Turnovers

[HoopsterBC]

Until this team decides to stop throwing the ball all over the place or dribbling the ball off there legs,  this year is over.  20 turnovers a game is a minimum of 20 points
a game added to MU's score.  Until they figure that out, you can talk all you want about improvement, moral victories, buttom line there losses.  Somehow Wojo
has to figure out an offense that simplifies plays, slow it down, do something, after 24 games I do not see much improvement there.  I was taught to take the ball to
the free throw line on the fastbreak and then make a decision, to either pass to the open man or shoot a free throw.  That is a simple drill that should be ingrained in
there head.  Not sure what Cohen was thinking, but maybe it is about coaching.

[mileskishnish72]

Agree. Wojo wants to open things up, but with this callow group I think they might do better with a slower pace, valuing each possession, like Brent did with the midgets.

[connie]

The converse is that you are asking a turnover prone team to play more games that are designed to come down to fewer possessions, magnifying the impact of possessions, and therefore the turnovers.

[Big Papi]

That this is a problem that has not been fixed is a huge disappointment.  Lack of a good point guard is the main reason. 

Wojo needs to recruit a big time point guard to fix this problem long term.  He needs to adjust his offensive philosophy to fix the short term but that has not happened. 

Feel bad for Henry.  No way should this team not be in contention for a big dance bid. 

[tower912]

Young team=turnovers.  This team has come miles since November.  Wojo acknowledges that turnovers are the Achilles heel of this team.  Two freshman point guards, one who has never played the position.   A high usage freshman big prone to traveling and pushing off when defended by more athletic forwards.  Turnovers are part of their learning.

[BlindboyPatSmith]

By this time in the season, a former coach would have said 'they are NOT freshmen anymore'

[Dawson Rental]

Until this team decides to stop throwing the ball all over the place or dribbling the ball off there legs,  this year is over.  20 turnovers a game is a minimum of 20 points
a game added to MU's score.  Until they figure that out, you can talk all you want about improvement, moral victories, buttom line there losses.  Somehow Wojo
has to figure out an offense that simplifies plays, slow it down, do something, after 24 games I do not see much improvement there.  I was taught to take the ball to
the free throw line on the fastbreak and then make a decision, to either pass to the open man or shoot a free throw.  That is a simple drill that should be ingrained in
there head.  Not sure what Cohen was thinking, but maybe it is about coaching.

The most annoyed I got during the game was when the play-by-play guy would say that Marquette is one of the youngest teams in the conference.  If you're doing play-by-play do the research to discover that MU is the eighth youngest team in Division I.

Simplify the offense?  Really???  So leading the sixth ranked team in the country for over three quarters of the game - on the road- with the eighth youngest team out of 351, isn't good enough for you, and you'd cut short the learning process and switch the offense away from the player's strengths to try and make things better?  I'd much rather have a team that's playing loose and making and learning from mistakes than a moribund one that is terrified of screwing up.

I can just wonder about what kind of post you'd make after MU got its turnovers down to single digits in games while scoring only 52 points a game and losing by 20 plus points.

Rebuilding years - and the mistakes that occur during them - are the dues you pay to get a team capable of of contending for a championship.

[Marcus92]

As noted above, this is a team-wide issue — not one that lies only with the point guard position.

We've seen way too many unforced turnovers (balls lost out of bounds without a defender involved), traveling and carrying calls. Entry and outlet passes have been inconsistent, leading to too many steals and balls thrown out of bounds. And although Wojo encourages aggressive play and driving to the basket, we've got to cut down on charges.

We don't have to be the best team in the Big East at protecting the ball. Xavier averages 13.0 turnovers per game, fifth in the conference. But we can't be the worst. Imagine if we had only committed 13 turnovers instead of 20 in yesterday's game. Totally different story.

[Dawson Rental]

As noted above, this is a team-wide issue — not one that lies only with the point guard position.

We've seen way too many unforced turnovers (balls lost out of bounds without a defender involved), traveling and carrying calls. Entry and outlet passes have been inconsistent, leading to too many steals and balls thrown out of bounds. And although Wojo encourages aggressive play and driving to the basket, we've got to cut down on charges.

We don't have to be the best team in the Big East at protecting the ball. Xavier averages 13.0 turnovers per game, fifth in the conference. But we can't be the worst. Imagine if we had only committed 13 turnovers instead of 20 in yesterday's game. Totally different story.

With this team, how would you get from 20 to 13 turnovers?  My argument is that if you pull in the reins to accomplish that, you take so much pressure off a defense like Xavier's that you pay too heavy a discount in points per possession, and you are probably worse off in the final score.

I'd much rather watch an aggressive offense, its more exciting, and its gives MU an occasional shot against a superior opponent.  I'd much rather watch a team that loses a lead in the last eight minutes of a close game than one that is less variable, but at the cost of never really being a threat to win after the first eight minutes of the first half.

The way I see it is MU's offense is dangerous to opponents and occasionally to MU.  If you keep teaching that, and over time, with experience, danger to MU decreases and the danger to the opponent increases.  I believe that I am not alone among Scoopers in believing that that process is already underway.

[Marcus92]

The most annoyed I got during the game was when the play-by-play guy would say that Marquette is one of the youngest teams in the conference. If you're doing play-by-play do the research to discover that MU is the eighth youngest team in Division I.

The quality of the broadcast teams at Fox Sports 1 varies wildly. As a whole, I haven't been impressed. I've even put games on mute for stretches because the commentary seems so inane or ill-informed. That said, I think it's an improvement from last season.

[Marcus92]

With this team, how would you get from 20 to 13 turnovers?  My argument is that if you pull in the reins to accomplish that, you take so much pressure off a defense like Xavier's that you pay too heavy a discount in points per possession, and you are probably worse off in the final score...with experience, danger to MU decreases and the danger to the opponent increases.  I believe that I am not alone among Scoopers in believing that that process is already underway.

Good question and great post. Think I agree with everything here. The team is playing the style Wojo wants (and a style that fits our talent). But I know Wojo is not happy with averaging 15 turnovers a game. He's said so repeatedly. In my opinion, it's the single biggest factor holding the team back right now.

