Dwight Buycks to MU!!

[Marquette84]

Ididn't say Bucyks would drop 10 poits shooting moving from JUCO to the BE-----what I did say is that if he had played BE BB this past year his trey shooting percentage would have been between 15 & 20 %.

In this thread you managed to work in most of your worst habits in posting.

Baseless comment:  "26% in JUCO is like 15 to 20% in the Big East".

Inability to Support your claim when Challenged:  You can't name any players who have had that 10 point drop in shooting percentages when they transferred from a JUCO to D1.

Trips to Fantasyland:  You pretend that Buycks  WOULD have had a 10 point drop IF by some fantasy he played in the Big East instead of JUCO.

Incorrect Premise:  You base this on the false premise that Buycks was smaller, slower, weaker and less talented than any Big East guard.

Being shown an obvious truth:  When I pointed out that unlike other JUCO players,  Buycks was not in JUCO because he was smaller, slower or less talented--he was there due to academics. 

Bait & Switch:  When it was pointed out that Buycks was not slower, smaller or less talented, you neither denied nor agreed with the point, but instead switched to discussions about Jucos in general, or the entire IHCC team.

Obstinance:  Despite the obvious mistake in assuming that Buycks was smaller, slower, weaker and less talented, you still haven't admitted that making that claim was wrong.



Here's what I say:   Buycks would have shot BETTER than the 26% had he played in the Big East this past year , because
a) he'd have had better coaching
b) the offense would have been more structured resulting in fewer rushed shots.
c) his supporting cast would have been FAR more talented, and would have drawn defensive pressure away from him--he would have seen far fewer double teams as the #5 or 6 option at MU than he would have as the #1 option at IHCC
d) He has a size advantage over most of the PGs and a speed advantage over most of the 2Gs in the league.

[Murffieus]

Again SJS/84 I must point on to you that I am not refering to two different years----I am referring to the same year. I'm saying that if Bucys played in the BE this past year (Note: THE SAME YEAR) his trey shooting percentage would have been worse the 26% he shot in JUCO. I estimate somewhere between 15-20%.

The rationale being that defenders are quicker, faster, stronger and above all are more talented
 in the BE. Sorry you can't see the reasoning here-----seems pretty clear cut to me.

BTW-----don't assume that he'd get better coaching at MU-----the guys on the UNO board would disagree with you!

[Blackhat]

Murffy,

I thought you said B. Williams proved to be a good offensive coach at UNO.  Are you flip flopping?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Murf,

You are brutal with this one.

You've never seen the kid play, so don't pretend like you are the dude "bringing us all back to reality" with your comments.

Nobody has any idea how Buycks will shoot in the BEAST. He could get better with more open looks and better coaching or he could be worse by playing against tougher/bigger defenders.

There is no way to just look at his stats and know exactly what will happen. Pretending that YOU know better than everybody else (including dependable, rationale people like Mark Miller) really hurts your creditability.

It's ok to say "I've never seen the kid play, so I don't know how good he is (or will be)"

[RawdogDX]

The rationale being that defenders are quicker, faster, stronger and above all are more talented
 in the BE. Sorry you can't see the reasoning here-----seems pretty clear cut to me.

And becuase of that and the players on our team being bigger faster stonger and more talented he won't be double teamed and is far more likely to be left open in clutch situations.  That seems pretty clear cut to me.

Rather have one big strong fast beast guy on me:
So he can leave me to help out his teammate who is being destroyed by james.  And then have dj kick it to me for an open jumper.  I'd probably have a BETTER percentage shooting that shot than when I have two juco guys on me knowing i'm going to take the shot as the clock winds down..... Come on coach, it's ok to admit that you may have been a little overboard saying he would have shot 10% worse.

[Murffieus]

Murffy,

I thought you said B. Williams proved to be a good offensive coach at UNO.  Are you flip flopping?

"Muffy" didn't say that Buzz was a "good BB coach" at UNO-----what I said is that his offensive efficiency was very high. But my reference questioning Buzz's offensive coaching ability was  based not on my opinion-----but rather on the comments I've read on the UNO message boards----they are brutal!

[Murffieus]

Murf,

You are brutal with this one.

You've never seen the kid play, so don't pretend like you are the dude "bringing us all back to reality" with your comments.

