Anonymous Eagle Article

[GoldenWarrior11]

So if PC and SH have had so much talent and turned it into 1 NCAA win a piece, why did you say that Cooley and Willard were overachieving?

Also, bolded directly contradicts your "as simple as" post earlier which is the one I took exception to.

In the NBA, this past year, Seton Hall had zero players in the NBA; Providence had one (Dunn).  Both have had players play in the NBA in prior years.  Considering Willard has made 4 (5, this year) consecutive NCAA Tournaments, with just one present NBA player, and in relation to other BE programs' relation to present NBA alumni, yes - I'd argue, with what Willard has had, as NBA talent, he has overachieved.  Cooley, has made five of the past six NCAA Tournaments (with a 6th expected this past year).  Again, with what is currently in the NBA, and in relation to NBA alumni of other programs, I'd say he overachieved too.

McDermott has quite a few (Patton, Thomas, McDermott, Alexander [this year]) in the NBA the past season or two.  However, McDermott, including this year (which was supposed to be a top-seed), has made three of six NCAA Tournaments.  I'd argue he has underachieved (but the outlook for next year is very, very promising).  As previously stated, I'd also argue DePaul has immensely underachieved (they have a few players that have appeared in the NBA, not including Reed this year), yet haven't even made an NIT (let alone an NCAA). 

Given Wojo's recruits, and only Henry really making the NBA thus far (Howard should as well), it's not a surprise as to why we haven't been consistently in the top-half of the BE (we look to be taking another step back next year). 

Yes, this is one reason.  They can be others as well.  That's why I made the whole point. 

[GoldenWarrior11]

Which is not what your original list was consisting of.

Because those were Buzz recruits, not Wojo's.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Also last time MU was below .500 we had multiple players that ended up playing in the NBA. Maybe NBA players aren't the best correlation.

Which means that team absolutely underachieved, for sure. 

[Its DJOver]

In 2018, Andrew Rowsey shot 42% from the field, 41% from 3, 90% from the line and averaged 20.1 ppg.

In 2018 Lonnie Walker shot 41% from the field, 34% from 3, 73% from the line and averaged 11.5 ppg.

Which would you say was the better college player, which is currently in the NBA. 

Yet another example of why looking at players that are currently in the NBA, as a metric for college level ability is at best very misleading.

[dgies9156]

Here we go again.

Someone writes a critical article about Coach Wojo and we suddenly are bombarded with Projos and Nojos. C'mon folks, have we said anything that has not already been said in this debate? Is there anything new we have not debated until we're all ready to throw up? I don't think so.

For those of you who missed the bus, let me save you four more takes of repetitious debate:

1) Lots of people like Wojo and thinks he can get to Michigan by walking across the lake.
2) Lots of people think Daffy Duck or Hologram Al could do a better job coaching our beloved Warriors than Coach Wojo.
3) The Nojos think we should be a blue blood and many are of an age where we remember our beloved Warriors as one of the best teams in the nation.
4) The Projos think we are Marquette means we're a better than average program and that our disadvantages, like being in Milwaukee, having cold weather and our coeds not being on the cover of what now passes for Playboy, prevent us from being a blueblood.
5) Both Projos and Nojos think the Board of Trustees loves Coach Wojo.

There you have it. Did I miss anything?

 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I mean, it's a discussion board where participation is optional.

[GoldenWarrior11]

In 2018, Andrew Rowsey shot 42% from the field, 41% from 3, 90% from the line and averaged 20.1 ppg.

In 2018 Lonnie Walker shot 41% from the field, 34% from 3, 73% from the line and averaged 11.5 ppg.

Which would you say was the better college player, which is currently in the NBA. 

Yet another example of why looking at players that are currently in the NBA, as a metric for college level ability is at best very misleading.

From those stats alone?  Rowsey, easily.

However, Miami made the tournament that year (Marquette didn't).  And, again, Walker is in the NBA, and Rowsey isn't/wasn't.  Miami currently has three players in the NBA (Brown, Hernandez, Walker) with a few others (Mac, Reed) in the past few seasons.  Miami, in that timeframe has a Sweet 16 and two other NCAA appearances.  Coincidence? 

[Its DJOver]

From those stats alone?  Rowsey, easily.

However, Miami made the tournament that year (Marquette didn't).  And, again, Walker is in the NBA, and Rowsey isn't/wasn't.  Miami currently has three players in the NBA (Brown, Hernandez, Walker) with a few others (Mac, Reed) in the past few seasons.  Miami, in that timeframe has a Sweet 16 and two other NCAA appearances.  Coincidence?

That's not the point.  The point is that there are plenty of great college players that weren't in the NBA last year, which is why your list is extremely misleading.