Truth is, there's likely no simple answer for bringing that number down before the end of the season. Sometimes the best lessons are the hardest ones. Marquette is learning what kind of effort it takes to play in the Big East. I'm encouraged by the toughness and resilience of this team. Next they need to learn how to play smarter.

[tower912]

Bo Ryan wanted to avoid turnovers in his offense.  His teams valued the ball.  How many freshman guards saw big minutes under him?   Many people don't want to accept the correlation between inexperience and turnovers.  Watch other games.  Watch frosh get pulled for dumb plays and listen to the announcer make the connection.  Marquette is no different.   Understand the game. 

[wadesworld]

People want to watch us slow the pace and turn into a half court offense?  Our transition game is where we are at our best, and it's not even close.  If we slowed the game down, walked the ball up the court, and didn't attack the rim simply because we wanted to drop our turnover average by 2 per game we'd lose games by 30 instead of 8.

[Marcus92]

People want to watch us slow the pace and turn into a half court offense?

That's not what I want. Like I stated above, that's not what Wojo wants, either. He wants his team to push the pace and be aggressive. I enjoy that style of play and have no issues with our pace. But he's also talked repeatedly about giving away too many possessions.

Dribbling the ball off your foot doesn't have anything to do with pace. Neither does getting called for carrying the ball. Or throwing an outlet pass over the head of the receiver. Or passing into a double team on the low block. Those are mental errors. Cut down and those and you'll start to see a big difference on the scoreboard.

[wadesworld]

That's not what I want. Like I stated above, that's not what Wojo wants, either. He wants his team to push the pace and be aggressive. I enjoy that style of play and have no issues with our pace. But he's also talked repeatedly about giving away too many possessions.

Dribbling the ball off your foot doesn't have anything to do with pace. Neither does getting called for carrying the ball. Or throwing an outlet pass over the head of the receiver. Or passing into a double team on the low block. Those are mental errors. Cut down and those and you'll start to see a big difference on the scoreboard.

Right.  We have a young, inexperienced team who is just now starting to figure out the physicality and the speed of high level division one basketball.  It's unfortunate Hank wouldn't be coming into his 1 year with Marquette next year, because with everyone else having a year under their belt plus this year's Hank we would be damn good next year.  As it is, we are an exciting but inconsistent team.

[Stretchdeltsig]

Agree thAt the Fox1 broadcast team are not good.  Brian Anderson is terrible.  He always talks up the opponent whether it's a Marquette or Brewer game and he is very boring.  He should be fired.  We deserve better.

[GGGG]

Agree thAt the Fox1 broadcast team are not good.  Brian Anderson is terrible.  He always talks up the opponent whether it's a Marquette or Brewer game and he is very boring.  He should be fired.  We deserve better.

I like Anderson.

[DaCoach]

The team had 7 T/O in the last 1:30 of each half. Wilson and Cheatham combined for 11 of them for the game. And this isn't the first game that the team wilted at the end of a game and half. Regardless of Carter's lack of consistent offense I'd much rather have him on the court at the end of games. Haniff just isn't a PG.

[brewcity77]

Simplify the offense?  Really???  So leading the sixth ranked team in the country for over three quarters of the game - on the road- with the eighth youngest team out of 351, isn't good enough for you, and you'd cut short the learning process and switch the offense away from the player's strengths to try and make things better?

LOLOLOLOLOL

Player's strengths? Are you out of your mind? We don't play at all to our players' strengths on offense.

[Dawson Rental]

LOLOLOLOLOL

Player's strengths? Are you out of your mind? We don't play at all to our players' strengths on offense.

Care to elaborate?

[brewcity77]

Care to elaborate?

Sure, happy to.
.

• Tempo: We play a high-tempo offense. The 71.2 possessions we average is 81st in the country. However, while we are in the top-23% in terms of playing fast, we are among the worst (316) in turnover percentage. By playing at a fast pace, we are increasing the odds we will turn it over a ton, hence why we are averaging over 15 TOs per game. With a young team and two of our primary PG options turning the ball over at rates of 27.8% and 30.5%, we are literally giving games away.
  
• Efficiency: Our highest usage player is Henry Ellenson, who takes 28.1% of our shots when he is on the court. But of our top-5 players in percent of shots taken (Duane, Jajuan, Haanif, Luke) Henry is by far our least efficient shooter with an eFG% of 46.6%. Everyone else is over 53.6%. In fact, based on current numbers, our top-5 scoring options have an almost direct inverse proportion when you compare eFG% and Shot percentage. Best to worst eFG% we have 1) Luke 59.7, 2) Haanif 54.4, 3) Jajuan 54.5, 4) Duane 53.6, 5) Henry 46.6. And lowest to highest shot percentage we have 5) Luke 19.3, 4) Haanif 19.4, 3) Jajuan 22.7, 2) Duane 23.9, 1) Henry 28.1. So basically, our least effective players take the highest number of shots and our most effective players take the fewest shots.
  
• Primary Option eFG%: The counter argument to this is that when players take more shots, the numbers will come back to the mean, while it's easier to be high efficiency with a smaller number of shots. That's all well and good, but Henry is the first player since Lazar Hayward in 2010 to lead Marquette in shot percentage with an eFG% under 50.0, and Lazar was still well ahead of Henry at 49.5%. Bottom line, we are running the offense through the wrong guy.
  
• Setting Luke up for Failure: Luke is horribly misused. It isn't just that we sometimes struggle getting the ball in to him, but when we do get it in, at least 2-3 times per game we completely clear out the side once the entry pass is made. That allows for easy double-teams and takes away Luke's passing ability by feeding it in and kicking it back out. If he consistently got shots up and our guards crashed the boards from the other side, it might work, but they don't. Of our five primary guards and wings, only Jajuan has an offensive rebounding percentage over 2.5%. There is virtually no chance Duane, Haney, Sandy, or Traci will get to the rebound after clearing out.
  