Nobody has any idea how Buycks will shoot in the BEAST. He could get better with more open looks and better coaching or he could be worse by playing against tougher/bigger defenders.

There is no way to just look at his stats and know exactly what will happen. Pretending that YOU know better than everybody else (including dependable, rationale people like Mark Miller) really hurts your creditability.

It's ok to say "I've never seen the kid play, so I don't know how good he is (or will be)"

Look, I've been around the game for a long time----and I know that a guy in the vast majority of cases isn't going to shoot better in the BE than he does in JUCO for reasons I have cited several times above (the only excemption would be if he is taught in the meantime how to deliver the ball properly). Completely different culture in the BE vs JUCO.

[Murffieus]

And becuase of that and the players on our team being bigger faster stonger and more talented he won't be double teamed and is far more likely to be left open in clutch situations.  That seems pretty clear cut to me.

Rather have one big strong fast beast guy on me:
So he can leave me to help out his teammate who is being destroyed by james.  And then have dj kick it to me for an open jumper.  I'd probably have a BETTER percentage shooting that shot than when I have two juco guys on me knowing i'm going to take the shot as the clock winds down..... Come on coach, it's ok to admit that you may have been a little overboard saying he would have shot 10% worse.

What seems "pretty clear" to you is not so clear to me. First of all you infer that Buyck's was "doubled teamed" in JUCO----well if he was he shouldn't be shooting when doubled teamed as somewhere on the floor as a result of being double teamed there is an open guy somewhere on the floor and Buyks's  his job is to find that open guy for the shot.

What makes you think Buyck's didn't have his share of open treys at Indian Hills?----he played on a very good JUCO team!

[ecompt]

Murff, the point is, you never saw him play, you don't know the caliber of players he played with or against, you don't know ANYTHING about him. No one does. To make a blanket statement that he'd probably shoot 15-20% on three-pointers in the BE is absurd.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Look, I've been around the game for a long time----and I know that a guy in the vast majority of cases isn't going to shoot better in the BE than he does in JUCO for reasons I have cited several times above (the only excemption would be if he is taught in the meantime how to deliver the ball properly). Completely different culture in the BE vs JUCO.

Saying that in "the vast majority of cases a player isn't going to shoot better" is a lot different than simply predicting a player that you have never seen will experience a 10% drop. I tend to agree that Buycks probably won't be as effective at MU as he is in JUCO, however, I have never seen the kid play, so I'm not going to spout off about it and make wild predictions. That would make me a hack.

Murf, you have been around for a long time. If you had seen this kid play a bunch, and formed an educated opinion (Mark Miller, cough cough), I would certainly respect that.

However, just reading some box scores and claiming a kid's shooting percentage will drop by almost 1/3 is silly, and Murf, you are certainly smart enough to know that.

[mviale]

respect your elders - to murph there is not much difference between a 26% shooter and 15% shooter.  In his day, they would both be on the bench.

[Marquette84]

Again SJS/84 I must point on to you that I am not refering to two different years----I am referring to the same year. I'm saying that if Bucys played in the BE this past year (Note: THE SAME YEAR) his trey shooting percentage would have been worse the 26% he shot in JUCO. I estimate somewhere between 15-20%.

The rationale being that defenders are quicker, faster, stronger and above all are more talented
 in the BE. Sorry you can't see the reasoning here-----seems pretty clear cut to me.

BTW-----don't assume that he'd get better coaching at MU-----the guys on the UNO board would disagree with you!

I'm referring to the same year as well.  And I'm sticking to my point.

Let me ask you this--we know Buycks was the best player on his team at IHCC.  If you were defeding IHCC, would you focus your attention on Buycks?  Or would you treat him as just anohter player.  Now, I know you'll dodge this one, so let me answer for you--you'd guard Buycks like files on honey.  You'd have at least one if not two guys on him like glue all game long.   

Second question: With that type of defense, would you really expect no change in the offensive performance of the player you're defending?  Again, you won't answer, so let me do so for you:  Of COURSE the shooting percentage would fall.  THAT is EXACTLY why you pressure up the defense on the best player on the opposing team.  You cite how well Brad Soderberg did so against Dwyane Wade YEARS after the fact.  Opposing coaching on IHCC  schedule aren't stupid--they know if you clamp down on Buycks, its your best defensive opportunity.