You never mentioned why I4 and USC haven't had the same level of success as Nova even though they currently have the same number of players in the NBA.

Mizzou would get a spot on your list because of Michael Porter, what did he do for them?  Memphis is about to get another spot on your list because of James Wiseman, what did he do for them?  UNC has another tally from Nassir Little, who never started a game and averaged less than 20 mpg.  Deondre Jordan averaged 8 points, 4 boards, and 20 mpg in college, that's not exactly spectacular for a future 3 time All-NBA player.

The point is that while looking at NBA talent produced can be a tool, calculating collegiate success is not "as simple as" just looking at the number of players that a University has put in the NBA.

[WhiteTrash]

5) Both Projos and Nojos think the Board of Trustees loves Coach Wojo.

There you have it. Did I miss anything?

I'm not on the BoT but my understanding is they like, not love, Wojo. He checks all the boxes except W's & L's. We are 1 year away from another "extend or cut bait" situation for a reason. 

Ooops! I forgot, MU has no money to payout Wojo so they will let him stay till the end of his contract (and that will do wonders for his recruiting). Plus, there are no viable coaches who will take the MU job. 

Horizon League, here we come!

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'm not on the BoT but my understanding is they like, not love, Wojo. He checks all the boxes except W's & L's. We are 1 year away from another "extend or cut bait" situation for a reason. 

Ooops! I forgot, MU has no money to payout Wojo so they will let him stay till the end of his contract (and that will do wonders for his recruiting). Plus, there are no viable coaches who will take the MU job. 

Horizon League, here we come!

There's another option besides "extend" or "cut bait." There's "extend and renegotiate the buyout."

[GoldenWarrior11]

That's not the point.  The point is that there are plenty of great college players that weren't in the NBA last year, which is why your list is extremely misleading.

You never mentioned why I4 and USC haven't had the same level of success as Nova even though they currently have the same number of players in the NBA.

Mizzou would get a spot on your list because of Michael Porter, what did he do for them?  Memphis is about to get another spot on your list because of James Wiseman, what did he do for them?  UNC has another tally from Nassir Little, who never started a game and averaged less than 20 mpg.  Deondre Jordan averaged 8 points, 4 boards, and 20 mpg in college, that's not exactly spectacular for a future 3 time All-NBA player.

The point is that while looking at NBA talent produced can be a tool, calculating collegiate success is not "as simple as" just looking at the number of players that a University has put in the NBA.

I'll happily mention both IU and USC.  They have both clearly underachieved, given their talent.  They are getting talented players into the program consistently, and they aren't meeting program expectations.  Nasir Little's UNC team also had Coby White and Cameron Johnson as present NBA players (with Luke Maye and Kenny Williams as future call-ups as well).  DeAndre Jordan's 2008 A&M team made the tournament and even won a game (and he's also had teammates play professionally). 

Wiseman didn't even make it through his first semester.  Porter obviously is another one due to injury.  Neither contributed to their program's ability, or inability, to have a successful season and/or make the tournament.  I wouldn't chalk either up to use an example in any case. 

No, it's not simple (I never argued it was) - but it is definitely relatable with overwhelming amounts of data.

[The Equalizer]

MU should finish top 3-4 every year. That's not having unrealistic explanations, that's not embellishing or asking for too much. That's just reality a program like MU's should be top 3-4 every year in conference.

The problem with this kind of thinking is that it ignores the fact that there are probably 9 (and now 10) other Big East teams setting the same goals, same expectations, same level of investment, same program history, etc.

What specific advantage do you think we have that would make us perpetually better than those other programs? 15 years ago the Al first opened, it was an advantage.  Now that every other Big East program is investing in equivalent facilities, it's just table stakes. Villanova, Butler, Georgetown, St. Johns, DePaul, UConn Seton Hall, and Providence all have Final Four banners hanging in their gyms--why do you think a recruit would care more about our banner than theirs? 

Realistic expectations in THIS version of the Big East, with the relative equivalence in investment, facilities, history, etc, its more like all teams will average is a top 4 finish once every 3 years--and that includes MU.

Until Wright retires, Villanova is the only team that should have expectations to make the top 4 every year, and until they get a new AD, DePaul won't be expected to perform at that level.

Otherwise, you have 9 roughly equal programs with equal desires that will compete for the other 3 available top 4 finishes every year. 

[WhiteTrash]

There's another option besides "extend" or "cut bait." There's "extend and renegotiate the buyout."

Serious question. What is the school's buyout? My understanding is that the school has to pay the remainder of the contract. (All my employment contracts worked that way). Not really a "buyout" just fulfilling the contractual obligation.