• Three-Point Takers: Henry should not be second on the team in three point attempts. Two reasons, first his 29.3% success rate is the lowest on the team among players that have taken at least 20 threes (and by a decent margin, Traci is next at 33.3%). Second, Henry is one of two players on the team that is actually a good offensive rebounder (Luke the other). When he shoots from the perimeter, it takes one of our only real chances of getting offensive rebounds away from the area where he can get those rebounds. His three point attempts decrease our chances of scoring and our chances of getting to the offensive glass. It's even worse when he takes a three and Luke isn't on the floor. I sincerely hope this is being addressed as Henry is picking his shots better recently, shooting 44.4% beyond the arc in his past 7 games on 2.6 attempts per game after shooting 24.6% on 3.4 attempts over the first 17 games.

.
So in a nutshell, we play a fast-paced offense with a roster that would be better suited to slow the game down to increase efficiency and reduce the number of possessions thus giving us a better chance of being in the game late. We have the wrong guys taking shots, running the offense through the worst options and putting our highest volume and highest efficiency players in positions where they are less likely to succeed. And we compound our problems by putting our worst long-ball threat and second best offensive rebounder on the arc where we increase the odds of missing shots while decreasing the odds of getting offensive rebounds.

My guess is that Wojo wants to play an up-tempo offense predicated on turnovers and long-range shooting, but right now, we are too sloppy and inefficient to make that work. Hopefully in the years to come the bumps we suffer this year will pay off, but saying that making changes would be shifting the offense away from the players' strengths is completely false, because right now the last thing we are doing is tailoring the offense to the players' current strengths.

[GGGG]

Let's not be a slave to "efficiency" to determine how to run the offense. Descriptive not necessarily prescriptive.

[brewcity77]

Let's not be a slave to "efficiency" to determine how to run the offense. Descriptive not necessarily prescriptive.

Do I place a high value on efficiency? Sure. But my issue is that our staff almost deliberately seems to put a reverse value on it.

And this isn't just efficiency. This is saying that taking a young, turnover-prone team and having them run at a fast-break pace in a defensive-minded league is a bad idea. Bailing out on your center as soon as you get the ball in to him, leaving him in a double-team without an outlet pass is a bad idea. And yes, also having your least effective scorers take the highest volume of shots is a bad idea.

Against top-200 opposition, in games that were played at a pace of 72 or fewer possessions in regulation (including both IUPUI and ASU), we are 5-3. In games played at a pace of 73 or more possessions in regulation, we are 1-6. So if we are more likely to lose as the number of possessions goes up, why on earth are we playing a fast-paced offense? It makes no sense and completely goes against our players' strengths.

EDIT: Also, one of those two slow-paced losses was the DePaul game, decided on the final shot, while the sole fast-paced win was the 1-point victory over LSU. So we are 1 point in either direction from being 6-2 in slow paced games and 0-7 in faster paced games.

[BM1090]

Do I place a high value on efficiency? Sure. But my issue is that our staff almost deliberately seems to put a reverse value on it.

And this isn't just efficiency. This is saying that taking a young, turnover-prone team and having them run at a fast-break pace in a defensive-minded league is a bad idea. Bailing out on your center as soon as you get the ball in to him, leaving him in a double-team without an outlet pass is a bad idea. And yes, also having your least effective scorers take the highest volume of shots is a bad idea.

Against top-200 opposition, in games that were played at a pace of 72 or fewer possessions in regulation (including both IUPUI and ASU), we are 5-3. In games played at a pace of 73 or more possessions in regulation, we are 1-6. So if we are more likely to lose as the number of possessions goes up, why on earth are we playing a fast-paced offense? It makes no sense and completely goes against our players' strengths.

EDIT: Also, one of those two slow-paced losses was the DePaul game, decided on the final shot, while the sole fast-paced win was the 1-point victory over LSU. So we are 1 point in either direction from being 6-2 in slow paced games and 0-7 in faster paced games.

But if that's the way that they want to play, they have 2 freshmen and 1 sophomore guard who will get used to playing fast paced and improve in the system over the next 3/4 years. Carter and Cheatham with 4 years  in the same system should pay dividends when they are upperclassmen.

So while this year it's ugly, they will likely limit turnovers better with each year of age/experience in the system.

[brewcity77]

But if that's the way that they want to play, they have 2 freshmen and 1 sophomore guard who will get used to playing fast paced and improve in the system over the next 3/4 years. Carter and Cheatham with 4 years  in the same system should pay dividends when they are upperclassmen.

So while this year it's ugly, they will likely limit turnovers better with each year of age/experience in the system.

Which I mentioned in my original explanatory post. But the point remains, we are not playing to our players' strengths. We are playing to their weaknesses. We are playing a style that increases the likelihood of turning the ball over, reduces our chances of having success on the offensive glass, and puts the ball into the hands of the players least likely to produce.

I hope it does pay off, but saying that this offense currently plays to our strengths is a complete fabrication.

[Big Papi]

Sure, happy to.
.

• Tempo: We play a high-tempo offense. The 71.2 possessions we average is 81st in the country. However, while we are in the top-23% in terms of playing fast, we are among the worst (316) in turnover percentage. By playing at a fast pace, we are increasing the odds we will turn it over a ton, hence why we are averaging over 15 TOs per game. With a young team and two of our primary PG options turning the ball over at rates of 27.8% and 30.5%, we are literally giving games away.
  
• Efficiency: Our highest usage player is Henry Ellenson, who takes 28.1% of our shots when he is on the court. But of our top-5 players in percent of shots taken (Duane, Jajuan, Haanif, Luke) Henry is by far our least efficient shooter with an eFG% of 46.6%. Everyone else is over 53.6%. In fact, based on current numbers, our top-5 scoring options have an almost direct inverse proportion when you compare eFG% and Shot percentage. Best to worst eFG% we have 1) Luke 59.7, 2) Haanif 54.4, 3) Jajuan 54.5, 4) Duane 53.6, 5) Henry 46.6. And lowest to highest shot percentage we have 5) Luke 19.3, 4) Haanif 19.4, 3) Jajuan 22.7, 2) Duane 23.9, 1) Henry 28.1. So basically, our least effective players take the highest number of shots and our most effective players take the fewest shots.
  