Now, think about MU THIS PAST YEAR.  If he were in a lineup with James and Matthews and Hayward and McNeal, would you STILL make Buycks the primary target?  Again, I predict you'll dodge the answer, so I'll give it:  of COURSE you wouldn't make Buycks the primary defensive target.  MU had so many option in the backcourt that you cannot possibly guard him as well.

But let me drive this home for you:  Maurice Aacker saw a 10 point IMPROVEMENT in his 3 point shooting--despite moving from the MAC into the BIG EAST.  Why do you suppose that was--oh, you'll make some excuse about the fact that he just magically "improved" by 10 points.  But if you're honest (and you paid attention to guard play like I do) you'd have noticed that opposing defenders took their chances and left Aaker open while tightly defending McNeal, James, Hayward, Fitzgerald, and Matthews.   I submit to you that Buycks would have received the same defensive attention that Aacker received. 

No coach in his right mind is going to shift primary defensive attention away from James & McNeal in order to better defend Buycks. 

So, let me repeat:   Buycks would have shot BETTER than the 26% had he played in the Big East this past year , because
a) he'd have had better coaching
b) the offense would have been more structured resulting in fewer rushed shots.
c) his supporting cast would have been FAR more talented, and would have drawn defensive pressure away from him--he would have seen far fewer double teams as the #5 or 6 option at MU than he would have as the #1 option at IHCC
d) He has a size advantage over most of the PGs and a speed advantage over most of the 2Gs in the league.


***--the guys on the UNO board would disagree with you!

Oh, gee, there's a nice, unbiased source of information! 

Furthermore, the UNO fans never saw Layer, Benford or Collins, so why would say they even have a CLUE as to what type of coaching Buycks would receive at MU?

[pbiflyer]

but rather on the comments I've read on the UNO message boards----they are brutal!

And if someone were to read the MU boards and look at the murf posts, they would think that Marquette was one of the worst programs in NAIA basketball, rather than a top 20 programs in Div 1.

[ecompt]

actually, mviale, a 26% shooter in Murff's day wasn't all that abnormal. Back in the 1950s a 40 percent shooter was considered a deadeye.

[tower912]

Hence the rebounding records he is so proud of.

[Murffieus]

Murff, the point is, you never saw him play, you don't know the caliber of players he played with or against, you don't know ANYTHING about him. No one does. To make a blanket statement that he'd probably shoot 15-20% on three-pointers in the BE is absurd.

Would you grant me that defenses are better in the BE? If you agree, why wouldn't Buyck's trey shooting be worse then in the BE. SJS/84 claims that Buyck's was a marked man in JUCO at 17 ppg-----I don't know of anyone who is a 'marked man" at only 17 ppg. Plus JUCO ball is run and shoot----17 PPG in JUCO is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

That's one of the things that I read on the UNO board-----and that is that "Buzz would recruit JUCO's galore"!

[ecompt]

Just because defenses are better doesn't mean he won't get better shots off because of the talent surrounding him. You may be right in the long run, but to make a blanket statement like you did is faulty. On your theory, Steve Novak's and Travis Diener's shooting percantages should have dropped dramatically  when they came out of Wisconsin high schools into Division I basketball. Face it, Murff, if Bo had recruiited him you'd say it was a great get because that stats don't mean anything and the swing offense is so efficient, blah, blah. I guarantee that if he's shooting 15 percent on threes in the first two months of his MU career he won't be firing up too many more.

[Marquette84]

Would you grant me that defenses are better in the BE? If you agree, why wouldn't Buyck's trey shooting be worse then in the BE. SJS/84 claims that Buyck's was a marked man in JUCO at 17 ppg-----I don't know of anyone who is a 'marked man" at only 17 ppg. Plus JUCO ball is run and shoot----17 PPG in JUCO is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

Yeah.  Run and shoot.

http://www.ottumwadailycourier.com/archivesearch/local_story_078233933.html

IHCC is a team that averaged 66.3 points per game, and gives up 41.9  Run and gun?  Not bloody likely.  

Really, Murff, it's beginning to show that you don't really know what you're talking about.  Every statement you make can be easily disproven with a little common sense or a minute or two with a search engine.

