Vander Blue versus Davante Gardner

[Henry Sugar]

I will correct a previous statement. Vander also had a strong finish to the 2H of conference play his sophomore year. He was pretty bad before that though, having a long stretch (9 games) where he was negative in every game.

As a freshman, I would argue he was the worst player on the team. He was Jake Thomas bad as a freshman.

So if I'm being fair:

Freshman - Terrible. Arguably the worst player on the team. He was given too many minutes.
Sophomore - Good against cupcakes. Had a long stretch (16 games) of struggling against good teams. Finished the season strong.
Junior - Inconsistent non-conference. Some very good games. Some terrible games. Strong conference season and post-season.

[ATL MU Warrior]

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.

Meh,

Every player has off nights.  Even the "offensively elite" Davante Gardner had a half dozen complete stinkers this past season.  Does that invalidate his eliteness?

[Henry Sugar]

Just to remind some people of high-quality Gardner performances his junior year.

LSU, 5-6, 9-9 FT, 5 steals, 19 pts, 3 boards
UConn, 4-7, 10-10 FT, 6 rebounds, 3 blocks, 18 points
Seton Hall, 5-8, 7-8 FT, 5 rebounds, 17 points
at Cincy, 1-8, 13-15 FT, 11 rebounds, 3 TO, 15 points
Prov, 4-8, 5-5 FT, 5 rebounds, 13 points
at Seton Hall, 6-10, 6-7 FT, 5 rebounds, 18 points
Syracuse, 7-7, 12-13, 8 rebounds, 26 points

Gardner was both the punishing running back grabbing first downs to run out the clock, as well as the offensive line blocking for that RB. He was above average for four years.

Not to mention fans used to chant /for/ Gardner and he got t-shirts made about him.

[77ncaachamps]

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."

I'll take Vander's senior year over Davante's freshman year.

[Henry Sugar]

Meh,

Every player has off nights.  Even the "offensively elite" Davante Gardner had a half dozen complete stinkers this past season.  Does that invalidate his eliteness?

Vander consistently had nights where he was the worst player on the team due to missed shots or turnovers. I count six his junior year alone (Colgate, USC, @UWGB, Providence, @Georgetown, ND).

That's not an off night. That's "the worst player on the team".

[Johnny B]

Vander consistently had nights where he was the worst player on the team due to missed shots or turnovers. I count six his junior year alone (Colgate, USC, @UWGB, Providence, @Georgetown, ND).

That's not an off night. That's "the worst player on the team".

Vander was never the worst
Player on the team.

[Henry Sugar]

Vander was never the worst
Player on the team.

Go look at the box scores for those games and then come back. While you're at it, check out the Nova and Syracuse games too.

[MU82]

Just to remind some people of high-quality Gardner performances his junior year.

LSU, 5-6, 9-9 FT, 5 steals, 19 pts, 3 boards
UConn, 4-7, 10-10 FT, 6 rebounds, 3 blocks, 18 points
Seton Hall, 5-8, 7-8 FT, 5 rebounds, 17 points
at Cincy, 1-8, 13-15 FT, 11 rebounds, 3 TO, 15 points
Prov, 4-8, 5-5 FT, 5 rebounds, 13 points
at Seton Hall, 6-10, 6-7 FT, 5 rebounds, 18 points
Syracuse, 7-7, 12-13, 8 rebounds, 26 points

Gardner was both the punishing running back grabbing first downs to run out the clock, as well as the offensive line blocking for that RB. He was above average for four years.

Not to mention fans used to chant /for/ Gardner and he got t-shirts made about him.

OK, are we really going to do this? Do I really have to cut down a player I actually liked and appreciated (Gardner) to counteract your cherry-picked stats? I guess, so here's a huge sampling of performances from Gardner's "punishing running back" of a junior year ...

Florida - 6 pts, 1 reb. Green Bay 7-2.

5-game stretch midway through BE season: 4 pts-2 pts-8 pts-13 pts-2 pts - total for the 5 games (USF-LV-USF-DeP-GT): 29 points, 9 turnovers, 14 rebounds.

Later in BE season, wrapped around his outstanding performance against Syracuse: Nova 2 pts, 1 reb; ND 5 pts, 2 reb; Rutgers 4pts, 3 reb.

In NCAAs: Davidson 9 pts, 2 reb, 4 fouls; Butler 8 pts, 4 reb, 3 TOs.

Oh, and he could barely play 5 or 6 straight minutes without needing a rest.