• Primary Option eFG%: The counter argument to this is that when players take more shots, the numbers will come back to the mean, while it's easier to be high efficiency with a smaller number of shots. That's all well and good, but Henry is the first player since Lazar Hayward in 2010 to lead Marquette in shot percentage with an eFG% under 50.0, and Lazar was still well ahead of Henry at 49.5%. Bottom line, we are running the offense through the wrong guy.
  
• Setting Luke up for Failure: Luke is horribly misused. It isn't just that we sometimes struggle getting the ball in to him, but when we do get it in, at least 2-3 times per game we completely clear out the side once the entry pass is made. That allows for easy double-teams and takes away Luke's passing ability by feeding it in and kicking it back out. If he consistently got shots up and our guards crashed the boards from the other side, it might work, but they don't. Of our five primary guards and wings, only Jajuan has an offensive rebounding percentage over 2.5%. There is virtually no chance Duane, Haney, Sandy, or Traci will get to the rebound after clearing out.
  
• Three-Point Takers: Henry should not be second on the team in three point attempts. Two reasons, first his 29.3% success rate is the lowest on the team among players that have taken at least 20 threes (and by a decent margin, Traci is next at 33.3%). Second, Henry is one of two players on the team that is actually a good offensive rebounder (Luke the other). When he shoots from the perimeter, it takes one of our only real chances of getting offensive rebounds away from the area where he can get those rebounds. His three point attempts decrease our chances of scoring and our chances of getting to the offensive glass. It's even worse when he takes a three and Luke isn't on the floor. I sincerely hope this is being addressed as Henry is picking his shots better recently, shooting 44.4% beyond the arc in his past 7 games on 2.6 attempts per game after shooting 24.6% on 3.4 attempts over the first 17 games.

.
So in a nutshell, we play a fast-paced offense with a roster that would be better suited to slow the game down to increase efficiency and reduce the number of possessions thus giving us a better chance of being in the game late. We have the wrong guys taking shots, running the offense through the worst options and putting our highest volume and highest efficiency players in positions where they are less likely to succeed. And we compound our problems by putting our worst long-ball threat and second best offensive rebounder on the arc where we increase the odds of missing shots while decreasing the odds of getting offensive rebounds.

My guess is that Wojo wants to play an up-tempo offense predicated on turnovers and long-range shooting, but right now, we are too sloppy and inefficient to make that work. Hopefully in the years to come the bumps we suffer this year will pay off, but saying that making changes would be shifting the offense away from the players' strengths is completely false, because right now the last thing we are doing is tailoring the offense to the players' current strengths.

One of the best posts I have seen on here.  My problems lie with Wojo specifically.  We have 2 near 7 footers on this team.  We don't have any experienced capable point guards and we are trying to run and gun whenever we can.  Our turnover rate is ridiculous and the excuse I hear the most is that we are inexperienced.  How about Wojo actually coaches with what he has.  We should be able to have a very good half court offense if he could use Henry and Luke effectively.  The shooters will come next year with Rowsey and Hauser who are lights out shooters.  Adjust and coach to your personnel and I just don't see that out of Wojo.  Buzz did it with the midgets early on in his coaching career.

[BM1090]

One of the best posts I have seen on here.  My problems lie with Wojo specifically.  We have 2 near 7 footers on this team.  We don't have any experienced capable point guards and we are trying to run and gun whenever we can.  Our turnover rate is ridiculous and the excuse I hear the most is that we are inexperienced.  How about Wojo actually coaches with what he has.  We should be able to have a very good half court offense if he could use Henry and Luke effectively.  The shooters will come next year with Rowsey and Hauser who are lights out shooters.  Adjust and coach to your personnel and I just don't see that out of Wojo.  Buzz did it with the midgets early on in his coaching career.

And then failed to do it in his last year here.

[LAZER]

One of the best posts I have seen on here.  My problems lie with Wojo specifically.  We have 2 near 7 footers on this team.  We don't have any experienced capable point guards and we are trying to run and gun whenever we can.  Our turnover rate is ridiculous and the excuse I hear the most is that we are inexperienced.  How about Wojo actually coaches with what he has.  We should be able to have a very good half court offense if he could use Henry and Luke effectively.  The shooters will come next year with Rowsey and Hauser who are lights out shooters.  Adjust and coach to your personnel and I just don't see that out of Wojo.  Buzz did it with the midgets early on in his coaching career.

They're lights out shooters at their respective levels, i wouldn't count on much from them.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

They're lights out shooters at their respective levels, i wouldn't count on much from them.

Rowsey is going to surprise you.  Don't think Hauser will get much run, but I could see him being a Kellen Dunham-lite type player later in his career.

[bilsu]

I was surprised that we were averaging more turnovers than St. John's. After thinking about it, I realized that is because St. John's shoots quickly.  We have a lot of turnovers in our half court offense and often they come after someone has passed up a decent shot.

[brewcity77]

I was surprised that we were averaging more turnovers than St. John's. After thinking about it, I realized that is because St. John's shoots quickly.  We have a lot of turnovers in our half court offense and often they come after someone has passed up a decent shot.

There is only one team in all of the top-6 basketball conferences with a higher turnover percentage than us and it's DePaul.

[Henry Sugar]

Which I mentioned in my original explanatory post. But the point remains, we are not playing to our players' strengths. We are playing to their weaknesses. We are playing a style that increases the likelihood of turning the ball over, reduces our chances of having success on the offensive glass, and puts the ball into the hands of the players least likely to produce.

I hope it does pay off, but saying that this offense currently plays to our strengths is a complete fabrication.

Brew, hell of a couple posts.



When I think about it this way, I actually feel even better about what Wojo is doing. Similarly, one can look at the defense this way. One could argue Wojo is taking his lumps on the man defense for the future, when the zone is more effective now.

Also, I don't mind running the whole offense through the first McDonald's All-American in 30 years. Other talented players are going to want to come here too.

For the record, though, there's no correlation between pace and turnover rate. You didn't say that, but just in case anyone didn't know.

[MuMark]

Brew, hell of a couple posts.



When I think about it this way, I actually feel even better about what Wojo is doing. Similarly, one can look at the defense this way. One could argue Wojo is taking his lumps on the man defense for the future, when the zone is more effective now.

Also, I don't mind running the whole offense through the first McDonald's All-American in 30 years. Other talented players are going to want to come here too.

