The Doubters Won’t Stop

[mu_hilltopper]

I have no problem with it. It's a reasonable take. The guys have one tournament game under their belts, and perhaps more importantly, they are so prone to some major dry spells on offense.

MU's dry spells are what concern me the most.    You can survive and easily beat Butler and DePaul with dry spells.   Top 10-25 teams, not so much.   

If Kam Jones (7 for 10 DePaul, 0 for 6 Butler) was more consistent, it'd be a relief.

[forgetful]

That was Jacobsen. And yes, that's fair. Oh, and he also "explained" his lack of confidence in MU early in the season (may not be exact words) "because we're a bunch of dummies".

I have a ton of confidence in this team and the M.O. that Shaka has used to knit the team so close. Knee jerk "Marquette can't win it" is BS, but specifically pointing to the experience factor is, I believe, fair.

His take was a pretty good one, and overall very complimentary. He did call them (analysts like himself) all stupid, and emphasized that they aren't in the gyms. They are looking at things on paper, and pretty much intimated that on paper no one could have expected this performance, because it required an entire team full of players to step up and improve dramatically with no senior leadership.

It's really a testament to how hard this team has worked in the off season, this season, and together to grow as a team.

Enjoying the ride.

[tower912]

Yes, the graphic showing last year's scoring averages next to this year's scoring averages was pretty definitive.

[NCMUFan]

Well, three quarters of teams leave after the first weekend.
Only 6% of teams are left for FF weekend.
So, odds are not with Marquette.
But:
Teams will be playing on neutral sites.
Most likely the great majority of teams will not have played Marquette.
Marquette plays as a precision unit under Shaka.
We are deep.
We have a disruptive defense.
So, anything can happen.
Go Marquette!

[StillAWarrior]

MU's dry spells are what concern me the most.    You can survive and easily beat Butler and DePaul with dry spells.   Top 10-25 teams, not so much.   

If Kam Jones (7 for 10 DePaul, 0 for 6 Butler) was more consistent, it'd be a relief.

Dry spells concern me too, but I do have to disagree with you a bit. Marquette had a 5 minute second-half dry spell against Top 20 Creighton on the road...and won. Marquette scored six points in the first 11 minutes against Top 20 Xavier...and won. They had a near 5 minute dry spell against No. 6 UConn...and won. Obviously, I want them to avoid dry spells and their chances of winning are much better if they do. But this team doesn't stop fighting.

[Carl]

They are looking at things on paper, and pretty much intimated that on paper no one could have expected this performance,

This.

As far as the team used their pre season expectations as bulletin board material, great. Find or create motivation wherever you can. It fueled an unbelievable season. But to pretend that it wasn't mostly justified is not being totally honest

[MuggsyB]

MU's dry spells are what concern me the most.    You can survive and easily beat Butler and DePaul with dry spells.   Top 10-25 teams, not so much.   

If Kam Jones (7 for 10 DePaul, 0 for 6 Butler) was more consistent, it'd be a relief.

It's a fair concern.  Kam getting buckets is critical to sustained success.  Last night he forced a bit.  I also still think he can score more at the rim and get to the FT line more often.   

[BallBoy]

If told I had to put a healthy chunk of money on MU going or not going to the FF, I would choose not going.  Most the rationale has nothing to do with the team  itself.  90% of FF teams were not 3 seeds. A deep run has a little bit of luck.

If I were to look at the team, I believe they could win against good teams but most Final Four teams aren't just good teams but they have at least one great player who can create on their own like Wade. I think this crew is a better version of the 2003 Final Four team without Wade. Realistically, I see MU as sweet 16 or ceiling of Elite 8.

I think the dry spells could haunt us without someone like a Wade who can demand extra attention and allow for open looks.

Additionally, I think the 6 and 7 and even some 8-11 seeded team could be sleepers. I think there are a few teams that will do just enough to get in like UK, UNC, Duke that just have talented players and they will show up when it matters.  During the season, they just went through the motions. I feel we ran into that last year so we will have to face a better team earlier than we normally would.

[wisblue]

I know I would rather hear commentators talking about why Big East champion Marquette won't make the Final Four than not having Marquette talked about at all.

