Quit Whining

[Lennys Tap]

Lots of good back and forth and varying opinions of where we've been, where we are and where (hopefully) we're going in this thread.

Some nasty personal insults, too, but we don't get a ten page thread on Scoop without them. C'est la vie.

[Goose]

Lenny

As usual, you are right on target. It is funny that is difficult to agree on where we and where we want to be. IMO the single bright spot of this season is Markus Howard. I do believe he has what it takes to be a big time D1 PG. Hauser is notch down IMO, but someone worth keeping an eye on moving forward. Other than that, we are another year of no NCAA and not looking much better next year.

My biggest rub is always on where we want the program to be, and I always feel way too many excuses used on here on why we cannot be a tier 1 program. For the first time in my life I am close to throwing my arms up in the air and give up the MU ball chase. Not there yet, but getting closer quickly.

[slingkong]

You NEVER expect to lose, EVER...At anything. That's small minded.

Sounds like you need to grow up and learn that losing is a fact of life. Sometimes it happens more often than other times. This is true for any program you want to talk about, if you want to stick to college basketball. Even Duke has it's relative down years.

Okay now we get to the "he's laying the foundation" part...great, but does anyone stop to think, what if 3-4 years from now, MU still isn't going to the NCAA's?? Then what?? That's why winning, and winning now is so important, the future is never guaranteed. That's why there's the instant gratification part. Winning cures everything.

Most of the reasonable people here, none of whom are the decision makers mind you, would prefer to have a 4-6 window to let Wojo (or whoever the next coach is down the road) build the program to suit his recruiting and playing schemes. So if 3-4 years from now MU is still struggling, I agree his seat will be very warm.

Finally, I will guarantee you NONE of you put up with the sh*t on a daily basis that I do from badger fans that just LOVE sticking it in my face how successful their program has been and how MU sucks. Sadly, I have no comebacks, because they are right. Maybe it shouldn't be a big deal, but trust me when I tell you...the folks I hear it from(almost hourly), want nothing more than to see MU fail, and fail miserably, and take great joy in their demise. NO ONE takes the harassment I do, at least not in this kind of way, a small chiding type of way sure..but these are vicious attacks, that don't quit. It gets tiring.

And here we find out that your real reason for "caring" is that you are so thin skinned that you can't take simple "my team is better" ribbing from your friends. Yes, I'm sure you are truly injured by these "vicious" attacks. 

[slingkong]

No, you didn't have to be thinking you were going to wipe the floor with with everyone, but if you went into your first match EXPECTING to lose...that would be the definition of irrationally competitive. No competitor, or serious competitor that i have ever been around, EXPECTS to lose, and when they do, they don't get over it in a few hours(or less). Losing should sting, it should hurt like hell, and it shouldn't take just a few hours to move past it. MU fans have just become way to passive. No competitiveness in them. When I hear "What did you expect when we were playing the #1 team in the country, no one expected us to win". That's a defeatist attitude and reeks of small time basketball. Now if you are Morgan State and playing North Carolina, yeah, you can think that way. It's so sad how meteoric MU's fall has been, how completely irrelevant in the college BB landscape they have become, when 4 years ago, it was completely different. What's even worse is how many MU fans have accepted it, shrug their shoulders and simply say "it happens".

You realize that YOU don't actually play, right? That you make zero contribution to the game when the team is out there? If someone here doesn't expect to win, it makes absolutely no difference to the end result. You may be old but you're certainly don't behave (or write) like much of an adult.

[GGGG]

Objective?  Like Haanif's eFG% regressing from 54.3% after a whole season of Big East play (as a freshman) to 48.6% through cupcake season and 3 Big East games thus far this season?  Granted his train wreck of  turnover rate as a freshman has come down this year (and subsequently his O-Rating his "improved") since he isn't playing PG this season, as was the case, inexplicably, last season.