For the record, though, there's no correlation between pace and turnover rate. You didn't say that, but just in case anyone didn't know.

Thanks for pointing that out. Just in watching the games it seems like most of the turnovers happen running normal half court offense. Lots of traveling violations and offensive fouls.

[brewcity77]

Brew, hell of a couple posts.



When I think about it this way, I actually feel even better about what Wojo is doing. Similarly, one can look at the defense this way. One could argue Wojo is taking his lumps on the man defense for the future, when the zone is more effective now.

Also, I don't mind running the whole offense through the first McDonald's All-American in 30 years. Other talented players are going to want to come here too.

For the record, though, there's no correlation between pace and turnover rate. You didn't say that, but just in case anyone didn't know.

Thanks, Henry, means a lot coming from you.

Agreed that I hope this pays off in the long run. Buzz was the sort of coach to adjust his tactics to his talent every years. Wojo on the other hand seems to be working to recruit to a single system and is willing to take the bumps and bruises that come with it. Good point on the zone. While we're a pretty good defensive team, we would likely be better in a zone. But as you say, it's about the future, and he's recruited guys who have shown they can defend man (Carter, Cheatham) so it should pay off in 2-3 years.

This is one more component of the "respect the process" argument. Until Wojo's recruits are upperclassmen, we likely won't see his system really working effectively. I'd say 2017-18 is when we'll really see the team acclimate to the system.

[Lennys Tap]

Brew, hell of a couple posts.



When I think about it this way, I actually feel even better about what Wojo is doing. Similarly, one can look at the defense this way. One could argue Wojo is taking his lumps on the man defense for the future, when the zone is more effective now.

Also, I don't mind running the whole offense through the first McDonald's All-American in 30 years. Other talented players are going to want to come here too.

For the record, though, there's no correlation between pace and turnover rate. You didn't say that, but just in case anyone didn't know.

A good coach assesses his player's strengths and weaknesses and utilizes them in a way that increases their chances of being successful, i.e., winning basketball games. Throwing away games to showcase a McDonald's AA's lack of shooting skills or playing a tempo and/or defense that doesn't suit your talent is poor coaching.

[GGGG]

You really think Wojo is throwing away games to highlight Henry? 

No. Henry is the most capable offensive player on the team. And that's a problem. He's not efficient and he's inconsistent. He's a freshman.

Luke is more efficient but has to rely too much on freshman point guards to get him the ball. And they struggle getting it to him in the right spot at the right time.

I'm not sure playing the game at a slower tempo is going to necessarily help. I think the spacing that comes with better shooting will. And I think that's what we will see improve next year.

[Marcus92]

No. Henry is the most capable offensive player on the team. And that's a problem. He's not efficient and he's inconsistent. He's a freshman.

I'd agree that Henry's offensive inefficiency (or the team's in general) has little if anything to do with pace. For all his skills as a shooter, passer and ball-handler, he's still learning the ways of the big-time college basketball when it comes to shot selection, when and when not to drive the lane, taking care of the ball, etc.

I'm encouraged by his performance the past 3 games. Against Butler, Seton Hall and Xavier, Henry shot 18 for 35 (51.4%) from the field and 4 for 8 (50%) from long-range. And while he committed 6 turnovers, his turnover rate was just 11.2% (think I got that calculation right).

It's too soon to tell if that's proof of real and lasting improvement. But he does seem to be taking better shots and finding the balance between patience and aggressiveness on offense.

[brewcity77]

A good coach assesses his player's strengths and weaknesses and utilizes them in a way that increases their chances of being successful, i.e., winning basketball games. Throwing away games to showcase a McDonald's AA's lack of shooting skills or playing a tempo and/or defense that doesn't suit your talent is poor coaching.

I don't think Wojo is throwing games away to showcase Henry. I think he expects that eventually these guys will be able to play in his style and that if he gets them playing that way now they will be more likely to succeed with it in 2-3 years rather than if he changes tempo every year (as Buzz did).

It's a different philosophy, but I feel that the idea is running this style now will pay off for guys like Traci, Duane, and Haney when they are juniors and seniors. Unfortunately, that means this year (and possibly next) will be sacrificial lambs.

[NotAnAlum]

Brew - I can't dispute your statistics that say this team plays fast but based on watching all their games it sure doesn't seem like they are playing fast.  They stand around a lot while passing the ball around the perimeter not accomplishing much.  They stair into the post for what seems like minutes trying to figure out how to pass it in.  When a post player gets it he stands there for a long time.  No moves are quick, no passes are off the dribble.  They almost never fastbreak because they are so challenged to get rebounds.  It sure doesn't seem like a team playing at a fast pace.  Is it possible all their turn overs which occur in the middle of their possessions are making it look like they play fast when they really don't. 

[Lennys Tap]

I don't think Wojo is throwing games away to showcase Henry. I think he expects that eventually these guys will be able to play in his style and that if he gets them playing that way now they will be more likely to succeed with it in 2-3 years rather than if he changes tempo every year (as Buzz did).

It's a different philosophy, but I feel that the idea is running this style now will pay off for guys like Traci, Duane, and Haney when they are juniors and seniors. Unfortunately, that means this year (and possibly next) will be sacrificial lambs.

OK, maybe hyperbole on my part - but when your two best players are Clydesdales and your quarterback is unproven and inexperienced (at best) you don't run a no huddle West Coast offense. You pound it. Next year one of them will be gone and your guards will have more experience. Speed it up some then. In two years they'll both be gone and your guards will be really experienced - speed it up some more. But I hate coaches who insist on playing a "style" when their players don't fit it - even Bo picked up the tempo and ditched the swing when he had the horses.

[Jay Bee]

• Tempo: We play a high-tempo offense. The 71.2 possessions we average is 81st in the country.
  

We're playing faster than that.. we're at 72.7, #44 in the country. 71.2/81 is based on *questionable* adjustments to account for opposition.