Are coaches agreeing to contracts that allow the school out at a lower amount than the contract calls for? (I know this is sometimes negotiated at terminations but didn't think so in the contract) Seems like a request that will piss-off the coach and get him looking for another job ASAP.

I'm no expert but I've only heard of the employee or coach paying the buyout.

Plus the bigger, and original question/assertion, is why is MU having to go through another renegotiation in just two years? If the BoT "loved him" this should be an every 5 year process. If I loved my coach I'd lock him up and give him a meaningful raise.

My understanding is they "like him" not "love him".

[Its DJOver]

I'll happily mention both IU and USC.  They have both clearly underachieved, given their talent.  They are getting talented players into the program consistently, and they aren't meeting program expectations.  Nasir Little's UNC team also had Coby White and Cameron Johnson as present NBA players (with Luke Maye and Kenny Williams as future call-ups as well).  DeAndre Jordan's 2008 A&M team made the tournament and even won a game (and he's also had teammates play professionally). 

Wiseman didn't even make it through his first semester.  Porter obviously is another one due to injury.  Neither contributed to their program's ability, or inability, to have a successful season and/or make the tournament.  I wouldn't chalk either up to use an example in any case. 

No, it's not simple (I never argued it was) - but it is definitely relatable with overwhelming amounts of data.

You most certainly did.

To me, I think it is as simple as just looking at the Big East in terms of players that played in the NBA this past year. 

Want another example?   Chris Mack, generally thought of as better than Wojo in every regard (especially around here).  Let's compare the talent that they put in the NBA.  Mack gets Sumner and is about to get Nwora, (who gets the Juan caveat because he inherited him).  So in a few months time they'll both have put 2 in the NBA.  Yes, Mack is a better coach, yes he has had better results, but basing it on your

To me, I think it is as simple as just looking at the Big East in terms of players that played in the NBA this past year. 

he's even with Wojo because they both had 1 NBA player last year and will have 2 next year.

Again, you can use NBA talent produced as a tool to measure success, but it is not the only tool, which means that it's not

as simple as just looking at the Big East in terms of players that played in the NBA this past year. 

[muguru]

The problem with this kind of thinking is that it ignores the fact that there are probably 9 (and now 10) other Big East teams setting the same goals, same expectations, same level of investment, same program history, etc.

What specific advantage do you think we have that would make us perpetually better than those other programs? 15 years ago the Al first opened, it was an advantage.  Now that every other Big East program is investing in equivalent facilities, it's just table stakes. Villanova, Butler, Georgetown, St. Johns, DePaul, UConn Seton Hall, and Providence all have Final Four banners hanging in their gyms--why do you think a recruit would care more about our banner than theirs? 

Realistic expectations in THIS version of the Big East, with the relative equivalence in investment, facilities, history, etc, its more like all teams will average is a top 4 finish once every 3 years--and that includes MU.

Until Wright retires, Villanova is the only team that should have expectations to make the top 4 every year, and until they get a new AD, DePaul won't be expected to perform at that level.

Otherwise, you have 9 roughly equal programs with equal desires that will compete for the other 3 available top 4 finishes every year.

Well just off the top of my head a few would be: Do other schools in the BE have a private jet available to them for recruiting??(I don't know that answer), what MU spends on basketball is greater than the other schools in the BE, and you only cite the AL, but what about the new sports science facility that they have now, I can be almost 100% certain no one else has that. That's not even mentioning the fact that they play in a state of the art NBA arena, players have access to NBA players like Giannis etc, and on top of that, what other school in the BE(with the exception of Nova) can lay claim to having recent or current popular NBA players like D Wade, Jimmy Butler and Jae Crowder as alums?? That's just a few things, I'm sure I can come up with more..but again, give nthose things in and of itself, there is no reason MU shouldn't be a top 3-4 team in the Big East consistently.

The one thing that would really elevate them and push them over the top(even nationally) is state of the art dorms for the players. They had the chance to get those and Lovell slow played it and it got taken off the table. That could end up being one of the worst decisions for the MU program in history.

[GoldenWarrior11]

You most certainly did.

My opinion was what I was referring to as simple (as I prefaced by saying, "to me").  What's not simple was the notion my opinion was the only reason/effect as to why our program was not meeting expectations - as, originally stated (and conveniently left out) was there can be many debates on this larger subject. 

You clearly disagree with my observation, which is fine.  No reason to continue going back and forth when it clearly will not lead anywhere. 

[Its DJOver]

My opinion was what I was referring to as simple (as I prefaced by saying, "to me").  What's not simple was the notion my opinion was the only reason/effect as to why our program was not meeting expectations - as, originally stated (and conveniently left out) was there can be many debates on this larger subject. 

