many shots outside of 10 ft? Davante was a very solid contributor but his 2FG%, FT%, RPG all were constant so he did not show radical improvement.  Gardner got to 14 PPG his senior year.  Blue did that his junior year.  Davante's freshman yr he only averaged 9 minutes and 4.6PPG. Blue played 19 minutes and averaged 5.1.  Blue played meaningful minutes.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/marquette/davante-gardner

Blue improved his game yr over yr.  His 2FG% and 3FG% went up every year meaning he was becoming a better jump shooter.  His FT% got better every year and his minutes also went up higher.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/marquette/vander-blue

To say, "he did improve, yet he set a much higher standard of performance than did Blue as a freshman and sophomore."
is not true.  Gardner barely played as a freshman and as sophomores had comparable stats but Blue was relied on more to play.  Gardner got into better shape which allowed him to play more. 

The fact is that Blue came in with a lot of fanfare while Gardner with little.  When Blue didn't meet the lofty expectations people knocked him.  When Gardner exceeded, everyone crowned him. 

Freshman yr: Blue
Sophomore yr: Blue slight edge -- Ox was more efficient but he could only play 20 minutes a game.  Blue played more and had almost as many rebounds and blocks.  Similar point total.  Blue played much better defense as well.
Junior Yr: Blue

Age of voters matters.  If you asked me who was better between DJO and McNeal I'd pick DJO because he was astonishing for my first three years at MU meanwhile I only remember McNeal after deciding on MU my sr year of HS. But on paper McNeal was better thus yes age of voters matters. 

We've all heard you talk about derrick being the problem with this team a million times. Well if vander was here and running point I'd venture to say we'd have been 2nd in the BE.  Gardner couldn't carry a team he was unbelievably efficient but how many times did Gardner drive the hoop? Stutter step to throw the defender and pop out for a jumper? Etc. Gardner was always going to get his but it wasn't gonna be THE huge difference for the team.  While vander was the huge difference on many many occasions.

[MU82]

I live in the real world, where emotion and memories exist, that is what I care about.  Not someones eFG% on 2pt shots, outside of 12 feet, but inside of 19 feet, or whatever you are spewing.  Nothing against him, Gardner was a fine player, and was an important player on some great teams.  But in 3, 5, 10 years, will you have one moment of DG, of like damn, remember when Davante Gardner (insert memory).  I won't.

I will vividly remember these two things, have anything close for the big fella?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-nH5o--3dU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QygEB3AYu2g

I love this point, which is spot-on.

I also love watching these videos whenever somebody links to them, especially the Davidson one. Gives me chills.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Age of voters matters.  If you asked me who was better between DJO and McNeal I'd pick DJO because he was astonishing for my first three years at MU meanwhile I only remember McNeal after deciding on MU my sr year of HS. But on paper McNeal was better thus yes age of voters matters.  

We've all heard you talk about derrick being the problem with this team a million times. Well if vander was here and running point I'd venture to say we'd have been 2nd in the BE.  Gardner couldn't carry a team he was unbelievably efficient but how many times did Gardner drive the hoop? Stutter step to throw the defender and pop out for a jumper? Etc. Gardner was always going to get his but it wasn't gonna be THE huge difference for the team.  While vander was the huge difference on many many occasions.

Why would age of voter matter when Gardner and Blue were in the same class?  

[Galway Eagle]

Why would age of voter matter when Gardner and Blue were in the same class?  

I told him how many of those votes were from current freshmen or sophomores who would obviously place a higher value on DG than Vander

[tower912]

I live in the real world, where emotion and memories exist, that is what I care about.  Not someones eFG% on 2pt shots, outside of 12 feet, but inside of 19 feet, or whatever you are spewing.  Nothing against him, Gardner was a fine player, and was an important player on some great teams.  But in 3, 5, 10 years, will you have one moment of DG, of like damn, remember when Davante Gardner (insert memory).  I won't.

I will vividly remember these two things, have anything close for the big fella?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-nH5o--3dU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QygEB3AYu2g

Watched these.   Then I watched the 4 minute one with the entire comeback against Davidson.   And there,  with just less than a minute to go, is the reason why you can't vote for Gardner.   Just an abysmal defensive move by Davante that leads to Davidson's last easy layup. 

[Aughnanure]

Watched these.   Then I watched the 4 minute one with the entire comeback against Davidson.   And there,  with just less than a minute to go, is the reason why you can't vote for Gardner.   Just an abysmal defensive move by Davante that leads to Davidson's last easy layup. 

Just like how you get Vander's clutch layup along with his abysmal offensive performance against Florida, and generally his entire career until the 2nd half of his junior year. 

[Henry Sugar]

I'm really surprised at how many people are voting for Vander.

