The Youth Excuse

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Let's play a game. How many teams ranked ahead of Marquette in KenPom feature rosters with 2 or less upperclassmen (seniors and juniors) in their top 9 players. If there are any, can you name which one or ones?

I actually did the research and know the answer, was surprised by the results. I'll share in a day or two.

[muwarrior69]

It's kind of an unfair question in that we have only 9 players and not a full roster. The other factor is are those two upper classman better than our 2 upper classman. I think we are where we are not because of our youth, but for our poor defensive play. I picked (a guess) 5.

[brewcity77]

I guessed 1, though I think it may as well be 2. My guesses are Duke and Kentucky. I think Kentucky will be the only one that actually qualifies because while Duke plays mostly freshmen (and Grayson Allen) they don't go very deep, so they probably have a couple forgotten juniors around 7th-9th on the depth chart.

[Jockey]

I guessed 1, though I think it may as well be 2. My guesses are Duke and Kentucky. I think Kentucky will be the only one that actually qualifies because while Duke plays mostly freshmen (and Grayson Allen) they don't go very deep, so they probably have a couple forgotten juniors around 7th-9th on the depth chart.

Those were the 2 that I thought of.

Possibly another random team or two as there are lots ahead of us in the ratings.

[Lennys Tap]

The real question, for me anyway, is how many teams (above or below us), have freshmen or sophomores who will have better careers than our groups?Having a team that plays a lot of young guys in and of itself is meaningless. Having really good young players who will stay and get better is what makes a future bright. Sam and Markus are very good college players who should get better but are somewhat limited by size and/or athletic ability. The jury is still out on the freshmen. They play because they have to, not because they're ready - and show flashes, could become really good - or not. The future (especially with Joey and Bailey coming on board) may be very bright but it's anything but guaranteed.

[mu03eng]

Am I allowed to cheat and use KenPom?

edit: Oh boy #Shaka

[skianth16]

It might be a good thing Wojo didn't have this information handy for his presser Saturday. This might have been the talking point instead of youngest team in the oldest conference.

Snarky jokes aside, I assume the answer is 2 or 3, going with 2 for my vote. We all know we're young and that experience is helpful when competing at a high level, but it's still tough to swallow the losses in the last 2 weeks. If we had only seem glimpses here and there of this team's potential, I think it would be easier. But we've seen them put together for a full 40 minutes more than a few times this year, so now I expect them to be able to keep doing that, which may be unfair for a bunch of teenagers.

Greg, Theo, and Jamal have all matured so much this year that at times it can be easy to forget they're freshmen. Sam plays with the composure and basketball IQ of an upperclassmen. And Markus is just something special. Sure, he's a sophomore, but he's always played well above expectations for his age.

Is it true that we're awfully young? Yup, sure is. Is that the reason we've dropped 4 straight? I have a hard time saying yes to that.

[The Lens]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

[mu03eng]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

I've said all along that you had to sign Ellenson but that set back the rebuild by at least a year both from expectation and from roster composition.

[tower912]

Yes.     Duane wanted to be featured and felt he wouldn't be at MU.   Traci didn't like the numbers either.    Haanif..... for now, I am going to take him at his word and consider it a family issue.    All would help this team. 

I have touched on this before, and I am sure I will again.    It is hard to recruit quality players when there is a perception that there is a young player in place.     Henry Ellenson.    His presence sent Levin and SjT packing and kept Froling from coming in the first place.    I go to Yogi Ferrell at IU.    Crean was never able to recruit a quality PG while Ferrell was on the roster.    Not even one willing to come and learn as a freshman and take over as a sophomore.    Markus' presence makes recruiting a HS PG problematic.

Wojo is going to have to convince a recruit that they are going to be able to get minutes as a freshman in a backcourt with Markus, Gregg, Sacar, Jamal.    Because coming to a school, sitting for a couple of years to perfect your craft, and then taking over as a junior is no longer a thing.   

[GooooMarquette]

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Not sure I agree Haanif was a miss.  His stats were best as a frosh in large part because defenses were going all-in to stop Henry.  There was a decrease in ppg as a soph partly because he was more a focus of the defenses, and partly because we lost Henry and suddenly had an influx of really good perimeter players (Andrew, Markus, Sam and Katin).  It's hard to tell where this season would have ended up because he was only here for 5 games.

