SH … and MU’s (lack of ) depth

[wisblue]

Are turnovers DOWN THE STRETCH important? Missing shots? Rebounding?

Of course they are, and MU has proven to be lacking in those areas.

But you can play a near perfect game for 39 minutes against a good team and carry a small lead when the opponent starts fouling intentionally. I am raising the question of how MU will perform when faced with that situation (which hasn’t come up yet). When a team has multiple players who can both handle the ball and convert free throws at a high percentage, they have a great chance to bring those games home. MU had that with Howard, Rowsey, and Houser.

I am simply questioning what MU will do when they have to inbound the ball successfully and have the player who gets the ball convert the free throws from the intentional fouls. I know I will not be confident if it’s Mitchell or Oso on the free throw line in one of those crucial one and one situations, and I’m not sure what to expect from others, even the ones who hit a pretty good percentage normally.

[MU82]

Oso bricked 2 FTs and shortly thereafter Shaka took him out of the game with just under 4 minutes left.

I wonder if Shaka was concerned that Holloway would foul Oso every time Marquette had the ball.

[Jay Bee]

Oso bricked 2 FTs and shortly thereafter Shaka took him out of the game with just under 4 minutes left.

I wonder if Shaka was concerned that Holloway would foul Oso every time Marquette had the ball.

No. That's absurd (and not factual).

Here's what really happened:

At 4:34 the clock stops when Oso is fouled. At that point in time, both Tyler and OMax were sent to the bench (good time to rest with the under 4 coming up). Oso stays in because the second FT was missed. The next whistle, his sub comes in and he goes out.

That was at 4:04. MU was up by freaking 18.

At 2:20, Tyler, OMax and Oso all returned to the floor.

[Newsdreams]

Of course they are, and MU has proven to be lacking in those areas.

But you can play a near perfect game for 39 minutes against a good team and carry a small lead when the opponent starts fouling intentionally. I am raising the question of how MU will perform when faced with that situation (which hasn’t come up yet). When a team has multiple players who can both handle the ball and convert free throws at a high percentage, they have a great chance to bring those games home. MU had that with Howard, Rowsey, and Houser.

I am simply questioning what MU will do when they have to inbound the ball successfully and have the player who gets the ball convert the free throws from the intentional fouls. I know I will not be confident if it’s Mitchell or Oso on the free throw line in one of those crucial one and one situations, and I’m not sure what to expect from others, even the ones who hit a pretty good percentage normally.

MU will never win close games

[MU82]

No. That's absurd (and not factual).

Here's what really happened:

At 4:34 the clock stops when Oso is fouled. At that point in time, both Tyler and OMax were sent to the bench (good time to rest with the under 4 coming up). Oso stays in because the second FT was missed. The next whistle, his sub comes in and he goes out.

That was at 4:04. MU was up by freaking 18.

At 2:20, Tyler, OMax and Oso all returned to the floor.

You're right.

[hawk]

It is hard to win in the BE when you are a young team and it is hard to win in the BE if you are a finesse team.  That being said I think this team can win 10 in conference play.  I like Gold, he should get more minutes to help his development and save some minute for Oso and Omax.  What Marquette needs more than depth is a banger.  The obvious foul imbalance is in part because MU doesn't bang.  It might be worth trying Gold out in that regard, he isn't afraid and I'm thinking he'd make some ft's

[PGsHeroes32]

It is hard to win in the BE when you are a young team and it is hard to win in the BE if you are a finesse team.  That being said I think this team can win 10 in conference play.  I like Gold, he should get more minutes to help his development and save some minute for Oso and Omax.  What Marquette needs more than depth is a banger.  The obvious foul imbalance is in part because MU doesn't bang.  It might be worth trying Gold out in that regard, he isn't afraid and I'm thinking he'd make some ft's

10?!?!?!?!/

Thats .500. If we only win 10 this year it is not a good season.