Like Reinko pointed out, Vander had signature moments. The closest Gardner gets is the Syracuse game. But that's really just availability bias. Vander had half of a good season in his three years and some clutch shots in that stretch.

Gardner was consistently above average for four years.

Even in Blue's best season, I calculate Gardner as twice as valuable.

[mu_hilltopper]

Find whatever stats you want to try to prove that Gardner was "elite" -- whatever that means.  He had great (maybe even "elite") hands and a big body.  That combination allowed him to be a very effective low post scorer, unless he was matched up against an athletic big...then he had all kinds of trouble.  He was also a very good (maybe even "elite") FT shooter, especially for a guy of his size. 

The question wasn't about who was elite or more elite.  "Who was the better college basketball player?" was the poll question.  Neither was elite. 

I'll say it again for those who've missed it and missed it and missed it. 

Gardner - Ranked in the Top 10 of ALL college basketball players in 2 offensive categories, and in 9 categories in the Top 100 of ALL college basketball players.

Blue - Didn't rank in the Top 100 of ANY categories on the offensive or defensive end. 

If anyone cares about Pudner's "value add" stat:

Blue's rank: 1518, 500, 228
Gardner: 981, 298, 55, 148.

http://valueaddbasketball.com/ballall.html

[ATL MU Warrior]

The question wasn't about who was elite or more elite.  "Who was the better college basketball player?" was the poll question.  Neither was elite. 

I'll say it again for those who've missed it and missed it and missed it. 

Gardner - Ranked in the Top 10 of ALL college basketball players in 2 offensive categories, and in 9 categories in the Top 100 of ALL college basketball players.

Blue - Didn't rank in the Top 100 of ANY categories on the offensive or defensive end. 

If anyone cares about Pudner's "value add" stat:

Blue's rank: 1518, 500, 228
Gardner: 981, 298, 55, 148.

http://valueaddbasketball.com/ballall.html

more numbers...yay!

All I am saying is that Vander is a better all-around basketball player than Davante...by a wide margin.  Not even close IMO.

Maybe that's a separate/different question...

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The question wasn't about who was elite or more elite.  "Who was the better college basketball player?" was the poll question.  Neither was elite. 

I'll say it again for those who've missed it and missed it and missed it. 

Gardner - Ranked in the Top 10 of ALL college basketball players in 2 offensive categories, and in 9 categories in the Top 100 of ALL college basketball players.

Blue - Didn't rank in the Top 100 of ANY categories on the offensive or defensive end. 

If anyone cares about Pudner's "value add" stat:

Blue's rank: 1518, 500, 228
Gardner: 981, 298, 55, 148.

http://valueaddbasketball.com/ballall.html

It's a question of what fans value. I don't like highly specialized players who only play on one side of the court. I'd rather have a player who is average on both ends than a player who is great on one and terrible on the other.

[MU Buff]

Not arguing Vander had a better college career but people saying Vander only had a great second half of his junior year are overdoing it to fit their narrative. He had a great preseason tournament, was the only one who even bothered to show up in the game at Florida, and played great in the win against Wisconsin. We all know everyone played poorly against UWGB.

[Henry Sugar]

Not arguing Vander had a better college career but people saying Vander only had a great second half of his junior year are overdoing it to fit their narrative. He had a great preseason tournament, was the only one who even bothered to show up in the game at Florida, and played great in the win against Wisconsin. We all know everyone played poorly against UWGB.

Here's the "net points" tracker for Vander's junior year. Yes, there are a few good games, but it doesn't really take off until the middle of the season.

[Henry Sugar]

2012-2013 Comparison

[MU Buff]

Here's the "net points" tracker for Vander's junior year. Yes, there are a few good games, but it doesn't really take off until the middle of the season.

I don't really care how he played against Colgate, etc, where we would have won no matter what he did. He played well in our biggest non-conference games.

Having said that, I'd take Gardner for 4 years over Blue for 3.

[MU82]

Vander had half of a good season in his three years and some clutch shots in that stretch.

So now we're down to half a good season. Beautiful. The very definition of selective memory.

Let's see, in the non-conference half of his junior year, Vander averaged a solid 13.4 points over 11 games and had his best games against the real opponents (21 against Butler, 20 against Florida, 17 against Wisconsin and 17 against LSU).

In the first half of the Big East season, he averaged 16.7 points in 9 games and was by far our best player.

In the second half of the Big East season, he had one three-game lull (7-6-6 vs Nova, Cuse and ND) but otherwise crushed it pretty damn good.

Won the St. John's game at the buzzer. Won the Davidson game at the buzzer. Put us on his back against Butler to carry us to the Sweet 16. All the while defending the opponent's best perimeter player.

Wow ... I mean, state your case for Davante all you want. (I have already said I'd take Davante's 4 years over Vander's 3 but that I'd take Vander's junior season.) But at least stick to the effen facts.