And even with the decrease in ppg, he was still our best perimeter defender his first two years, and comparable on defense with Sacar this season. He played a valuable role, and IMHO we wouldn't have these enormous defensive concerns if his family issue hadn't come up.

Maybe he wasn't the star we thought we had when he was a frosh, but I'd hardly call him a miss.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

A valid question. Looking back, Wojo had two choices when he took over:

1. Build for year 5, but try to have some winning basketball in the meantime
2. Build for year 4, but have some really ugly basketball in the meantime

Year 1, I don't think Wojo had many or any options. The goal there was just to get enough players to put onto the court.

Year 2 is where Wojo had to make the decision. He didn't have to recruit Henry, he knew the chances were slim to none that Henry was there for more than a year. He could have filled his team instead with guys like Gabe Levin, Harry Froling, and maybe get transfers like Kyle Washington. That would also free up the useless scholarship that was Wally Ellenson. He also didn't have to keep guys like Jajuan Johnson, Sandy Cohen, Luke Fischer, or Duane Wilson, guys who while nice players, were not going to amount to more than a first round NCAA exit at Marquette. He could have encouraged those guys to leave and brought in more of his freshmen and transfers. The result would have a disastrous year 2 and year 3...but a year 4 filled with upperclassmen who knew Wojo's system and theoretically been ready to compete for a high seed.

Instead, Wojo tried to put enough talent on the court to at least have some decent basketball while bringing up his own guys. I think this was the right move, can you imagine how apocalyptic this board would have been if we had a losing season in year 2 and no NCAA in year 3? And there were other benefits like having experienced players to mentor the younger ones and the exposure that came with Henry. But I remember at least one poster, I think it was Dr. Blackheart, who said that Wojo should have blown up the roster when he took over and started the rebuild in earnest. Maybe he was correct. The idea definitely seems less crazy to me now than it did when he first said it.

We will know next season if Wojo's strategy will pay off.

[Marcus92]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

All good questions. No easy answers.

I think there's another side to bringing in players like Carlino and Reinhardt. While 2015 was pretty much a disaster, Matt showed young players like Duane Wilson, JaJuan Johnson and Luke Fischer what senior leadership means. He played hard, he played for the team. Matt embodied the idea that you keep fighting, no matter what, even when things aren't going your way.

Two years later, Katin came to Marquette as the only player with NCAA tournament experience. That certainly made an impression on young players like Markus and Sam. And Duane, JJJ and Luke were now veteran leaders themselves. They appreciated what it takes to win. Luke and Duane even accepted reduced roles because it made the team better. That's part of the foundation of a winning program.

Henry, in my view, is a unique case. I enjoyed seeing one of the most talented players in the country in an MU uniform. We may never see another rebounder like him. But aside from bringing national visibility to the program, it feels like his impact was limited. That said, I don't think there's a coach in college basketball that turns him away at the door.

Haanif, Traci and Duane? Expecting a 100% hit rate on recruits with zero transfers is simply unrealistic. And if we're going to become a Top 25 program, we need to be constantly looking to upgrade talent. However, I do hope we reach a point where the transfers level off and we start to actually see the rewards of developing young players.

[79Warrior]

Yes.     Duane wanted to be featured and felt he wouldn't be at MU.   Traci didn't like the numbers either.    Haanif..... for now, I am going to take him at his word and consider it a family issue.    All would help this team. 

I have touched on this before, and I am sure I will again.    It is hard to recruit quality players when there is a perception that there is a young player in place.     Henry Ellenson.    His presence sent Levin and SjT packing and kept Froling from coming in the first place.    I go to Yogi Ferrell at IU.    Crean was never able to recruit a quality PG while Ferrell was on the roster.    Not even one willing to come and learn as a freshman and take over as a sophomore.    Markus' presence makes recruiting a HS PG problematic.

Wojo is going to have to convince a recruit that they are going to be able to get minutes as a freshman in a backcourt with Markus, Gregg, Sacar, Jamal.    Because coming to a school, sitting for a couple of years to perfect your craft, and then taking over as a junior is no longer a thing.   

Well, how do other schools do it? We seem to have had a PG issue for a bit now.