Pretty sure of the Four Factors most important to winning basketball games eFG% is a factor, but O-Rating is not.

Haanif's regression in eFG is concerning and absolutely affecting the team in a negative manner.

Sure his eFG% is down.  He's better at rebounds, steals, assists and turnovers from last year.  I don't call that regression. 

[Lennys Tap]

Lenny

As usual, you are right on target. It is funny that is difficult to agree on where we and where we want to be. IMO the single bright spot of this season is Markus Howard. I do believe he has what it takes to be a big time D1 PG. Hauser is notch down IMO, but someone worth keeping an eye on moving forward. Other than that, we are another year of no NCAA and not looking much better next year.

My biggest rub is always on where we want the program to be, and I always feel way too many excuses used on here on why we cannot be a tier 1 program. For the first time in my life I am close to throwing my arms up in the air and give up the MU ball chase. Not there yet, but getting closer quickly.

Goose

Totally agree on MH - said in early December he was (at 17) the best offensive point guard at Marquette since Diener. Also agree that Sam H can be very good. Of the sophomore class (that was ranked in the top 10) all that remains are 3 role players. Two role players in the junior class. So lots of work going forward. Hopefully among Froling, Cain, Bailey and others in the pipeline we'll find someone special.

But don't give up, Goose. We're at a tipping point and I'm hopeful things turn out OK.

[Galway Eagle]

The myth of the fertile recruiting grounds of JUCO has been greatly exaggerated. We were absolutely spoiled with the quality of JUCOs we got from Buzz. Crowder, JFB, DJO, and Buycks were four of the best JUCOs not just of their time period, but of all time. Most JUCOs don't pan out at the high major level. What JUCOs was Wojo supposed to land?

Over the past two years, 247 has ranked 99 players as the top JUCOs in the country.

1 was accused of sexual assault multiple times and as such wouldn't have been welcomed at Marquette. (2015 #1 Dominic Artis, went to UTEP). 98 Left.

Of those 98, 66 have yet to average more than 20 minutes in a game. An admittedly arbitrary stat but you would think to be an impact player at Marquette that you would have averaged around 20 minutes at most programs. 32 left.

Of those 32, 4 went to low major programs (South Alabama, Eastern Illinois, Lipscomb, and Grand Canyon). Definitely not at Marquette's level, down to 28.

Of those 28, 11 went to mid major programs (Murray State, Little Rock, UTEP, Houston, Western Kentucky, Fresno State, Central Florida, Iona, Missouri State, Tulsa, and Middle Tennessee State). A couple of those might have cracked Marquette's roster and some might have even started. But most would be role players at best. Down to 17.

Of those 17, 7 went to high major programs currently ranked outside of the top 100 per KenPom (St. John's, LSU, Auburn, Washington, Rutgers, Missouri, and Washington State). Again, some might have cracked the roster, and some may have earned a starting spot, but most would be role players at Marquette, if that. 10 Left.

Here are the 10 remaining JUCOs:
2015 #11 Chris Boucher (Oregon): 25.3 minutes, 14.1 points, 7.3 rebounds, 2.9 blocks
2015 #13 Justin Leon (Florida): 21.7 minutes, 7.2 points, 3.4 rebounds, .455 3P%
2015 #23 Vladimir Brodziansky (TCU): 20.3 minutes, 11.4 points, 5.2 rebounds, .590 FG%
2015 #34 Devon Thomas (Texas Tech): 25.5 minutes, 4.9 points, 3.8 assists, 1.3 steals
2015 #50 Rasheed Brooks (Ole Miss): 23.9 minutes, 8.8 points, 3.1 rebounds, 1.1 steals
2016 #1 Jaylen Barford (Arkansas): 22.1 minutes, 10.2 points, 3.3 rebounds, .286 3P%
2016 #5 Daryl Macon (Arkansas): 24.9 minutes, 14.1 points, 2.5 assists, .391 3P%
2016 #14 Tyler Rawson (Utah): 23.5 minutes, 7.7 points, 5.2 rebounds, 0.9 blocks
2016 #22 JoJo Zamora (Utah): 25.3 minutes, 10.6 points, 1.5 assists, .434 3P%
2016 #26 Justas Furmanavicius (Ole Miss): 23.6 minutes, 6.0 points, 5.4 rebounds, 1.5 blocks