Vander had a very good junior season, with only 8 single-digit scoring games all year. He was by far our best perimeter defender and came up huge in the clutch. He averaged 34 minutes in BE play and could have played more because he was in extraordinary physical shape. He played all 80 minutes in the two NCAA games in D.C.

To say he was anything less than very good by focusing on a half-dozen of his worst games shows a general lack of understanding of basketball - not to mention what willie would call a "hate woody" regarding Vander.

You know, I voted for Gardner because he was around for a whole 'nother year. But now, after doing all this research to refute your flawed arguments, I'm starting to think that was a mistake.

[Johnny B]

Go look at the box scores for those games and then come back. While you're at it, check out the Nova and Syracuse games too.

Check the box scores for Derrick Wilson,Juan, Jamal ferguson, Steve Taylor in those games and comon back.

[Johnny B]

OK, are we really going to do this? Do I really have to cut down a player I actually liked and appreciated (Gardner) to counteract your cherry-picked stats? I guess, so here's a huge sampling of performances from Gardner's "punishing running back" of a junior year ...

Florida - 6 pts, 1 reb. Green Bay 7-2.

5-game stretch midway through BE season: 4 pts-2 pts-8 pts-13 pts-2 pts - total for the 5 games (USF-LV-USF-DeP-GT): 29 points, 9 turnovers, 14 rebounds.

Later in BE season, wrapped around his outstanding performance against Syracuse: Nova 2 pts, 1 reb; ND 5 pts, 2 reb; Rutgers 4pts, 3 reb.

In NCAAs: Davidson 9 pts, 2 reb, 4 fouls; Butler 8 pts, 4 reb, 3 TOs.

Oh, and he could barely play 5 or 6 straight minutes without needing a rest.

Vander had a very good junior season, with only 8 single-digit scoring games all year. He was by far our best perimeter defender and came up huge in the clutch. He averaged 34 minutes in BE play and could have played more because he was in extraordinary physical shape. He played all 80 minutes in the two NCAA games in D.C.

To say he was anything less than very good by focusing on a half-dozen of his worst games shows a general lack of understanding of basketball - not to mention what willie would call a "hate woody" regarding Vander.

You know, I voted for Gardner because he was around for a whole 'nother year. But now, after doing all this research to refute your flawed arguments, I'm starting to think that was a mistake.

I'm feeling the same. I love davante, but I wish I voted for blue.

[NersEllenson]

I get a kick out of guys who try to discredit Gardner for not being a playmaker - he wasn't a freaking guard.  Guards have the ball in their hands a hell of a lot more than a big/post player.  Post players are ALWAYS dependent upon guards getting them the ball, to be able to then go to work.  A guard can go to work anytime they want.  

Gardner was a hell of a lot more reliable and consistent in his production at MU over his 4 years than was Blue.  And I tend to value stats (so long as the sample size is relevant), to back up what my eyes tell me as well - Gardner was a better player than Blue.  And, I suspect if you asked opposing coaches which player they game planned more for trying to take away - it was Davante Gardner without question.

[Johnny B]

I get a kick out of guys who try to discredit Gardner for not being a playmaker - he wasn't a freaking guard.  Guards have the ball in their hands a hell of a lot more than a big/post player.  Post players are ALWAYS dependent upon guards getting them the ball, to be able to then go to work.  A guard can go to work anytime they want.  

Gardner was a hell of a lot more reliable and consistent in his production at MU over his 4 years than was Blue.  And I tend to value stats (so long as the sample size is relevant), to back up what my eyes tell me as well - Gardner was a better player than Blue.  And, I suspect if you asked opposing coaches which player they game planned more for trying to take away - it was Davante Gardner without question.

Nobody is discrediting gardener, we're simply
Debating about them. The thread is called gander VS devante
Right?

[NersEllenson]

Nobody is discrediting gardener, we're simply
Debating about them. The thread is called gander VS devante
Right?

I guess you can say that...if you want to split hairs - The reality is that in such a topic, both sides are making points to support their case...and in so doing, are discrediting the other person they didn't vote for.

The point of my post is that you can't say Gardner wasn't a playmaker, or expect him to have some of the signature moments that Blue had as a guard - such as against Davidson, St. Johns etc...by simple virtue of their positions.  Rarely do any back to the basket players have game winning shots.  I mean how many game winners did Shaq have?  A guard is by function of their position SUPPOSED TO BE A PLAYMAKER. 

It would be like me being critical of Blue for never developing a post game while at MU.  Why didn't Vander ever command the ball on the block and go to work?  You can't be critical of Gardner for rarely taking someone off the dribble, or doing much from the perimeter - as that isn't what a guy in his position does...or needs to do...when they already are the 10th best player in ALL of college basketball as far as True Shooting Percentage...