[The Lens]

All good questions. No easy answers.

I think there's another side to bringing in players like Carlino and Reinhardt. While 2015 was pretty much a disaster, Matt showed young players like Duane Wilson, JaJuan Johnson and Luke Fischer what senior leadership means. He played hard, he played for the team. Matt embodied the idea that you keep fighting, no matter what, even when things aren't going your way.

Two years later, Katin came to Marquette as the only player with NCAA tournament experience. That certainly made an impression on young players like Markus and Sam. And Duane, JJJ and Luke were now veteran leaders themselves. They appreciated what it takes to win. Luke and Duane even accepted reduced roles because it made the team better. That's part of the foundation of a winning program.

Very good points.  I can certainly appreciate how balancing the roster can help not just on the court but off it as well. 

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Here is a scatter plot of experience (definition below) and rank for the top 100 KenPom teams for '17 and '18.  Marquette is in red.

Experience
– The experience value is in terms of years of college experience where a player’s eligibility class is assumed to determine this. For the purposes of the calculation, a freshman has zero years of experience, a sophomore has one year of experience, etc.

– Like the average height calculation, the experience calculation weights the experience of each player on the roster based on minutes played. Players that have played less than 10% of their team’s minutes are not included.

[SaveOD238]

Here is a scatter plot of experience (definition below) and rank for the top 100 KenPom teams for '17 and '18.  Marquette is in red.

Experience
– The experience value is in terms of years of college experience where a player’s eligibility class is assumed to determine this. For the purposes of the calculation, a freshman has zero years of experience, a sophomore has one year of experience, etc.

– Like the average height calculation, the experience calculation weights the experience of each player on the roster based on minutes played. Players that have played less than 10% of their team’s minutes are not included.

It doesn't take a genius to notice that we went from middle of the pack to near the bottom.

What's interesting though is that there isn't a clear correlation that experience=success.  There are good teams, both years, with lots of experience and good teams with no experience. 

It would be interesting to see all 351 teams plotted, to see if the correlation was stronger.

[SaveOD238]

I have touched on this before, and I am sure I will again.    It is hard to recruit quality players when there is a perception that there is a young player in place.     Henry Ellenson.    His presence sent Levin and SjT packing and kept Froling from coming in the first place.    I go to Yogi Ferrell at IU.    Crean was never able to recruit a quality PG while Ferrell was on the roster.    Not even one willing to come and learn as a freshman and take over as a sophomore.    Markus' presence makes recruiting a HS PG problematic.

Wojo is going to have to convince a recruit that they are going to be able to get minutes as a freshman in a backcourt with Markus, Gregg, Sacar, Jamal.    Because coming to a school, sitting for a couple of years to perfect your craft, and then taking over as a junior is no longer a thing.   

I wouldn't entirely rule out bringing in younger guys to fill the bench, especially since that's how we got Greg.

The problem is recruiting the right guys.  A guard ranked in the top 25 would probably not shy away from coming to MU if he thought he could beat out Howard, etc, for minutes.  A guard ranked 25-100 or so would be more likely to want a school where he can come in right away and be the guy, without having to beat out an established player.  We're probably screwed on the latter group for this year.

The place where you can recruit is the unranked guys who are willing to sit or be role-players their first two years, a la Greg Elliot.

[The Lens]

The place where you can recruit is the unranked guys who are willing to sit or be role-players their first two years, a la Greg Elliot.

Especially if you believe in your player development. 

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

What's interesting though is that there isn't a clear correlation that experience=success.  There are good teams, both years, with lots of experience and good teams with no experience. 

That is my conclusion. 

All teams...experience seemingly no matta.

[Lennys Tap]

I have touched on this before, and I am sure I will again.    It is hard to recruit quality players when there is a perception that there is a young player in place.     Henry Ellenson.    His presence sent Levin and SjT packing and kept Froling from coming in the first place.    I go to Yogi Ferrell at IU.    Crean was never able to recruit a quality PG while Ferrell was on the roster.    Not even one willing to come and learn as a freshman and take over as a sophomore.    Markus' presence makes recruiting a HS PG problematic.