So let the record show that Murff is wrong that Jucos are nothing but run and gun/defense free leagues.  IHCC had more games where they scored in the 50s and 60's than in the 80's and 90s.  Their offense was only 66.3 points per game, and they gave up 41.9 points per game.

That's O'Neill/Deane/Bennett like performance.


But that's not the only Murff whopper:

***-I don't know of anyone who is a 'marked man" at only 17 ppg.

Funny, I've seen 4th grade rec league coaches take less than three plays to figure out who the other team's best player is and put their best defender on him.

I don't think I've seen basketball at any level where coaches DON'T make that adjustment.  But Murff, here, in order to avoid believing the common sense argument that Buycks got the tougest defender on the other team,  believes that JUCO coaches are too clueless to bother to take extra effort defend the best player on the other team.

This is difficult to believe coming from a guy who bills himself as "always a coach".   Here, he actually expects us to believe that coaches don't bother to adjust.

Then again, he expects us to believe that IHCC opponents--teams that average 44 points and give up 63--are playing a "run and gun/no defense" style of play.


Once again, we see him digging deeper in some ill-fated effort to avoid admitting that you posted without really thinking.  

Here's the common sense idea I put forth--Buycks is the best player on his team at IHCC, and probably gets the other teams top defender--a situation that probably wouldn't have happened at MU.  Therefore, he might have an easier time getting open looks than he did at IHCC.

To avoid admitting this common sense proposition, we have the silly sight of a supposed coach telling us that other coaches wouldn't bother to do anything special to defend the other team's best player.

[RawdogDX]

Ok, people votes are in.  about 50 to 1 on weather, in this thread, statements by murph made any sense.  It's cool, if you continue to fight about it after clearly stateing your opinion it only exasperates the problem.

Now can someone explain why it says he will play in 2009?  I thought because he was at juco for academics he had to stay there for two years.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Ok, people votes are in.  about 50 to 1 on weather, in this thread, statements by murph made any sense.  It's cool, if you continue to fight about it after clearly stateing your opinion it only exasperates the problem.

Now can someone explain why it says he will play in 2009?  I thought because he was at juco for academics he had to stay there for two years.

I believe he only has 1 year left of Juco, which would put him on campus in fall of 2009.

[rocky_warrior]

Now can someone explain why it says he will play in 2009?

Dawg - If you go the recruiting wiki
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball_recruits/start#recent_news

And then click for the "Discussion Here" on the Buycks line, it's all explained

[Murffieus]

Murf,

You are brutal with this one.

Nobody has any idea how Buycks will shoot in the BEAST. He could get better with more open looks and better coaching or he could be worse by playing against tougher/bigger defenders.

There is no way to just look at his stats and know exactly what will happen. Pretending that YOU know better than everybody else (including dependable, rationale people like Mark Miller) really hurts your creditability.

Connect the dots here------if a guy shoots only 26% in JUCO where contrary to what SJS/84 says there is very little emphasis on defense and where the talent level is low----what is there in that number to indicate he will shoot a better number in the BE where defense IS emphasized and the talent level is far superior to that of JUCO ball!

The burden of proof is on you guys----- (26%) is a lousy number to start with.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Connect the dots here------if a guy shoots only 26% in JUCO where contrary to what SJS/84 says there is very little emphasis on defense and where the talent level is low----what is there in that number to indicate he will shoot a better number in the BE where defense IS emphasized and the talent level is far superior to that of JUCO ball!

The burden of proof is on you guys----- (26%) is a lousy number to start with.

I know how you are approaching this, but you are smart enough to know there are a ton of variables.

How many shots make up the % (sample size)?

How many shots were under duress, or at the end of the shot/game clock?

Does he have a great stroke off the catch and shoot, but doesn't get the opportunity because he plays point (thus handling the ball)?

Was he injured or dinged up for part of the season?

What did he shoot in high school?

My point is, I don't think you can just expect a kid to shoot 1/3 worse just based upon his box scores. At his age, his percentage really doesn't tell the whole story.

Will the big east be a step up? Certainly.

Is it a good practice to just apply a 1/3 reduction in shooting percentage? Probably not. Too many variables and unknowns.

Also, just to be clear, I never said he would shoot better in the BEAST. I said I wasn't sure discounting his shooting percentage by 1/3 was an accurate statement.