Why look for the slights, most of which are more imagined than real, instead of enjoying the attention.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

It's a fair concern.  Kam getting buckets is critical to sustained success.  Last night he forced a bit.  I also still think he can score more at the rim and get to the FT line more often.   

I think Kam is going to need to rework his outside shot again this off season. I think the moon shot three needs less arc to be consistent. His 3% has dropped closer to OMP's than Joplin's and Kolek's.

[MUfan12]

I think Kam is going to need to rework his outside shot again this off season. I think the moon shot three needs less arc to be consistent.

That's exactly the feedback he'd get from the pro scouts too.

[MuggsyB]

I think Kam is going to need to rework his outside shot again this off season. I think the moon shot three needs less arc to be consistent. His 3% has dropped closer to OMP's than Joplin's and Kolek's.

He was dropping the kiss the sky J with regularity but you may be right.  His spot shooting is more consistent than his 3-Ball off the bounce.  Generally he has done a good job with shot selection, last night he got a little trigger happy. 

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Why look for the slights, most of which are more imagined than real, instead of enjoying the attention.

Because it is way more fun?

[tower912]

Doubter's never stop.    Revel in the accomplishment.     

[Pakuni]

MU was on its way to the Final Four until someone on a podcast said otherwise and ruined it for us.

[LAZER]

I listened to The Field of 68 Show After Dark tonight and they closed with a segment on the biggest. The question was raised whether MU was a Final Four contender and Mack immediately scoffed, "Nah!"  He then stalled for a minute trying to come up with a rationale and then said, "I'm just not convinced; I don't know why."  He then made some dumb comment about how you have to be "really elite" to make a FF.

Randolph Childress then said you have to have good guard play to make a FF run and said he didn't see MU as top 5 in the country in that respect.

Mack then asked if anyone would take MU over UNC in an elite 8 matchup and they concluded they wouldn't be "fooled twice." As to the BET, they picked Creighton or Nova.

In short, "F@ck 'em."

I'd be curious to know which teams he thinks have elite guard play.

[Daniel]

MU has done better than anyone thought and that gives us the luxury of being in these discussions.   We will do what we will do, as we have done.  Let's just keep it going and give them more to talk about with more accomplishments.

[tower912]

Marquette has been extremely efficient all year.    Other than the UConn game at UConn, Marquette has had an opportunity to win every game.     However, being scoop, we are all versed in the weaknesses of this team.   (Hint: elite guard play isn't it)

MU can be erratic from 3.    Only an average 3 shooting team all year.    But, as we know, there have been stretches where MU punishes the rim and backboard with scuds.     Started last night 0-8, then went 7-12.     Ending up at 7-20 or 35% which, shockingly, is the average for the season.

MU can be beat up on the boards.     There have been several games where MU got blown up on the boards.   MU has found ways to win most of them.    But we all know that a hot UConn team playing bully ball is a tough match up.    So, how many teams out there have the horses to bully MU?

Foul trouble to one of the anchors.    Kolek or Oso in foul trouble is an issue.    To be fair, having stars in foul trouble is an issue for most teams.    MU isn't any different.   

This team is truly greater than the sum of its parts.    On both ends.     And it has been an absolute joy to watch.    But, IMO, it will be possible for a team to out-physical MU.    Maybe that is on the backboards, maybe by really strong guards just putting their heads down and attacking the basket.     Maybe an opponent with two athletic forwards in the 6'7 range to go along with a post.    Which would force MU to play away from its 3 guard strength.   

Having said all that, there aren't many teams that can beat MU playing at its best.   

[Dr. Blackheart]

MU was on its way to the Final Four until someone on a podcast said otherwise and ruined it for us.

An unemployed coach who resided over a shytshow, no less.

[lawdog77]

Marquette has been extremely efficient all year.    Other than the UConn game at UConn, Marquette has had an opportunity to win every game.     However, being scoop, we are all versed in the weaknesses of this team.   (Hint: elite guard play isn't it)

MU can be erratic from 3.    Only an average 3 shooting team all year.    But, as we know, there have been stretches where MU punishes the rim and backboard with scuds.     Started last night 0-8, then went 7-12.     Ending up at 7-20 or 35% which, shockingly, is the average for the season.