[MU82]

I get a kick out of guys who try to discredit Gardner for not being a playmaker - he wasn't a freaking guard.  

And, I suspect if you asked opposing coaches which player they game planned more for trying to take away - it was Davante Gardner without question.

On the first sentence, I never once mentioned Gardner's playmaking. It would have been nice if that awesome force of a center grabbed a few more rebounds, though.

On the second, maybe you're right. And maybe the coaches at St. John's, Davidson and Butler wish they had spent a little more time game-planning to take away Vander, because he kicked their arses.

Against Butler, while Davante was going for 8 points (1-for-4), 4 rebs (0 defensive boards), 0 blocks and 3 TOs, Vander was carrying us to the Sweet 16 with 29 pts (9-15, including 3-4 from arc), and 4 steals. I guess the great Brad Stevens was focusing on Davante!

OK, I'm done here. This is a dopey argument. One guy was a center who needed guards to get him the ball and won nothing as a senior when he had lousy guards. The other guy was a guard who took 2+ years to find his stride but then became a very good player who came through in the clutch.

Both had strengths, both had flaws and their games were so different that comparing them is foolish. I'm already wishing I had the time back that I spent on this subject.

[forgetful]

I get a kick out of guys who try to discredit Gardner for not being a playmaker - he wasn't a freaking guard.  Guards have the ball in their hands a hell of a lot more than a big/post player.  Post players are ALWAYS dependent upon guards getting them the ball, to be able to then go to work.  A guard can go to work anytime they want.  

Gardner was a hell of a lot more reliable and consistent in his production at MU over his 4 years than was Blue.  And I tend to value stats (so long as the sample size is relevant), to back up what my eyes tell me as well - Gardner was a better player than Blue.  And, I suspect if you asked opposing coaches which player they game planned more for trying to take away - it was Davante Gardner without question.

Couldn't you use this argument the other way…

I get a kick out of guys saying Vander was more inconsistent - he was a freaking guard - guards are required to have their hands on the ball all the time.  In order to score they have to create for themselves.  That leads to more room for error and an easier job to disrupt their game leading to more inconsistencies.  Post players can rely on the guards creating opportunities for them, they just have to catch the ball and put it in the hoop.

That is much easier to be consistent with.

Also, if you want to know who the coaches game planned against.  Two years ago it was Vander or at times Gardner.  Last year, several high profile coaches have admitted, the one player they game planned against to make sure they didn't get any opportunities was Jake….game plans don't always reference the best player, rather often the easiest person to take out of their game to disrupt the overall offense.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Gardner will be hard to duplicate in Marquette's offensive efficiency record books...but I put up the Davidson tape because of his inability to play defense, not his playmaking ability.  The big man couldn't even consistently crack the starting lineup.

For me, to be better, he wasn't close to a two way player, which is why he went undrafted.  That and his lackluster senior year where he didn't grab the leadership reigns, Buzz be damned.

[NersEllenson]

Couldn't you use this argument the other way…

I get a kick out of guys saying Vander was more inconsistent - he was a freaking guard - guards are required to have their hands on the ball all the time.  In order to score they have to create for themselves.  That leads to more room for error and an easier job to disrupt their game leading to more inconsistencies.  Post players can rely on the guards creating opportunities for them, they just have to catch the ball and put it in the hoop.

That is much easier to be consistent with.

Also, if you want to know who the coaches game planned against.  Two years ago it was Vander or at times Gardner.  Last year, several high profile coaches have admitted, the one player they game planned against to make sure they didn't get any opportunities was Jake….game plans don't always reference the best player, rather often the easiest person to take out of their game to disrupt the overall offense.

Why has it been so difficult for MU to find a good post player for the last 30 years?  They are a lot more rare than good guards...if its as simple as get some good guards...and dump off to a Dwight Burke for an easy dunk or layup...fine..I'd go along with your point.  Regarding Blue - he wasn't a very good guard as far as being a playmaker for others...though the Mayo haters wanted to call Todd selfish...he assisted at a better rate than Vander Blue.

And I'll guarantee you Davante Gardner put a hell of a lot more fear into opposing coaches than Jake Thomas.  Of course you know Jake is a 3point shooter..and you try to limit that...and that is a lot easier to limit, than a 295 bull that can bully his way to the basket and either make the shot, miss the shot and get his own rebound, or get fouled and then convert at 80% from the line.

And game plans generally do try to limit the best player on the other team.  Period.  You want to make the other role players beat you.  Why?  Because they aren't as damn good.