All 10 would at least be rotation players for Marquette. I would say only Boucher and Macon would be definite starters. Others might have started, really can't say. Boucher is for sure the only true impact player that was the level of JUCO that Buzz was bringing in.

Oh and all these are assuming that none of the 99 had any disciplinary or academic issues that would have kept them out (besides Artis whose case I happened to know)

This is far from a science. There is a juco or two at the mid major level that I think could have competed at Marquette, Rob Gray at Houston comes to mind, but the main point still stands. Most JUCOs are JUCOs because they aren't very good at basketball. The pool of JUCOs capable of stepping in and starting for a high major is EXTREMELY shallow. In most cases, I would rather get a freshman who has four years to develop into a starter. I would rather have Howard and Hauser than any JUCO from last year's class. There were a couple of JUCOs in the 2015 class I would have rather had than say Heldt or Anim, but only a couple.

This is interesting I wonder if the overall pool has gone down because we aren't far removed from Marshall Henderson, Jameel McKay, and Pierre Jackson in addition to our own Crowder, Butler, DJO and more. Was the Juco talent pool randomly deeper then or what I wonder is the big difference.

[GGGG]

This is interesting I wonder if the overall pool has gone down because we aren't far removed from Marshall Henderson, Jameel McKay, and Pierre Jackson in addition to our own Crowder, Butler, DJO and more. Was the Juco talent pool randomly deeper then or what I wonder is the big difference.

I think Buzz had an extensive Juco network that he used very well and that we have lost our objectivity because of it. 

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

This is interesting I wonder if the overall pool has gone down because we aren't far removed from Marshall Henderson, Jameel McKay, and Pierre Jackson in addition to our own Crowder, Butler, DJO and more. Was the Juco talent pool randomly deeper then or what I wonder is the big difference.

The difference is Buzz got the best of the best in Butler, DJO, and Crowder.  He also got an injury prone Fulce, a role player in Buycks, and a nobody in Taylor.  McKay was starting caliber, albeit for Iowa State.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

This is interesting I wonder if the overall pool has gone down because we aren't far removed from Marshall Henderson, Jameel McKay, and Pierre Jackson in addition to our own Crowder, Butler, DJO and more. Was the Juco talent pool randomly deeper then or what I wonder is the big difference.

I would argue that 10 out of 100 starters and 28 out of 100 at least role players isn't a terrible hit rate. 

I agree with Sultan though that Buzz's hit rate may be one of the best (4 into the NBA in 6 years!)

Amended for Lazar's comment

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I would argue that 10 out of 100 starters and 28 out of 100 at least role players isn't a terrible hit rate. 

I agree with Sultan though that Buzz's hit rate may be one of the best (3 into the NBA + DJO! in 6 years)

DJO made the NBA too.  Holds the distinction for most FGA without scoring a single point in his career.

[Nostradamus]

Sure his eFG% is down.  He's better at rebounds, steals, assists and turnovers from last year.  I don't call that regression.

I'd argue the 6% drop in eFG% is more adverse/regression to the team than Haanif's 0.2% improvement in Steal Rate, 4% improvement in Assist Rate, 3.5% improvement in Rebounding rate.  The improved Turnover rate is beneficial of course, yet it was inflated last year due to Haanif being played out of position a great deal.