What next:

"Oh, it's Davante. Advanced stats say he had the best eFG in the history of mankind. Besides, I don't even count the 2 good games Vander played as a junior. Wait ... did I say 2? I meant to say one half of one good game."

[BallBoy]

We've all heard you talk about derrick being the problem with this team a million times. Well if vander was here and running point I'd venture to say we'd have been 2nd in the BE.  Gardner couldn't carry a team he was unbelievably efficient but how many times did Gardner drive the hoop? Stutter step to throw the defender and pop out for a jumper? Etc. Gardner was always going to get his but it wasn't gonna be THE huge difference for the team.  While vander was the huge difference on many many occasions.

I believe you meant to quote Ners on this. I have defended Wilson as not being the sole cause of of the bad yr. I am also Blue over Mayo and Blue over Gardner.  Not because Gardner didn't do good things but because Blue is did and would take you further.

[Galway Eagle]

I believe you meant to quote Ners on this. I have defended Wilson as not being the sole cause of of the bad yr. I am also Blue over Mayo and Blue over Gardner.  Not because Gardner didn't do good things but because Blue is did and would take you further.

Oops ya my bad

[Dr. Blackheart]

Gardner was the most efficient by far but he wasn't the better college player.  The clip shows why Vander was better and the part of Gardner's game where he was exposed.  Btw, Vander was a 17 year old freshman.

http://youtu.be/x-EdfwyLvZk

[GGGG]

The question wasn't about who was elite or more elite.  "Who was the better college basketball player?" was the poll question.  Neither was elite. 

I'll say it again for those who've missed it and missed it and missed it. 

Gardner - Ranked in the Top 10 of ALL college basketball players in 2 offensive categories, and in 9 categories in the Top 100 of ALL college basketball players.

Blue - Didn't rank in the Top 100 of ANY categories on the offensive or defensive end. 

But this is the problem with defensive stats...they are often very misleading in determining who is a good defensive basketball player.  And Blue was very good on the defensive end.  For all the bitching and moaning about Buzz's defense, Blue seemed to grasp exactly what Buzz wanted early on.  He was in the right place at the right time in front of the right people.

For instance, MU does not win @UW in 2011 without Blue's defense.  At different times during that game he was matched against Jordan Taylor (and got in his head), Ben Brust, and Mike Bruesewitz.  He was phenominal on the defensive end that game.

There is absolutely no doubt that Gardner was better offensively and more efficient.  But Vander Blue was the better player.  I bet if you polled college basketball coaches on the same question, Blue wins in a landslide.

[Johnny B]

But this is the problem with defensive stats...they are often very misleading in determining who is a good defensive basketball player.  And Blue was very good on the defensive end.  For all the bitching and moaning about Buzz's defense, Blue seemed to grasp exactly what Buzz wanted early on.  He was in the right place at the right time in front of the right people.

For instance, MU does not win @UW in 2011 without Blue's defense.  At different times during that game he was matched against Jordan Taylor (and got in his head), Ben Brust, and Mike Bruesewitz.  He was phenominal on the defensive end that game.

There is absolutely no doubt that Gardner was better offensively and more efficient.  But Vander Blue was the better player.  I bet if you polled college basketball coaches on the same question, Blue wins in a landslide.

Am the only one that really did notice elite defence from Vander.

[Henry Sugar]

So now we're down to half a good season. Beautiful. The very definition of selective memory.

Let's see, in the non-conference half of his junior year, Vander averaged a solid 13.4 points over 11 games and had his best games against the real opponents (21 against Butler, 20 against Florida, 17 against Wisconsin and 17 against LSU).

In the first half of the Big East season, he averaged 16.7 points in 9 games and was by far our best player.

In the second half of the Big East season, he had one three-game lull (7-6-6 vs Nova, Cuse and ND) but otherwise crushed it pretty damn good.

Won the St. John's game at the buzzer. Won the Davidson game at the buzzer. Put us on his back against Butler to carry us to the Sweet 16. All the while defending the opponent's best perimeter player.

Wow ... I mean, state your case for Davante all you want. (I have already said I'd take Davante's 4 years over Vander's 3 but that I'd take Vander's junior season.) But at least stick to the effen facts.

Vander had an up and down non-conf season. You cannot cherry-pick only the good performances.

Colgate, 2-8 with 2 TOs
SE LA, 1-7 with 3 TOs
Against USC in the Maui final, 3-11
At UWGB, 2-10 with 2 TOs

In three of those games (not SE LA), he was the worst player on the team. Yes, he played well against FL, Miss State, and UW, but Vander had just as many terrible performances early as good ones.

Vander's season starts to take off with the North Carolina Central game (right before conference play). It was a very good half-season.