[Texas Western]

Why has it been so difficult for MU to find a good post player for the last 30 years?  They are a lot more rare than good guards...if its as simple as get some good guards...and dump off to a Dwight Burke for an easy dunk or layup...fine..I'd go along with your point.  Regarding Blue - he wasn't a very good guard as far as being a playmaker for others...though the Mayo haters wanted to call Todd selfish...he assisted at a better rate than Vander Blue.

And I'll guarantee you Davante Gardner put a hell of a lot more fear into opposing coaches than Jake Thomas.  Of course you know Jake is a 3point shooter..and you try to limit that...and that is a lot easier to limit, than a 295 bull that can bully his way to the basket and either make the shot, miss the shot and get his own rebound, or get fouled and then convert at 80% from the line.

And game plans generally do try to limit the best player on the other team.  Period.  You want to make the other role players beat you.  Why?  Because they aren't as damn good.

I agree

[Wojo'sMojo]

Couldn't you use this argument the other way…

I get a kick out of guys saying Vander was more inconsistent - he was a freaking guard - guards are required to have their hands on the ball all the time.  In order to score they have to create for themselves.  That leads to more room for error and an easier job to disrupt their game leading to more inconsistencies.  Post players can rely on the guards creating opportunities for them, they just have to catch the ball and put it in the hoop.

That is much easier to be consistent with.

Also, if you want to know who the coaches game planned against.  Two years ago it was Vander or at times Gardner.  Last year, several high profile coaches have admitted, the one player they game planned against to make sure they didn't get any opportunities was Jake….game plans don't always reference the best player, rather often the easiest person to take out of their game to disrupt the overall offense.

I'm just curious, who are these high profile coaches who admitted their game plan was to stop Jake?

[BallBoy]

I get a kick out of guys who try to discredit Gardner for not being a playmaker - he wasn't a freaking guard.  Guards have the ball in their hands a hell of a lot more than a big/post player.  Post players are ALWAYS dependent upon guards getting them the ball, to be able to then go to work.  A guard can go to work anytime they want.  

Gardner was a hell of a lot more reliable and consistent in his production at MU over his 4 years than was Blue.  And I tend to value stats (so long as the sample size is relevant), to back up what my eyes tell me as well - Gardner was a better player than Blue.  And, I suspect if you asked opposing coaches which player they game planned more for trying to take away - it was Davante Gardner without question.

I think this is the point many of us have been making for the last several pages. Davante was a good post player when Marquette has had zero post presence but he needed others to make him successful. He needed a Vander. Buzz made Gardner successful because he required paint touches and he was successful when there where players who could spread the floor. So if the question is who do you want on your team you have to take the guy who can carry you on his own and that is Vander.  College is a guards game.

Davante was more consistent than blue but it was because he did his one thing very well. Blue would drive to the hoop, do a jump shot off the dribble and shoot the three. He was more versatile.

If I knew I had a Wade on the team then I would pick Gardner but if it was last years team plus/minus Blue or Gardner I would go with Blue. He could move to PG. He could replace Thomas.

Mayo is a pick up basketball player. Head down look to score and don't play in a system. And when the team stopped playing a system last yr Mayo had his best games down the stretch. However that is not sustainable in D1 and it showed last yr.   one fact that hasn't been brought up is that mayo was a full yr older than Blue so when you compare yr to yr Mayo had as advantage of more time on earth playing.

[forgetful]

Why has it been so difficult for MU to find a good post player for the last 30 years?  They are a lot more rare than good guards...if its as simple as get some good guards...and dump off to a Dwight Burke for an easy dunk or layup...fine..I'd go along with your point.  Regarding Blue - he wasn't a very good guard as far as being a playmaker for others...though the Mayo haters wanted to call Todd selfish...he assisted at a better rate than Vander Blue.

And I'll guarantee you Davante Gardner put a hell of a lot more fear into opposing coaches than Jake Thomas.  Of course you know Jake is a 3point shooter..and you try to limit that...and that is a lot easier to limit, than a 295 bull that can bully his way to the basket and either make the shot, miss the shot and get his own rebound, or get fouled and then convert at 80% from the line.

And game plans generally do try to limit the best player on the other team.  Period.  You want to make the other role players beat you.  Why?  Because they aren't as damn good.

They also easily shut down Gardner by rotating a defender to help double.  He was just as easy to game plan for.  The difference was if a guy like Jake gets hot, the whole offense is dangerous and harder to stop.  If Gardner gets his, no one else gets going.  Better to stop the guard.