[Dr. Blackheart]

In 2006 with the Amigos as freshmen, MU's offensive efficiency in Big East play was 107.5 with a turnover rate of 19.9 and an assist rate of 56.2.  In 2016 in Big East play, MU's offensive efficiency is 96.4 with a turnover rate of 22.3% and an assist rate of 57.5.  Adjusted tempo in 2006 was 68.9 versus 72.4 now.  Offensive rebounding rate was 32.9 then and 24.9 now.  Defensive rebounding percent was 38.6 then and 32.9 now. eFG% was 52.8 then and 49.7 now.

With a higher tempo, turning it over more while rebounding less while missing more, shyt happens!  While Jerel turned it over at a high rate, DJames and Steve Novak were the difference makers. Let's grab the next three with smart and determined play and see where we sit.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Sure, happy to.
.

• Tempo: We play a high-tempo offense. The 71.2 possessions we average is 81st in the country. However, while we are in the top-23% in terms of playing fast, we are among the worst (316) in turnover percentage. By playing at a fast pace, we are increasing the odds we will turn it over a ton, hence why we are averaging over 15 TOs per game. With a young team and two of our primary PG options turning the ball over at rates of 27.8% and 30.5%, we are literally giving games away.
  
• Efficiency: Our highest usage player is Henry Ellenson, who takes 28.1% of our shots when he is on the court. But of our top-5 players in percent of shots taken (Duane, Jajuan, Haanif, Luke) Henry is by far our least efficient shooter with an eFG% of 46.6%. Everyone else is over 53.6%. In fact, based on current numbers, our top-5 scoring options have an almost direct inverse proportion when you compare eFG% and Shot percentage. Best to worst eFG% we have 1) Luke 59.7, 2) Haanif 54.4, 3) Jajuan 54.5, 4) Duane 53.6, 5) Henry 46.6. And lowest to highest shot percentage we have 5) Luke 19.3, 4) Haanif 19.4, 3) Jajuan 22.7, 2) Duane 23.9, 1) Henry 28.1. So basically, our least effective players take the highest number of shots and our most effective players take the fewest shots.
  
• Primary Option eFG%: The counter argument to this is that when players take more shots, the numbers will come back to the mean, while it's easier to be high efficiency with a smaller number of shots. That's all well and good, but Henry is the first player since Lazar Hayward in 2010 to lead Marquette in shot percentage with an eFG% under 50.0, and Lazar was still well ahead of Henry at 49.5%. Bottom line, we are running the offense through the wrong guy.
  
• Setting Luke up for Failure: Luke is horribly misused. It isn't just that we sometimes struggle getting the ball in to him, but when we do get it in, at least 2-3 times per game we completely clear out the side once the entry pass is made. That allows for easy double-teams and takes away Luke's passing ability by feeding it in and kicking it back out. If he consistently got shots up and our guards crashed the boards from the other side, it might work, but they don't. Of our five primary guards and wings, only Jajuan has an offensive rebounding percentage over 2.5%. There is virtually no chance Duane, Haney, Sandy, or Traci will get to the rebound after clearing out.
  
• Three-Point Takers: Henry should not be second on the team in three point attempts. Two reasons, first his 29.3% success rate is the lowest on the team among players that have taken at least 20 threes (and by a decent margin, Traci is next at 33.3%). Second, Henry is one of two players on the team that is actually a good offensive rebounder (Luke the other). When he shoots from the perimeter, it takes one of our only real chances of getting offensive rebounds away from the area where he can get those rebounds. His three point attempts decrease our chances of scoring and our chances of getting to the offensive glass. It's even worse when he takes a three and Luke isn't on the floor. I sincerely hope this is being addressed as Henry is picking his shots better recently, shooting 44.4% beyond the arc in his past 7 games on 2.6 attempts per game after shooting 24.6% on 3.4 attempts over the first 17 games.

.
So in a nutshell, we play a fast-paced offense with a roster that would be better suited to slow the game down to increase efficiency and reduce the number of possessions thus giving us a better chance of being in the game late. We have the wrong guys taking shots, running the offense through the worst options and putting our highest volume and highest efficiency players in positions where they are less likely to succeed. And we compound our problems by putting our worst long-ball threat and second best offensive rebounder on the arc where we increase the odds of missing shots while decreasing the odds of getting offensive rebounds.

My guess is that Wojo wants to play an up-tempo offense predicated on turnovers and long-range shooting, but right now, we are too sloppy and inefficient to make that work. Hopefully in the years to come the bumps we suffer this year will pay off, but saying that making changes would be shifting the offense away from the players' strengths is completely false, because right now the last thing we are doing is tailoring the offense to the players' current strengths.

Solid post. I agree with points 2-5, especially with the point about Henry's three point shooting. I don't mind him taking open threes, but he shouldn't be number two on the team. I think Wojo has addressed that in the past few weeks because we've seen a much better Henry.

I don't agree with point 1. As Henry pointed out, there is not correlation between increased pace and increased turnovers. I may be off in my understanding, but I think that our high turnovers and our high steal% is what drives our number of possessions up, inflating our pace. So instead of the pace increasing turnovers I think it is the turnovers that increase the pace. I think the more likely reason we are 1-6 in games with an increased pace is because our turnover rate was that high in that game.

[brewcity77]

I'm not saying the pace leads to a higher turnover rate. I know those are unrelated. However, we are a turnover prone team. So when we play fast, we increase the odds of giving the ball away which increases the score disparity making it more difficult to be in the game late.

As our turnover percentage is higher than our takeaway percentage, playing faster hurts us more than it helps. Too often when we take it away and go fast break, it seems we throw the ball away, dribble into a 1-on-3, or drive to the home while ignoring the open man. These are times when you need to slow down.

If you are turnover prone, playing faster will limit the total number of turnovers (not the percentage) and thus increase the chance you can keep it close late.

I know the NBA tracks fast break efficiency. I would love to see those numbers for this team. I feel a lot of our problem is poor fast breaks that lead to squandered takeaways and foolish turnovers.

[Henry Sugar]

A good coach assesses his player's strengths and weaknesses and utilizes them in a way that increases their chances of being successful, i.e., winning basketball games. Throwing away games to showcase a McDonald's AA's lack of shooting skills or playing a tempo and/or defense that doesn't suit your talent is poor coaching.

It's investing for the future versus maximizing profits results today, especially with the 8th least experienced team in the country.