Wojo is going to have to convince a recruit that they are going to be able to get minutes as a freshman in a backcourt with Markus, Gregg, Sacar, Jamal.    Because coming to a school, sitting for a couple of years to perfect your craft, and then taking over as a junior is no longer a thing.   

I don't see why Markus' presence makes recruiting a PG problematic - he's an undersized #2 occasionally filling in for our other undersized #2 guard who starts out of necessity at the point. A true point guard who can play would get big minutes right from the jump.

[Lennys Tap]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

+1. One and dones, grad transfers, regular transfers, everything but jucos (where it seems Wojo has no contacts) - it all points to a win now philosophy, not some grandiose 5 year plan. Maybe we'll finally be good in year 5, but it's hard for me to see a cogent, consistent "plan" that got us there.

[Dawson Rental]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

You're talking about a first time head coach who didn't have an opportunity to recruit for hhis first year, except to get a band aid player who went grad transfer in the spring (Carlino), and a lone holdover from the previous coach's class (Cohen).

BY THE WAY, this is why a head coach shouldn't be replaced lightly: MU loses a complete year of recruiting which then set the program back for three years.

He then in his first recruiting class got a very well thought of class of five two of which are in the rotation, one of which went pro after one year, and two of which were left after being recruited over (even though one of them was starting at the time). 

BY THE WAY, recruiting over starting players is a good thing because it raises the team's talent level.

So now we have a young team whose core is freshmen and sophomores and two (at least) top 100 freshmen coming in. 

What's not to like?  Given your level of expectations Jay Wright never would have made it past his fourth year at Villanova.  Too bad, you could have spared them all that winning.

[GGGG]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

1. Not every plan goes according to form. 

2. Signing a grad transfer doesn't really hurt long-term development.  You are only using the scholarship for a year.  Rowsey was a no-brainer in retrospect.

3. I'm thinking that Year 5 is going to look pretty nice. 

[Floorslapper]

My take:  The roster situation is what it is, and it has arrived at this place due to the actions and choices of Wojo.

You wouldn't think in Year 4 of a "rebuild," we'd be so young.  Can't blame Traci, Duane, Deonte, Levin for transferring out.  All four of those guys could play, but didn't like their role/projected role as they looked at the composition of the roster (that Wojo recruited).

I don't see Haanif as a loss, as it opened the doors for our freshman, who both have a MUCH higher ceiling than Haanif, and Sacar is a better player/athlete than was Haanif.

No way you fire Wojo after this year even if he stinks up the joint the rest of the way.  If he can't get the job done next with a relatively easy/lock type of NCAA bid, say 6 seed - you seriously have to question if there is any more room to his ceiling.

The frustrating part, I think for those not fully on board with Wojo at this point, is, that, he's provided little evidence he can actually be a difference-maker as a coach on an X's and O's, or in-game strategist.  I tend to be in this camp, and as a result feel his recruiting will need to be ELITE (like almost to a Duke level) for us to be able to compete for Sweet 16/Elite 8 seasons (which would be my goal for the program.)

[ATL MU Warrior]

My take:  The roster situation is what it is, and it has arrived at this place due to the actions and choices of Wojo.

You wouldn't think in Year 4 of a "rebuild," we'd be so young.  Can't blame Traci, Duane, Deonte, Levin for transferring out.  All four of those guys could play, but didn't like their role/projected role as they looked at the composition of the roster (that Wojo recruited).

I don't see Haanif as a loss, as it opened the doors for our freshman, who both have a MUCH higher ceiling than Haanif, and Sacar is a better player/athlete than was Haanif.

No way you fire Wojo after this year even if he stinks up the joint the rest of the way.  If he can't get the job done next with a relatively easy/lock type of NCAA bid, say 6 seed - you seriously have to question if there is any more room to his ceiling.

The frustrating part, I think for those not fully on board with Wojo at this point, is, that, he's provided little evidence he can actually be a difference-maker as a coach on an X's and O's, or in-game strategist.  I tend to be in this camp, and as a result feel his recruiting will need to be ELITE (like almost to a Duke level) for us to be able to compete for Sweet 16/Elite 8 seasons (which would be my goal for the program.)

Dunked on anyone lately?

[tower912]

My take:  The roster situation is what it is, and it has arrived at this place due to the actions and choices of Wojo.

