Game thread....

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

---

Wait, so watching Dawson for 8 minutes doesn't trump all that? I'm confused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

---

I may be in the minority, but I don't care about practice other than that they try hard. From all reports Jake has been lighting it up in practice since day 1. Hasn't showed up consistently in games. If Derrick is dominating in practice, he too has never shown it in a game. Bottom line is we are losing because our starting guards should not be starting guards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

---

We got major problems then. Jake and Derrick are the least talented backcourt in the conference. Both are extremely limited players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

---

The only problem I have with this is: do Dawson & Wilson sag into the paint off of Derrick? Or do they guard him straight up since they are practicing using MU's D? Because of course Derrick would look pretty good offensively if defended that way. The only problem is that no opposing team guards him that way, so those practice performances should be taken with a grain of salt if that is the case, IMO. Just my two cents, I don't hate Derrick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TedBaxter

When MU was letting players get by them in the second half, Derrick, Todd and Jake could have used a blow and that's why I said John should have played. He hit one of the two three pointers on the night, so he might have sprung one of those as well.

---

This is exactly what I was saying at the time. Derrick wasn't bad by any means yesterday, but running him for 36 minutes was a problem. And one of the reasons Dawson looked back in the second half is because Buzz basically put him in with a second unit.

I think by far the bigger problem was a 2 guard that didn't shoot for 38 minutes and never scored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2013UnleashTheBeast

Or do they guard him straight up since they are practicing using MU's D?.

---

No - depending on who is on what end, they will play opponent's D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

---

+1 million. My guess is those who are ripping Kneel up and down, won't do the same to you IWB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

Yes, Derrick and Jake got burned D today, true.

People complain about Derrick & Jake's lack of O, true.

John, JJJ & Duane can't stop Derrick & Jake in practice.

So if Derrick and Jake are that limited in offense and those guys can't stop them, why do you thing they can stop Nova's talented guards?

---

our starting backcourt had 6 points in 65 minutes played. Nova's starting backcourt had 40 points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MUAlphaBangura

+1 million. My guess is those who are ripping Kneel up and down, won't do the same to you IWB.

---

You know what, maybe they wouldn't stop Nova's talented guards, but they may actually put up some points themselves, and demand to be covered on defense. There is something to be said for that as well. Last time I checked, the object of basketball is to score more than your opponent!

How many times can we as fans bang our heads against the D Wilson/J Thomas wall this year? I think we can all agree that Buzz isn't stupid (note, not infallible, but also not stupid). If the solution was so obvious, we wouldn't be 11-9.

I also reject the notion that he is stubborn. This is a guy who adapts his style of play to suit the talent on hand every single year. Bo Ryan he is not.

Seriously, the argument that Buzz is either stupidly or stubbornly refusing to play the guys who give us the best chance at winning is extremely bizarre.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kneelb4zerg

Seriously, the argument that Buzz is either stupidly or stubbornly refusing to play the guys who give us the best chance at winning is extremely bizarre.

---

It's used by people who need to have an excuse for why he is playing who he is playing.

I mean otherwise people would have to admit they are wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mufansince72

You know what, maybe they wouldn't stop Nova's talented guards, but they may actually put up some points themselves, and demand to be covered on defense. There is something to be said for that as well. Last time I checked, the object of basketball is to score more than your opponent!

---

Demand to be covered on defense? Did you watch yesterday at all? Villanova staying in man allowed them to cover Jake Thomas all day to take him away as a three-point threat. In addition, Villanova stayed up on Derrick throughout the game, not sagging off him as most teams have done as they shift into a zone. Our offense was NOT the problem. Villanova DID cover our guards. That's why Davante was able to have a field day in the paint. That's why Jamil was able to be efficient. That's why Mayo was able to score effectively all day.

Jesus, you'd think every single game is the exact same reading these posts. 'Nova did cover our two starting guards and that allowed the rest of our team to score on them nearly at will. Oh, and Derrick also had 7 assists and 5 rebounds to go along with his 6 points. Did those points created and possessions won not help our offense? Yes, Jake had a forgettable game, but it was because Villanova made him a defensive priority. It's not like he went 0/10 from the field, he only had 2 shots because they were staying close to him and not allowing him to get free shots.