However, it is also entirely possible that Wojo is not a good enough coach to modify his system and adapt to the personnel. Despite the long tenure as an assistant, he's inexperienced at running his own show. Perhaps he is just defaulting to the system with which he is familiar and we are making excuses for the inconsistencies and coaching strategies. It's certainly a default explanation.

What I like about Brew's post is that it provides an alternate explanation where Wojo gets some credit for long term thinking and honestly, being a little brave. Of course, maybe what I really like about it is the sense of optimism.

[Lennys Tap]

It's investing for the future versus maximizing profits results today, especially with the 8th least experienced team in the country.

However, it is also entirely possible that Wojo is not a good enough coach to modify his system and adapt to the personnel. Despite the long tenure as an assistant, he's inexperienced at running his own show. Perhaps he is just defaulting to the system with which he is familiar and we are making excuses for the inconsistencies and coaching strategies. It's certainly a default explanation.

What I like about Brew's post is that it provides an alternate explanation where Wojo gets some credit for long term thinking and honestly, being a little brave. Of course, maybe what I really like about it is the sense of optimism.

Hope you're right - bravery is certainly a preferred explanation to stubbornness or inflexibility.

[MU82]

Feel bad for Henry.  No way should this team not be in contention for a big dance bid.

Well, given that Henry ranks second on the team in turnovers and is last among our top 6 rotation players in FG% and is hurtin' in most of the offensive efficiency stats brew stated, maybe Henry should feel bad for the rest of the team!

That's admittedly over-the-top hyperbole, but it's just my way of saying they are all in this together, and nobody is immune from criticism. Including the head coach and his assistants. (Some might say especially Wojo & Co. -- cue the "leash"!)

I am an optimist. I generally have enjoyed watching this season's team -- DePaul and a few other games being notable exceptions -- and I believe the program has a bright future. That will depend upon Wojo's improvement as a game coach and his continued success as a recruiter; I have high hopes there, too.

On one other subject mentioned here ...

Most FS1 announcers are OK, IMHO. Nothing great, nothing too horrible. I have had to mute the sound the last two times Dickey was the analyst, though. He ranks among the very worst I have ever heard in any sport, and I have seen/heard  hundreds if not thousands.

[brewcity77]

After Buzz, I get why we embrace coaches that can be adaptable. Buzz found ways to win with different types of players and at different paces of play. That got us to the tournament every year but the lady with great NCAA results.

That said, plenty of coaches are just as, or even more successful by being inflexible. Jim Boeheim never leaves the zone. Bo Ryan stuck with the Swing and man defense no matter what. Wojo seems to want up tempo offense predicated on turnovers and man defense. Right now, the results aren't good with the combination of a bare cupboard and youth. In 2-3 years, we'll see.

[mu03eng]

I'm not saying the pace leads to a higher turnover rate. I know those are unrelated. However, we are a turnover prone team. So when we play fast, we increase the odds of giving the ball away which increases the score disparity making it more difficult to be in the game late.

As our turnover percentage is higher than our takeaway percentage, playing faster hurts us more than it helps. Too often when we take it away and go fast break, it seems we throw the ball away, dribble into a 1-on-3, or drive to the home while ignoring the open man. These are times when you need to slow down.

If you are turnover prone, playing faster will limit the total number of turnovers (not the percentage) and thus increase the chance you can keep it close late.

I know the NBA tracks fast break efficiency. I would love to see those numbers for this team. I feel a lot of our problem is poor fast breaks that lead to squandered takeaways and foolish turnovers.

This is where I think there needs to be stat like effective tempo, because I think there is a quirk in the tempo stat. Most of our turnovers are on fast breaks or early in the possessions, that biases the tempo stat to say we are going faster then we actually are.

I'm not saying we don't play up tempo, but we really play in two phases: On an opponent miss, we push tempo hoping to score against an unestablished defense, if not there we settle into a half court offense looking for paint touches and kicks. On opponent makes, we are running a half court offense in which we take the first good look(usually). In each phase, the turnovers come early in possessions more so than late. Early TOs mean "faster pace"

[brewcity77]

I'd really like to see someone track fast break efficiency. I know they track it for the NBA. While we try to break plenty, I'm not sure we're very good at it. What good is forcing a turnover if you hand it right back without scoring?

[Marcus92]

One thing to keep in mind is that the best players, coaches and teams learn from failure. Failure exposes your weaknesses — and thus, where you need to focus on improving — like nothing else.

Wojo has stressed a number of key points in virtually every interview or post-game press conference: 1) effort/intensity; 2) rebounding (closely related to effort/intensity); 3) defense (of course related to both the first two points); 4) shot selection; and 5) turnovers.

There's been progress on points 1, 3 and 4 since the beginning of the season. Wojo's said as much. Marquette plays hard, doesn't give up, shows the makings of a good defensive team, and seems to be taking better shots of late. Rebounding has been good some games, not so much in others. When it comes to turnovers, though, the team remains its own worst enemy. And it's not just on Henry. Far from it.

The 20 turnovers against Xavier represent a smorgasbord of mistakes and lost opportunities. But one key stretch stands out to me as the most egregious.

With under 2 minutes to go, MU had closed to within a single possession at 77-80. Then we committed 3 consecutive turnovers in the space of 47 seconds. Xavier took advantage, hitting on a jumper and 3 free throws to up the lead to 77-85.

Down 3 points with 1:26 left and you're in a position to win. Down 8 points with 0:39 to go, it's all but over. Game changer.

I hope and expect that Wojo and the coaching staff have repeatedly reviewed that 47 seconds of game film with the team. If anything gets through to them about how much every possession matters, how much empty possessions hurt your chances of winning, that should be Exhibit A.

[MarquetteDano]

This is where I think there needs to be stat like effective tempo, because I think there is a quirk in the tempo stat. Most of our turnovers are on fast breaks or early in the possessions, that biases the tempo stat to say we are going faster then we actually are.

Completely agree.  When you turn teams over more than average (we do) and you yourself turn it over a lot (we definitely do) you will have a very high tempo. 

The problem is that even though we have a high tempo number it doesn't mean you throw the ball down court after a defensive rebound to score or shoot after the first pass, which we rarely do.