And also, by letting Gardner get his, you assure yourself that he is playing on the defensive end, where he will give many of them back.

Gardner was the best offensive big man that I can remember since Damon Key (who was a much better version of Gardner), but he was a poor defender and prone to getting easily frustrated/disrupted by big defenders.

As for the coaches, I remember for sure, George Thompson and Jay Wright.  I know there were others but don't remember the precise games.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Vander consistently had nights where he was the worst player on the team due to missed shots or turnovers. I count six his junior year alone (Colgate, USC, @UWGB, Providence, @Georgetown, ND).

That's not an off night. That's "the worst player on the team".

Give me a effin break.  That claim is just silly.

[ATL MU Warrior]

OK, are we really going to do this? Do I really have to cut down a player I actually liked and appreciated (Gardner) to counteract your cherry-picked stats? I guess, so here's a huge sampling of performances from Gardner's "punishing running back" of a junior year ...

Florida - 6 pts, 1 reb. Green Bay 7-2.

5-game stretch midway through BE season: 4 pts-2 pts-8 pts-13 pts-2 pts - total for the 5 games (USF-LV-USF-DeP-GT): 29 points, 9 turnovers, 14 rebounds.

Later in BE season, wrapped around his outstanding performance against Syracuse: Nova 2 pts, 1 reb; ND 5 pts, 2 reb; Rutgers 4pts, 3 reb.

In NCAAs: Davidson 9 pts, 2 reb, 4 fouls; Butler 8 pts, 4 reb, 3 TOs.

Oh, and he could barely play 5 or 6 straight minutes without needing a rest.

Vander had a very good junior season, with only 8 single-digit scoring games all year. He was by far our best perimeter defender and came up huge in the clutch. He averaged 34 minutes in BE play and could have played more because he was in extraordinary physical shape. He played all 80 minutes in the two NCAA games in D.C.

To say he was anything less than very good by focusing on a half-dozen of his worst games shows a general lack of understanding of basketball - not to mention what willie would call a "hate woody" regarding Vander.

You know, I voted for Gardner because he was around for a whole 'nother year. But now, after doing all this research to refute your flawed arguments, I'm starting to think that was a mistake.

thank you for pointing out the obvious.  Davante had many games where he was a non-factor offensively, just as Vander did.  Somehow, he gets a pass while Vander gets the ridicule as being the "worst player on the team"...pure garbage.  It's hard to fathom...it really is.

[Henry Sugar]

Give me a effin break.  That claim is just silly.

Excellent point. Missed shots and turnovers no longer matter, right?

[Henry Sugar]

OK, are we really going to do this? Do I really have to cut down a player I actually liked and appreciated (Gardner) to counteract your cherry-picked stats? I guess, so here's a huge sampling of performances from Gardner's "punishing running back" of a junior year ...

Florida - 6 pts, 1 reb. Green Bay 7-2.

5-game stretch midway through BE season: 4 pts-2 pts-8 pts-13 pts-2 pts - total for the 5 games (USF-LV-USF-DeP-GT): 29 points, 9 turnovers, 14 rebounds.

Later in BE season, wrapped around his outstanding performance against Syracuse: Nova 2 pts, 1 reb; ND 5 pts, 2 reb; Rutgers 4pts, 3 reb.

In NCAAs: Davidson 9 pts, 2 reb, 4 fouls; Butler 8 pts, 4 reb, 3 TOs.

Oh, and he could barely play 5 or 6 straight minutes without needing a rest.

Vander had a very good junior season, with only 8 single-digit scoring games all year. He was by far our best perimeter defender and came up huge in the clutch. He averaged 34 minutes in BE play and could have played more because he was in extraordinary physical shape. He played all 80 minutes in the two NCAA games in D.C.

To say he was anything less than very good by focusing on a half-dozen of his worst games shows a general lack of understanding of basketball - not to mention what willie would call a "hate woody" regarding Vander.

You know, I voted for Gardner because he was around for a whole 'nother year. But now, after doing all this research to refute your flawed arguments, I'm starting to think that was a mistake.

I was trying to be positive with that post. It's easy to point out the three game winners for Blue. People seemed to be forgetting the many times where Gardner was huge for the team.

Of course Gardner had bad games. Neither he nor Blue were good enough. He just didn't have as many, or at the level, of Blue.

What I find funny is that we both think Gardner was the better college player.

Here's my simplistic breakdown
Freshman year - Gardner was better
Sophomore year - Gardner was better
Junior year - Gardner was better (but I understand why people might say Blue was better)
Senior year - Gardner was better