You wouldn't think in Year 4 of a "rebuild," we'd be so young.  Can't blame Traci, Duane, Deonte, Levin for transferring out.  All four of those guys could play, but didn't like their role/projected role as they looked at the composition of the roster (that Wojo recruited).

I don't see Haanif as a loss, as it opened the doors for our freshman, who both have a MUCH higher ceiling than Haanif, and Sacar is a better player/athlete than was Haanif.

No way you fire Wojo after this year even if he stinks up the joint the rest of the way.  If he can't get the job done next with a relatively easy/lock type of NCAA bid, say 6 seed - you seriously have to question if there is any more room to his ceiling.

The frustrating part, I think for those not fully on board with Wojo at this point, is, that, he's provided little evidence he can actually be a difference-maker as a coach on an X's and O's, or in-game strategist.  I tend to be in this camp, and as a result feel his recruiting will need to be ELITE (like almost to a Duke level) for us to be able to compete for Sweet 16/Elite 8 seasons (which would be my goal for the program.)

This creates the question.... what do you do about a player who looks forward and doesn't like his role?    How do you replace that player on short notice?    If Duane or Traci don't see themselves playing, you end up with an outside the top 100 recruit like Greg and hope he pans out.   (which, so far, he has)    But if the perception of recruits is the same as the perception of the returnees, how do you attract high level (top 100) recruits to come and sit behind Markus for 2-3 years?     If Levin and STjr and Froling don't see opportunities and don't believe Henry is a one-and-done do you take a body and have them occupy a scholarship?     
    I like our freshman class, but when Bailey and Joey and Morrow arrive next fall, how will that affect their perception of their role?    And if they leave to get more consistent time elsewhere, aren't we right back where we started?       Should Wojo be trying to line up 4 new players?    Would we want players who accept that they will not see the court for two years?   
   So far, Wojo can recruit.     Keeping the players happy when they get to MU appears to be the real challenge.   

[GGGG]

Dunked on anyone lately?

[Its DJOver]

Different players have different roles. Wojo will have to convince multiple players to accept new roles next year, because other than Markus and Sam, who should stay consistent, everyone else will likely have fewer minutes, with only one player leaving and 4 coming in.

[GooooMarquette]

Dunked on anyone lately?

Spit take....

[Floorslapper]

Dunked on anyone lately?

Huh?  I guess I just did, on Wojo?

[BM1090]

Definitely seems to be Ners.

If it is Ners, he's been totally fine since coming back IMO

[ATL MU Warrior]

Definitely seems to be Ners.

If it is Ners, he's been totally fine since coming back IMO

agree completely.  Ners had a distinctive way of phrasing certain things...as does this poster.

The only question is whether Floorslapper is a better dunker than was Ners.

[Eldon]

agree completely.  Ners had a distinctive way of phrasing certain things...as does this poster.

The only question is whether Floorslapper is a better dunker than was is Ners.

Go up to the hwy 100 YMCA on Saturday mornings and/or Thursday evenings.  Ners bams on everybody there.

[Eldon]

I voted 1 (stab in the dark, but I'd say Kentucky)

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Bump. Any last guesses?

[mu03eng]

Bump. Any last guesses?

I know the answer, does that make it a guess? 5 total teams

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I know the answer, does that make it a guess? 5 total teams

Your number is different than mine so I'll be curious to see where we deviate.

[mu03eng]

Your number is different than mine so I'll be curious to see where we deviate.

I used KenPom's experience metric instead of a pure roster analysis like you seemed to have done. So I just looked for higher ranked KenPom teams with a lower ranked experience.

[MerrittsMustache]

Being an "experienced team" is not necessarily the same as "having upperclassmen in the rotation." Underclassmen who log a lot of minutes and play during crunch time bring a different quality than seniors who've ridden the pine for 3+ years.

Haanif Cheatham played 974 minutes his freshman year.

Matt Heldt has currently played a total of 977 minutes in nearly 3 full seasons.

What's more valuable to a team: Soph year Cheatham or Upperclassman Heldt?

[brewcity77]

NM

[skianth16]

Being an "experienced team" is not necessarily the same as "having upperclassmen in the rotation." Underclassmen who log a lot of minutes and play during crunch time bring a different quality than seniors who've ridden the pine for 3+ years.