[mu03eng]

After Buzz, I get why we embrace coaches that can be adaptable. Buzz found ways to win with different types of players and at different paces of play. That got us to the tournament every year but the lady with great NCAA results.

That said, plenty of coaches are just as, or even more successful by being inflexible. Jim Boeheim never leaves the zone. Bo Ryan stuck with the Swing and man defense no matter what. Wojo seems to want up tempo offense predicated on turnovers and man defense. Right now, the results aren't good with the combination of a bare cupboard and youth. In 2-3 years, we'll see.

If I'm analyzing what Wojo is doing, I think the long term plan is to play like what's currently en vogue in the NBA, Space and Pace. So up tempo with strong shooting, right now we are some what deficient on shooting and we don't have enough experience to play at tremendous tempo yet....so we struggle at times.

Long term, I think it's very smart because the skill sets required to play space and pace are more readily available and are also much more teachable than say requiring an aircraft carrier down low to run your offense through the low post.

I'd love to have Henry back next year but A) not happening B) we can be as good if not better without him next year, simply because we'll have shooters and space.

Let's assume Rowsey is the starting PG and Sandy figures his crap out, a line-up could be 4 out 1 in of Rowsey, Duane, JjJ, Sandy, and Luke. That is a lot of shooting on the floor and Duane, Rowsey, JjJ(especially) able to slash with the space the shooting provides. That's good stuff.

[mu03eng]

I'd really like to see someone track fast break efficiency. I know they track it for the NBA. While we try to break plenty, I'm not sure we're very good at it. What good is forcing a turnover if you hand it right back without scoring?

You're not sure we're good at it? I'm quite certain we are very not good at it. In fact, I think if we do score off the break we are often lucky

[brewcity77]

You're not sure we're good at it? I'm quite certain we are very not good at it. In fact, I think if we do score off the break we are often lucky

LOL

I was trying to be as diplomatic as possible without hard statistics, but I agree. I feel like at least twice a game on fast breaks I'm screaming "slow down, slow down, slow...oh crap!"

[BM1090]

LOL

I was trying to be as diplomatic as possible without hard statistics, but I agree. I feel like at least twice a game on fast breaks I'm screaming "slow down, slow down, slow...oh crap!"

I think that's about par for the course though for every team. I bet if we pay attention to both team's fast break opportunities tonight the amount of screw ups on the break will be about the same.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

LOL

I was trying to be as diplomatic as possible without hard statistics, but I agree. I feel like at least twice a game on fast breaks I'm screaming "slow down, slow down, slow...oh crap!"

Someone please insert a gif of the 3 on 1 that Sandy led on Sat.  That however was "go, go, oh come on!"

[MU82]

This is where I think there needs to be stat like effective tempo, because I think there is a quirk in the tempo stat.

Yes, I was just thinking that we need another stat an old fart like me doesn't understand! 

[brewcity77]

I think that's about par for the course though for every team. I bet if we pay attention to both team's fast break opportunities tonight the amount of screw ups on the break will be about the same.

I don't think that's the case, but it's exactly why I hope someone starts tracking fast break efficiency. When Jae and DJO were here, or on the Amigos team, it felt like getting a steal and fast break was nearly guaranteed. Sure, you still sometimes want them to slow up, but on those teams, it was maybe once or twice a month, not once or twice a game. I would be floored if this team was as good at converting fast break chances into points as those teams were.

[mu03eng]

Yes, I was just thinking that we need another stat an old fart like me doesn't understand! 

How else can we possibly win an argument against you when you have logic and experience on your side?

[BM1090]

I don't think that's the case, but it's exactly why I hope someone starts tracking fast break efficiency. When Jae and DJO were here, or on the Amigos team, it felt like getting a steal and fast break was nearly guaranteed. Sure, you still sometimes want them to slow up, but on those teams, it was maybe once or twice a month, not once or twice a game. I would be floored if this team was as good at converting fast break chances into points as those teams were.

I think that's fair, but you're comparing this year's team to probably the two best Marquette teams we've had in the past 10 years. I think if you looked at Marquette this year it would be near the national average, while those two teams obviously excelled.

I could be completely wrong, though. Just my gut feeling.

[MuMark]

http://www.anonymouseagle.com/2016/2/10/10957204/marquette-basketball-offensive-fouls-turnovers-ellenson-fischer-carter-cheatham-heldt

[PaintTouches]

I don't think that's the case, but it's exactly why I hope someone starts tracking fast break efficiency. When Jae and DJO were here, or on the Amigos team, it felt like getting a steal and fast break was nearly guaranteed.

Not quite a full accounting, but Hoop-Math.com does provide eFG% on transition opportunities. MU's eFG% in transition is 57.0%, which ranks 128th in the country.

Here's where MU sits the last 5 years

                   eFG         Transition
2016 -      57.0%          24.4%
2015 -      58.7%        23.8%
2014 -      56.4%        24.1%
2013 -      63.1%        21.4%
2012 -      55.6%          35.4%

So while MU isn't great in transition this year, it's fairly middle of the pack in both eFG% and % of possessions in transition.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

One thing to keep in mind is that the best players, coaches and teams learn from failure. Failure exposes your weaknesses — and thus, where you need to focus on improving — like nothing else.

Wojo has stressed a number of key points in virtually every interview or post-game press conference: 1) effort/intensity; 2) rebounding (closely related to effort/intensity); 3) defense (of course related to both the first two points); 4) shot selection; and 5) turnovers.

I think Xavier was our best rebounding effort. Hopefully that means we are starting to see improvement in that area.

[brewcity77]

Not quite a full accounting, but Hoop-Math.com does provide eFG% on transition opportunities. MU's eFG% in transition is 57.0%, which ranks 128th in the country.

Here's where MU sits the last 5 years

                   eFG         Transition
2016 -      57.0%          24.4%
2015 -      58.7%        23.8%
2014 -      56.4%        24.1%
2013 -      63.1%        21.4%
2012 -      55.6%          35.4%

So while MU isn't great in transition this year, it's fairly middle of the pack in both eFG% and % of possessions in transition.

Thanks, definitely going to check that out.