The reality is that this team is just good enough to compete with most every team, regardless of the venue. However, it lacks the go-to guy to help win these close games against quality competition (and at this point, cannot count on that emerging). A bunch of near misses in recruiting, Vander unexpected leaving early, and Duane Wilson's injury are all contributing factors to this shortfall. Thankfully, the close recruiting misses in past classes have become hits and the unexpected fortune of getting a stud big transfer adds to a very promising future. Nova two years was 13-19, 5-13 in the Big East, and looked far worse then us this year. Now they are in the top 10 and look poised for a banner 2-3 year run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kneelb4zerg

How many times can we as fans bang our heads against the D Wilson/J Thomas wall this year? I think we can all agree that Buzz isn't stupid (note, not infallible, but also not stupid). If the solution was so obvious, we wouldn't be 11-9.

I also reject the notion that he is stubborn. This is a guy who adapts his style of play to suit the talent on hand every single year. Bo Ryan he is not.

Seriously, the argument that Buzz is either stupidly or stubbornly refusing to play the guys who give us the best chance at winning is extremely bizarre.

---

To be fair, I'm not sure why you think that's such a bizarre statement. Buzz has said himself, he plays the guys that have earned it the most. Just because you work hard in practice etc etc, does NOT mean you give the team the best chance of winning, and deserve to play more minutes than someone who doesn't work as hard but would give MU a better chance of winning. At some point, you have to get over your loyalty to certain players, and realize they probably work harder in practice because they have to to make up for a talent deficiency. Talent wins ball games, not necessarily guys who practice the hardest.

I Coach a baseball team in the summer and I had a situation similar to this. The guys that would come to practice every week would wonder why someone who almost could never make practice(this is an adult team by the way), would start for me. It's pretty easy...He gives me the best chance of winning. You may have been at practice every day and put in more time than he does, but if he's a better ball player and gives me a better chance of winning, that's who I'm going to play, but I appreciate your efforts and all you do to help the team in other ways.

Something tells me that coaching a college basketball team is a little different than adult, rec. league baseball.

It's very simple. If the more "talented" players, who you think can win MU more games, want to play, they should perform better in practice. I mean, if they are more talented, it should be simple right?

Yeah Nova defintely played us differently then most other teams have...it was really kind of bizarre to watch Gardner kill them because they stayed with Derrick and Thomas.

I would expect Wright to do it differently next time.......

I think we will see sagging man to man and zone from Providence which should provide more opportunites for Dawson and Thomas to make an impact......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

Something tells me that coaching a college basketball team is a little different than adult, rec. league baseball.

It's very simple. If the more "talented" players, who you think can win MU more games, want to play, they should perform better in practice. I mean, if they are more talented, it should be simple right?

---

Why?? Why should they have to perform better in practice?? You're talking about practice. Not a game, practice. More talented players can and typically do tend to "coast" in practice, but they are ready to go and give you everything come game time. Honestly, even if i was Coaching a college team and all that goes into that, I wouldn't let/want my more talented players to basically just "show up" for practice, and i don't think that's what happens, but if they give an effort, they will be in my starting lineup come game time, because they are the most talent i have and again, talent wins ball games more often than not.

Honestly, by "rewarding" less talented players because they work harder in practice is kind of "whacked out". I mean, are you TRYING to lose ball games?? Trying to send a message?? That's dumb, because college or not, the bbottom line is, you play to win the game. If you're not, you shouldn't be Coaching.

Because it is about rewarding good behavior that maximizes a player's potential. Look, if Jake Thomas is outperforming JJJ in practice...if he is playing to the game plan, understanding his role defensively, etc., starting JJJ over Thomas because of "potential" doesn't do Marquette or JJJ any good in the long run.

Furthermore I am not convinced that playing JJJ or Dawson would really improve MU's chances of winning anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSultan

Because it is about rewarding good behavior that maximizes a player's potential. Look, if Jake Thomas is outperforming JJJ in practice...if he is playing to the game plan, understanding his role defensively, etc., starting JJJ over Thomas because of "potential" doesn't do Marquette or JJJ any good in the long run.

Furthermore I am not convinced that playing JJJ or Dawson would really improve MU's chances of winning anyway.

---

On the other hand, many of us believe that playing Derrick and Jake together for extended minutes does not improve MU's chances of beating quality opponents. A real Catch-22 here..... We move on to the next game which provides another challenge for our starting guards in Bryce Cotton. Hoping for the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

Demand to be covered on defense? Did you watch yesterday at all? Villanova staying in man allowed them to cover Jake Thomas all day to take him away as a three-point threat. In addition, Villanova stayed up on Derrick throughout the game, not sagging off him as most teams have done as they shift into a zone. Our offense was NOT the problem. Villanova DID cover our guards. That's why Davante was able to have a field day in the paint. That's why Jamil was able to be efficient. That's why Mayo was able to score effectively all day.