[brewcity77]

I think the key to the depth is just figuring out the best lineup combinations. Our starting five of Tyler Kolek, Kam Jones, Stevie Mitchell, O-Max Prosper, and Oso Ighodaro is maybe the best lineup in the country. According to Hoop Explorer, if you filter by lineups that have played 150 possessions, they are the third best lineup in the nation behind Arizona and Purdue's starting lineups. If you filter by lineups that have played 250+, they are #1.

The problem is figuring out how to mix in which reserves deserve the other minutes. I think the best plan for the staff is to use the 4 rotation players (Joplin, Ross, Jones, Gold) and evaluate the best rosters they can make using those players. Use a 9-man rotation until March, then once we get to the BET cut it to 7 players, with others only getting minutes as necessary. With an elite starting five, if we can figure out the best use of 2 reserves to get those guys rest, this team can really do some damage in the postseason.

[DoctorV]

I think the key to the depth is just figuring out the best lineup combinations. Our starting five of Tyler Kolek, Kam Jones, Stevie Mitchell, O-Max Prosper, and Oso Ighodaro is maybe the best lineup in the country. According to Hoop Explorer, if you filter by lineups that have played 150 possessions, they are the third best lineup in the nation behind Arizona and Purdue's starting lineups. If you filter by lineups that have played 250+, they are #1.

The problem is figuring out how to mix in which reserves deserve the other minutes. I think the best plan for the staff is to use the 4 rotation players (Joplin, Ross, Jones, Gold) and evaluate the best rosters they can make using those players. Use a 9-man rotation until March, then once we get to the BET cut it to 7 players, with others only getting minutes as necessary. With an elite starting five, if we can figure out the best use of 2 reserves to get those guys rest, this team can really do some damage in the postseason.

Nice post

[MU82]

I think the key to the depth is just figuring out the best lineup combinations. Our starting five of Tyler Kolek, Kam Jones, Stevie Mitchell, O-Max Prosper, and Oso Ighodaro is maybe the best lineup in the country. According to Hoop Explorer, if you filter by lineups that have played 150 possessions, they are the third best lineup in the nation behind Arizona and Purdue's starting lineups. If you filter by lineups that have played 250+, they are #1.

The problem is figuring out how to mix in which reserves deserve the other minutes. I think the best plan for the staff is to use the 4 rotation players (Joplin, Ross, Jones, Gold) and evaluate the best rosters they can make using those players. Use a 9-man rotation until March, then once we get to the BET cut it to 7 players, with others only getting minutes as necessary. With an elite starting five, if we can figure out the best use of 2 reserves to get those guys rest, this team can really do some damage in the postseason.

That's real interesting, brew. "Best" by what measure?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

That's real interesting, brew. "Best" by what measure?

I believe plus/minus

[brewcity77]

That's real interesting, brew. "Best" by what measure?

Hoop Explorer looks at efficiency per 100 possessions, both raw and adjusted for level of competition. Here are our starters:

Raw Offensive Efficiency: 125.2 points per 100 possessions
Raw Defensive Efficiency: 93.6 points per 100 possessions
Net Rating: +31.6 points per 100 possessions

Adjusted Offensive: 128.8
Adjusted Defensive: 91.1
Net Rating: +37.7

The problem is when you take any one of those starters out, the numbers decline significantly. If we could manage to get 40 minutes out of our starters every night, we'd be a Final Four favorite. But because guys have to rest, we have to run out Joplin, Ross, Sean, and Gold, all of whom bring something less to the table than who they are replacing in the lineup. By the time we get to March, we have to maximize how often the starters are out there and minimize the negative impact when we have to give minutes to the bench players.

Personally, I think one of the problems we have is Joplin being first off the bench. Ross should be first off the bench. In addition, when Joplin comes in, we are generally playing at a deficit unless he's playing with Chase Ross. At this point of the season, I'm using 2 possessions on both ends for the baseline (because you can only be so statistically significant with 1-15 possessions played). Every lineup with Chase is a net positive of at least +15.3 net rating, with three of his four most common lineups at +40 or better.

Further, for Joplin, he has 6 lineup combinations that reach the 25+ possession mark, and the four most efficient lineups for Joplin all also feature Ross. So Ross should come off the bench first, but he should be the safety blanket for Joplin and/or Sean Jones when we have to go with two or more bench players at the same time. When we go to the bench, all the best lineups have Chase.