Nobody expected Haanif to become a rebounding, assist, and steals wizard coming into this season.  Most expected Haanif would be a Top 3 player on this team.  All of JJJ, Luke, Markus, Rowsey, and Reinhardt exceed Haanif in points per 40.  He's less than 1 point per 40 ahead of Hauser and Duane. Has the lowest +/- on the team other than Reinhardt.  Has the worst O-Rating on the team in conference play (with 2nd least usage on the team), and 2nd worst D-Rating.

Guess we have different viewpoints on what constitutes improvement.  So, let's call it 2-2 for the original post we are debating.   

[jesmu84]

Objective?  Like Haanif's eFG% regressing from 54.3% after a whole season of Big East play (as a freshman) to 48.6% through cupcake season and 3 Big East games thus far this season?  Granted his train wreck of  turnover rate as a freshman has come down this year (and subsequently his O-Rating his "improved") since he isn't playing PG this season, as was the case, inexplicably, last season.

Pretty sure of the Four Factors most important to winning basketball games eFG% is a factor, but O-Rating is not.

Haanif's regression in eFG is concerning and absolutely affecting the team in a negative manner.

Did Derrick regress?

[Nostradamus]

Did Derrick regress?

No. Derrick blossomed under the tutelage of Wojo his senior year. 

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

No. Derrick blossomed under the tutelage of Wojo his senior year.

Oh god.

[mu03eng]

No. Derrick blossomed under the tutelage of Wojo his senior year.

Good talk Nerstradamus

[GGGG]

Did you know that John Dawson had his best year turnover wise when he played for Wojo?

[Galway Eagle]

I think Buzz had an extensive Juco network that he used very well and that we have lost our objectivity because of it.

I agree that's why we got those jucos but my point was to address their talent. those are a lot of high major talents all in a few years while suddenly (based on TAMU's stats) it seems like that level of juco has pretty much dried up.

[brewcity77]

How does a #6 seeded team "epitomize" a bubble team? At least 24 at large teams were selected after us. So for part of the year, yes - but only part. And in 2014, we didn't even make the NIT. So again, for part of the year, yes.

But even worse than your bad math is totally dismissing Buzz's first year. Not a coach but a caretaker? Seriously? Tell that to Wesley Matthews, an afterthought for three years who became the 1a option in a new offense. And tell that to D James, whose role in the offense completely changed. I guess we watched entirely different teams 1n 2008-09.

We were 11-8 and the lead team mentioned in Bubble Watch every week. Thinking we weren't a bubble team all year is pure revisionist history.

And that season, after Crean's stars left, was when we became TBW. Buzz's first season was the epitome of winning with another guys players. Buzz did well with that team, but it was Crean's roster.

[MU1980]

Finally, I will guarantee you NONE of you put up with the sh*t on a daily basis that I do from badger fans that just LOVE sticking it in my face how successful their program has been and how MU sucks. Sadly, I have no comebacks, because they are right. Maybe it shouldn't be a big deal, but trust me when I tell you...the folks I hear it from(almost hourly), want nothing more than to see MU fail, and fail miserably, and take great joy in their demise. NO ONE takes the harassment I do, at least not in this kind of way, a small chiding type of way sure..but these are vicious attacks, that don't quit. It gets tiring.

Wow, this is one of the saddest things I have read in awhile. I have so many die-hard Badger fans that I am friends with, work with or am related too. I do not get any harassment from them because they know that I am a huge Marquette fan, but that my happiness in no way depends on their success. You on the other hand, bring on this harassment by making it your whole life. They know this and therefore take great pleasure in harassing you. The thing is, over the next few years as Marquette becomes once again the more dominate team in the state (yes I absolutely see this happening), you will probably be the most obnoxious harassing Marquette fan to your Badger fan friends and co-workers.  I very sincerely feel sorry for your negativity and irrational thought process about the state of Marquette basketball. 

[Lennys Tap]

We were 11-8 and the lead team mentioned in Bubble Watch every week. Thinking we weren't a bubble team all year is pure revisionist history.

And that season, after Crean's stars left, was when we became TBW. Buzz's first season was the epitome of winning with another guys players. Buzz did well with that team, but it was Crean's roster.