MU can be beat up on the boards.     There have been several games where MU got blown up on the boards.   MU has found ways to win most of them.    But we all know that a hot UConn team playing bully ball is a tough match up.    So, how many teams out there have the horses to bully MU?

Foul trouble to one of the anchors.    Kolek or Oso in foul trouble is an issue.    To be fair, having stars in foul trouble is an issue for most teams.    MU isn't any different.   

This team is truly greater than the sum of its parts.    On both ends.     And it has been an absolute joy to watch.    But, IMO, it will be possible for a team to out-physical MU.    Maybe that is on the backboards, maybe by really strong guards just putting their heads down and attacking the basket.     Maybe an opponent with two athletic forwards in the 6'7 range to go along with a post.    Which would force MU to play away from its 3 guard strength.   

Having said all that, there aren't many teams that can beat MU playing at its best.   

Just looking at our losses, the only one that I think might beat us now on a neutral court is UConn. And that's if the "good" UConn shows up.

[hawk]

Not that it matters or that anyone cares but my view would be that if MU hangs on to a 2 or 3 seed I would put them in the round of 8.  From there is just a crap shoot.  This team seems to think they are the reincarnation of the 03 team and maybe they are.  They have a lock on the one position you need to win and that is point guard.  Kolek is the boss of this team and he is a stern taskmaster.  It is also possible that Ben Gold is the surprise of this team in a money game.  In any game regardless of minutes he has produced some positive play, a basket a rebound a block, but always something.  He could break out in a game unexpectedly.  I really like this team, tjis may be the moment they shine, go warriors

[MuMark]

I have no problem with it. It's a reasonable take. The guys have one tournament game under their belts, and perhaps more importantly, they are so prone to some major dry spells on offense.

Yep.....they could make the same argument about a bunch of other good teams......TRank gives us an 11% chance to make the final 4...... https://barttorvik.com/tourneycast.php

Just about anyone can make it.......but in a single elimination tournament I wouldn't pick us either......it isn't some slight......

[The Equalizer]

His take was a pretty good one, and overall very complimentary. He did call them (analysts like himself) all stupid, and emphasized that they aren't in the gyms. They are looking at things on paper, and pretty much intimated that on paper no one could have expected this performance, because it required an entire team full of players to step up and improve dramatically with no senior leadership.

I never interpreted the ninth-place pick as a slight against Marquette so much as a testament to the top-to-bottom strength of the Big East. 

There's a reasonable argument to be made for each of the teams picked ahead of us.  It's not like people were just stupid in picking us 9th:

• Creighton: returned most of the core of a team that took Kansas to the wire in last year's NCAA, filled a major hole landing Schierman via the portal
• UConn: Loaded returning roster with potential POY in Sonogo and strong incoming frosh and impact transfers
• Villanova: Returns a ton of talent from their final four team with expected contributions from Moore and Whitmore.
• Xavier: NIT champion with a ton of returning talent, and a new coach wtih 4x Elite Eight appearances
• Butler: New coach with 2x Final Four experience, strong moves in the transfer portal, retained Lukocius
• St. Johns: Impact transfer in David Jones, and great potential IF the Curbelo experiment pans out.  And this is one of the tougher picks--while some people would simply say Curbelo is a head case and will destroy any team he's on, outhers could argue that on-paper he's a tremendous talent and could thrive with the change in scenery
• Providence: Strong coaching in Ed Cooley, worked the transfer portal hard after proving it worked the year before
  
• Seton Hall:  Strong core of returning players with a new coach who made an Elite Eight with far less talent at St. Peters.

[StillAWarrior]

Whether there was a reasonable argument to be made or not, everyone picked MU to finish 9th...

[tower912]

Right.  And MU graduated Morsell and Kuath, with Justin declaring and Greg transferring.  And Wrightsil coming in.  So, on paper, the easy prediction was to look at the numbers and experience of the known returning players and make a prediction based in that.  Completely fair and by the book.  Very few national media types do deep dives and forecast seasons based on 6 returnees making huge strides in development.   They do based on knowns.

So I was never offended by the predictions.  I was just pretty sure MU was better than that.