It's a long season, so they have time to figure this out, but over the past few years, teams that get to the Final Four seem to be good at shortening their bench by March and maximizing minutes for their best players. We need to figure out the best combinations to allow us to do that while using the bench players we do need most effectively.

[Goose]

brew

There is no doubt that Shaka will figure the best combo lineups, depending on the situation. That is why when everyone was bitching about how they played against Chicago State, I was happy that they had 7 guys plays at least 20 minutes and 2-3 others roughly 10.

Every time we have a lull because of a certain lineup is a learning experience, for the players and the coaches. I think this bodes extremely well for the team as the season moves into Feb and March. Imo, there are nine guys that contribute and that is a nice luxury.

[brewcity77]

brew

There is no doubt that Shaka will figure the best combo lineups, depending on the situation. That is why when everyone was bitching about how they played against Chicago State, I was happy that they had 7 guys plays at least 20 minutes and 2-3 others roughly 10.

Every time we have a lull because of a certain lineup is a learning experience, for the players and the coaches. I think this bodes extremely well for the team as the season moves into Feb and March. Imo, there are nine guys that contribute and that is a nice luxury.

Yup. There has been a learning curve, but this team is getting better in front of us. Figure out those last few pieces and we'll be truly dangerous by March.

[rocket surgeon]

preparation-

   a good coach is always prepared for the unexpected.  having all of your players ready is something good coaches preach.  i remember when travis went down with the hand injury and walk-on rob hanley was thrown to the fire and performed quite admirably.  anything in travis new book about that moment in time? 

[MU82]

Hoop Explorer looks at efficiency per 100 possessions, both raw and adjusted for level of competition. Here are our starters:

Raw Offensive Efficiency: 125.2 points per 100 possessions
Raw Defensive Efficiency: 93.6 points per 100 possessions
Net Rating: +31.6 points per 100 possessions

Adjusted Offensive: 128.8
Adjusted Defensive: 91.1
Net Rating: +37.7

The problem is when you take any one of those starters out, the numbers decline significantly. If we could manage to get 40 minutes out of our starters every night, we'd be a Final Four favorite. But because guys have to rest, we have to run out Joplin, Ross, Sean, and Gold, all of whom bring something less to the table than who they are replacing in the lineup. By the time we get to March, we have to maximize how often the starters are out there and minimize the negative impact when we have to give minutes to the bench players.

Personally, I think one of the problems we have is Joplin being first off the bench. Ross should be first off the bench. In addition, when Joplin comes in, we are generally playing at a deficit unless he's playing with Chase Ross. At this point of the season, I'm using 2 possessions on both ends for the baseline (because you can only be so statistically significant with 1-15 possessions played). Every lineup with Chase is a net positive of at least +15.3 net rating, with three of his four most common lineups at +40 or better.

Further, for Joplin, he has 6 lineup combinations that reach the 25+ possession mark, and the four most efficient lineups for Joplin all also feature Ross. So Ross should come off the bench first, but he should be the safety blanket for Joplin and/or Sean Jones when we have to go with two or more bench players at the same time. When we go to the bench, all the best lineups have Chase.

It's a long season, so they have time to figure this out, but over the past few years, teams that get to the Final Four seem to be good at shortening their bench by March and maximizing minutes for their best players. We need to figure out the best combinations to allow us to do that while using the bench players we do need most effectively.

That truly is interesting stuff, brew. Thanks for providing it. I'm guessing that if you asked a cross-section of 10,000 college basketball fans from around the country to name the best starting unit, 10,000 of them wouldn't have said Marquette. (Unless you were one of those polled.)

If you have the time to provide it, I'm curious which teams' starting-5s make up the rest of the top 10.

FWIW, I agree about Chase Ross. He is a much better 2-way player than Joplin. Jop can get hot, and that definitely has value, but he's a ball-stopper on O and a poor defender. I like to think Shaka is figuring all of this out; he's a darn good coach.