Agree to disagree, Brew. At 11-8 (2-5) we were nowhere near even an NIT bubble. We got to the NCAA bubble at 14-8 (5-5) and stayed there until 19-9 (10-6) when we were safely in. So 6 games, maybe 3-4 weeks on the bubble. Seemed like forever but it wasn't.

As for 2008-09, Crean's roster, yes - but Buzz's team. If you listened to the players on senior day you know that.

[brewcity77]

Agree to disagree, Brew. At 11-8 (2-5) we were nowhere near even an NIT bubble. We got to the NCAA bubble at 14-8 (5-5) and stayed there until 19-9 (10-6) when we were safely in. So 6 games, maybe 3-4 weeks on the bubble. Seemed like forever but it wasn't.

As for 2008-09, Crean's roster, yes - but Buzz's team. If you listened to the players on senior day you know that.

No agreement, just disagree. You're flat out wrong.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=17552.msg173796#msg173796

There's a quote from Andy Glockner in there when we were 11-8 saying that we were still in the mix and if we didn't make the NCAA he'd pick us to win the NIT. So nice try, but your memory is simply incorrect. We were on the bubble before and after that. We earned the Team Bubble Watch moniker that season.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AndyGlockner/status/20333381359243264

It was seven years ago, so I understand the foggy memory, but that season created the TBW meme that followed us for years to come.

[Lennys Tap]

No agreement, just disagree. You're flat out wrong.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=17552.msg173796#msg173796

There's a quote from Andy Glockner in there when we were 11-8 saying that we were still in the mix and if we didn't make the NCAA he'd pick us to win the NIT. So nice try, but your memory is simply incorrect. We were on the bubble before and after that. We earned the Team Bubble Watch moniker that season.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AndyGlockner/status/20333381359243264

It was seven years ago, so I understand the foggy memory, but that season created the TBW meme that followed us for years to come.

I concede I was wrong about MU not even being on the NIT bubble. 11-8 (2-5) with a 79 RPI was probably right there. But at that point we were not on the NCAA bubble. The bubble is last 4 in, first 4 out and maybe the next 4 out. Even Glockner admits that MU needed to RECOVER to make the NCAAs. If you can show me one team ever who got an at large bid with a .576 winning %, a .286 conference winning % and a 79 RPI I'll admit that on Jan 26, 2010 we were on the NCAA bubble. But you can't because a team with that resume' has never received such a bid. We won a few, got on the bubble and when those few became 9 out of 10 we were off the bubble and safely in. Team Bubble watch is a catchy, well turned phrase. But one writer saying it doesn't make it a fact.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I can't name any teams that made it with those stats (though Syracuse had about that rpi last season) but I can name dozens who had a resume like Marquette did at that point in the season who made the tournament. To me all team bubble watch meant was that we were currently out or near out of the tournament but had a reseonable chance to play ourselves in. And that's my definition. I'm not going to argue about the definition of a made up turn of phrase.

[Lennys Tap]

I can't name any teams that made it with those stats (though Syracuse had about that rpi last season) but I can name dozens who had a resume like Marquette did at that point in the season who made the tournament. To me all team bubble watch meant was that we were currently out or near out of the tournament but had a reseonable chance to play ourselves in. And that's my definition. I'm not going to argue about the definition of a made up turn of phrase.

Two ways of defining "the bubble", I guess. By my definition, it's a snapshot that includes maybe the last 8 in and the first 8 out at any given time from around mid January until the end of the season. Teams move on or off (in both directions) depending on performance. Yours is much larger and more subjective - you could probably argue that there are 50 teams out now with a "reasonable" chance of playing themselves into the tournament who you would put "on the bubble" and 30+ teams who are in now with a reasonable chance of playing themselves out. Maybe it's as simple as the bubble watch is broad and the actual bubble more narrow.