Haanif Cheatham played 974 minutes his freshman year.

Matt Heldt has currently played a total of 977 minutes in nearly 3 full seasons.

What's more valuable to a team: Soph year Cheatham or Upperclassman Heldt?

Fair point. But there's still a lot of value to having the extra  year or two of practices, film study, time in the weight room, etc. Guys do seem to learn at a faster pace when they get more minutes in games, but there's a reason coaches like to redshirt players too.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

And the answer is.....2!

Neither were a surprise to me as they are one and done factories Duke (#5 in KenPom) and Kentucky (#29 in KenPom). But I was surprised that it was only 2.

That's it. No other team ranked higher than Marquette by KenPom has only 2 upperclassmen currently in it's top 9 players.

I'll add two that came close:

West Virginia (#14 in KenPom) currently has 2 seniors, a junior, 5 sophomores, and 1 freshman in their top 9 players. Most of the season, they only had 2 upperclassmen. Junior Esa Ahmad was suspended for the first 16 games of the season.

Alabama (#51 in KenPom) is currently ranked 1 spot behind Marquette. They have even less experience than we do with 2 juniors, 3 sophomores, and 4 freshmen in their top 9. Props the Herman Cain, he's said a couple times that Avery Johnson would be a good hire there, and this seems to support that.

In fact, even if you up the cutoff to 3 upperclassmen in the top 9, there only 4 more teams that are ranked above Marquette: West Virginia (#14), Arizona (#23), Miami FL (#27), and Texas (#33). So 5/49 of the teams ranked above Marquette have at least 4 upperclassmen in their top 9 players.

Said another way, the only 2 coaches who are doing better than Wojo with this few upperclassmen on the roster are 2 future HOFers with an average of 4 or 5 players on their team who could be one and dones.

Now some caveats:
KenPom is not flawless.
There is a difference between # of upperclassmen and experience
This doesn't take into account who the stars and bench players are...for example one of Marquette's upperclassmen is Matt Heldt....that is not as significant as West Virginia's two best players being seniors

Look, I don't mean this as proof that Wojo is a great coach and those who have their doubts are wrong. Cause this is not enough evidence to support either of those claims. But I do think this supports the assertion that our youth is NOT an excuse, but a reality. If youth isn't a factor, why is no other team doing better than us with a similarly aged roster (other than the blue blooded one and done factories with HOF coaches)?

In my (very limited) experience there are three ways to win at a high level in college basketball:

1. Get one and dones
2. Get old
3. Some combo of the two

We are working on #2 (and hopefully #3 sometime soon!). Next season (assuming no defections) we will have a roster with 1 senior, 5 juniors, 3 sophomores, and 3 freshmen. On the list that I did, that swings us from one of the youngest to one of the oldest in a single offseason...and that doesn't account for the possibility of a grad transfer.

I still have hope for this year, 5-2 is tough but doable. But if we fall short, there is reason to be very optimistic about next season.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Postgame bump.

[tower912]

Thank you, TAMU.       This team is so young.    And, as opposed to Kentucky or Duke, the freshmen are all outside the top 100.    Good players, all.    Progressing nicely, all showing glimpses.    To expect them to be instant impact and wail and gnash your teeth when they are not isn't fair to them.   

[mu03eng]

So comparing KenPom overall rankings to the Experience ranking I got 5 teams that are less experienced than MU but performing "better".

Duke
Kentucky
Texas
Syracuse
Alabama

Was surprised by Syracuse but I guess I don't follow them closely anymore.

[Tugg Speedman]

Another question is why are we at this point in year four?

Is it because we used scholarships on Matt Carlino, Wally Ellenson, Henry Ellenson, Katin Reinhardt or Andrew Rowsey?  If we were on this perfectly planned 5 year plan that he sold the admin on, why did we constantly sign band-aids?  How did those guys help build for sustained, long-term success?

Or is it because we swung and missed on Hannif & Traci Carter?

Or is it because we couldn't come to an agreement with Duane Wilson about how his 5th year at Marquette would look?

Isn't the answer simple?

Carter, Hannif were recruited over because Wojo is getting better and better players so they left to find a better role for themselves.