You clearly disagree with my observation, which is fine.  No reason to continue going back and forth when it clearly will not lead anywhere.

Sorry for interpreting your words as you wrote them?

This was not meant to be a back-and-forth, and in some ways I understand your point.  The programs that produce the most NBA talent will have the most NCAA success.  To some degree this is true; you presented the data point of Nova, there is also Duke, Kentucky and other BB.  If you were to just look at this data, that's a fair assumption to draw.  But when you look at all the data, of both teams that have produced a lot of NBA talent with little NCAA success (USC, I4 etc.) as well as the teams that have produced little NBA talent but with much NCAA success (Madison), as well as the seemingly random data points (CJ McCollum at Lehigh, Damian Lillard at Weber State, Steph at Davidson, Paul George Fresno State, Kawhi SDSU) I think it becomes much harder to draw the same conclusion.

[WarriorDad]

3 out of 7 years at MU is not good. It's a failure. This isn't 1989 Marquette. This is a Marquette that made the tournament (starting from 2001) 10 out of 13 times. Wojo has already missed that mark as many times in 6 years.

3 out of 7 years, but it is also 3 out of 4 years.  Why did you purposely choose the less recent stat?

Let's turn the tables on your 10 of 13 you stated above - why don't we use your fact pattern and make that 10 of 17?  Both are accurate.   

[panda]

3 out of 7 years, but it is also 3 out of 4 years.  Why did you purposely choose the less recent stat?

Let's turn the tables on your 10 of 13 you stated above - why don't we use your fact pattern and make that 10 of 17?  Both are accurate.   

Why are you celebrating being one of the last auto bids 2 of those 4 years?

[WarriorPride68]

Why are you celebrating being one of the last auto bids 2 of those 4 years?

Factually speaking Wojo is under .500 in the Big East & 0 tournament wins entering year 7

[Viper]

Well just off the top of my head a few would be: Do other schools in the BE have a private jet available to them for recruiting??(I don't know that answer), what MU spends on basketball is greater than the other schools in the BE, and you only cite the AL, but what about the new sports science facility that they have now, I can be almost 100% certain no one else has that. That's not even mentioning the fact that they play in a state of the art NBA arena, players have access to NBA players like Giannis etc, and on top of that, what other school in the BE(with the exception of Nova) can lay claim to having recent or current popular NBA players like D Wade, Jimmy Butler and Jae Crowder as alums?? That's just a few things, I'm sure I can come up with more..but again, give nthose things in and of itself, there is no reason MU shouldn't be a top 3-4 team in the Big East consistently.

The one thing that would really elevate them and push them over the top(even nationally) is state of the art dorms for the players. They had the chance to get those and Lovell slow played it and it got taken off the table. That could end up being one of the worst decisions for the MU program in history.

Lovell. No comprehension of MU basketball history. No understanding of Marquette basketball importance on so many fronts. Is he a fan? Sure. Does he want wins? Sure. But does Lovell ‘get it’. Probably not. Lovell ain’t Father Wild. Nope.

[muguru]

Factually speaking Wojo is under .500 in the Big East & 0 tournament wins entering year 7

Nope, Chicos says you have to throw out his first year as though it never happened, and you can't count it against Wojo because of what Buzz left him, and so Wojo is above .500 technically according to Chicos. 

[Viper]

I put transfers pretty far down on my list of concerns I have about Wojo.  Transfers could be dealt with if I thought he was a better in-game coach.

bingo!

[panda]

Nope, Chicos says you have to throw out his first year as though it never happened, and you can't count it against Wojo because of what Buzz left him, and so Wojo is above .500 technically according to Chicos. 

Yep sterling marks of two conference seasons below .500 one .500 record, one season one game above .500 and a season with a choked away regular season conference title.

But don’t count his first season - It’ll make him look bad!

[Herman Cain]

In 2018, Andrew Rowsey shot 42% from the field, 41% from 3, 90% from the line and averaged 20.1 ppg.

In 2018 Lonnie Walker shot 41% from the field, 34% from 3, 73% from the line and averaged 11.5 ppg.

Which would you say was the better college player, which is currently in the NBA. 

Yet another example of why looking at players that are currently in the NBA, as a metric for college level ability is at best very misleading.

Prior to Covid, Rowsey was on the verge of getting called up  for a cup of coffee in the NBA. He was having an incredible season in the G League.  Was shooting 48 percent from the NBA 3 line, 59 percent EFG and 94 percent from the line. 20 points per game.

Hopefully he can keep up the momentum when basketball restarts.