Will the problem fixed next year with everyone a year old, Morrow and a "seasoned" Froling?

[brewcity77]

Hmm...I'd count Alabama. They are behind us now, but when this was posted, Alabama had yet to lose to Mississippi State and was 49 per Pomeroy while MU had yet to beat Seton Hall and was at 50 per Pomeroy. An admittedly minor quibble.

[muwarrior69]

And the answer is.....2!

Neither were a surprise to me as they are one and done factories Duke (#5 in KenPom) and Kentucky (#29 in KenPom). But I was surprised that it was only 2.

That's it. No other team ranked higher than Marquette by KenPom has only 2 upperclassmen currently in it's top 9 players.

I'll add two that came close:

West Virginia (#14 in KenPom) currently has 2 seniors, a junior, 5 sophomores, and 1 freshman in their top 9 players. Most of the season, they only had 2 upperclassmen. Junior Esa Ahmad was suspended for the first 16 games of the season.

Alabama (#51 in KenPom) is currently ranked 1 spot behind Marquette. They have even less experience than we do with 2 juniors, 3 sophomores, and 4 freshmen in their top 9. Props the Herman Cain, he's said a couple times that Avery Johnson would be a good hire there, and this seems to support that.

In fact, even if you up the cutoff to 3 upperclassmen in the top 9, there only 4 more teams that are ranked above Marquette: West Virginia (#14), Arizona (#23), Miami FL (#27), and Texas (#33). So 5/49 of the teams ranked above Marquette have at least 4 upperclassmen in their top 9 players.

Said another way, the only 2 coaches who are doing better than Wojo with this few upperclassmen on the roster are 2 future HOFers with an average of 4 or 5 players on their team who could be one and dones.

Now some caveats:
KenPom is not flawless.
There is a difference between # of upperclassmen and experience
This doesn't take into account who the stars and bench players are...for example one of Marquette's upperclassmen is Matt Heldt....that is not as significant as West Virginia's two best players being seniors

Look, I don't mean this as proof that Wojo is a great coach and those who have their doubts are wrong. Cause this is not enough evidence to support either of those claims. But I do think this supports the assertion that our youth is NOT an excuse, but a reality. If youth isn't a factor, why is no other team doing better than us with a similarly aged roster (other than the blue blooded one and done factories with HOF coaches)?

In my (very limited) experience there are three ways to win at a high level in college basketball:

1. Get one and dones
2. Get old
3. Some combo of the two

We are working on #2 (and hopefully #3 sometime soon!). Next season (assuming no defections) we will have a roster with 1 senior, 5 juniors, 3 sophomores, and 3 freshmen. On the list that I did, that swings us from one of the youngest to one of the oldest in a single offseason...and that doesn't account for the possibility of a grad transfer.

I still have hope for this year, 5-2 is tough but doable. But if we fall short, there is reason to be very optimistic about next season.

You are the stat guy. Were we better defensively last year (older team) or this year (younger team)? Yes being young is a reality, but how does that translate to playing poor defense which I believe is why we are where we are. I am optimistic about next year, but only if we can solve our defensive problems.

[tower912]

1.  Understanding scheme and executing it every time. 
2.  Physical strength.   Witness Cain at the end of the Villanova game.   
3.  The rigors of the Big East. (or any high major conference)   
4.  Not letting the moment overwhelm.   

[mu03eng]

You are the stat guy. Were we better defensively last year (older team) or this year (younger team)? Yes being young is a reality, but how does that translate to playing poor defense which I believe is why we are where we are. I am optimistic about next year, but only if we can solve our defensive problems.

That's a great question so I looked:

To date, we have a adjusted defensive ranking of 155 on KenPom on 11th hardest schedule with the 210th most experience

In 2017, we had an adjusted defensive ranking of 165 on the 37th hardest schedule with the 192nd most experience

That doesn't account for our schedule getting easier over the next couple of weeks so our SoS might go down but our defense ranking might go up. All and all, on the surface the coaching/talent are better this year than last year.

[SaveOD238]

To date, we have a adjusted defensive ranking of 155 on KenPom on 11th hardest schedule with the 210th most experience

And the 2nd hardest SOS when it comes to Opponents' Offense.  We have played a murderers row of excellent offensive teams.