Jesus, you'd think every single game is the exact same reading these posts. 'Nova did cover our two starting guards and that allowed the rest of our team to score on them nearly at will. Oh, and Derrick also had 7 assists and 5 rebounds to go along with his 6 points. Did those points created and possessions won not help our offense? Yes, Jake had a forgettable game, but it was because Villanova made him a defensive priority. It's not like he went 0/10 from the field, he only had 2 shots because they were staying close to him and not allowing him to get free shots.

---

Bottom line is our guards are not good enough! They may be nice standup kids, but they are not good enough to be playing extended minutes in major D1 Basketball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mufansince72

Bottom line is our guards are not good enough! They may be nice standup kids, but they are not good enough to be playing extended minutes in major D1 Basketball.

---

No, the bottom line is it's about damn time people start accepting that this team is what it is. Playing Dawson and JJJ wouldn't have fixed the problems yesterday. Most of the complaints about Derrick yesterday that I've read seem to have been written by people that had no concept of what he provided to the team yesterday. It gets really annoying to see people make the same negative arguments when those arguments do not even remotely relate to reality. Derrick was good yesterday. He demanded coverage from the defense and kept the offense functioning. Buzz himself said after the game that yesterday might have been our best offensive performance of the season. Yet all we hear is how the defense was able to ignore Derrick, how Dawson's offense would have improved our odds of winning, and how we didn't do enough on the offensive end.

Derrick was very good on the offensive end yesterday. He missed a few bunnies, but he distributed well, was aggressive on the boards, and had our offense humming smoothly. Further, he didn't force his shot, doing a good job of taking what the defense game him. If he had any failing, it was that he was abused on defense, but my guess is had we played Dawson, he'd have been abused even worse by Archie and the rest of 'Nova's talented backcourt.

Bottom line, it was a great college game. Sometimes you have to just give credit to the better team. On the road, Nova just stepped into their shots and nailed them. And then when MU started to overplay the perimeter, Nova successfully attacked the paint.

Jay Wright and Buzz were two of the best offensive coaches in the old BE. They are the top in the new. It was fun seeing each team's plays being executed out of each time out, each time, players got good looks. A chess game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

No, the bottom line is it's about damn time people start accepting that this team is what it is. Playing Dawson and JJJ wouldn't have fixed the problems yesterday. Most of the complaints about Derrick yesterday that I've read seem to have been written by people that had no concept of what he provided to the team yesterday. It gets really annoying to see people make the same negative arguments when those arguments do not even remotely relate to reality. Derrick was good yesterday. He demanded coverage from the defense and kept the offense functioning. Buzz himself said after the game that yesterday might have been our best offensive performance of the season. Yet all we hear is how the defense was able to ignore Derrick, how Dawson's offense would have improved our odds of winning, and how we didn't do enough on the offensive end.

Derrick was very good on the offensive end yesterday. He missed a few bunnies, but he distributed well, was aggressive on the boards, and had our offense humming smoothly. Further, he didn't force his shot, doing a good job of taking what the defense game him. If he had any failing, it was that he was abused on defense, but my guess is had we played Dawson, he'd have been abused even worse by Archie and the rest of 'Nova's talented backcourt.

---

our starting backcourt had 6 points in 65 minutes played. Nova's starting backcourt had 40 points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

our starting backcourt had 6 points in 65 minutes played. Nova's starting backcourt had 40 points.

---

And our front court scored a ton of points. 'Twas Buzz's rather obvious game plan, and the reason Dawson got yanked when he started jacking out of control threes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kneelb4zerg

And our front court scored a ton of points. 'Twas Buzz's rather obvious game plan, and the reason Dawson got yanked when he started jacking out of control threes.

---

Dawson shot 2 threes, making 1 of them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

Dawson shot 2 threes, making 1 of them

---

The one he missed was a terrible shot taken without running the offense. How I remember it at least.

It also occurs to me that if Chris and/or Taylor had not missed easy layups out of perfect half court offensive sets we might be talking about what a great win it was yesterday instead of how bad Derrick and Jake were.......

it was...but in fairness anybody can take a bad shot(Jamil took a similar 3...patted himself on the chest afterwards as if to say "my bad"......................freshmen get yanked for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kneelb4zerg

The one he missed was a terrible shot taken without running the offense. How I remember it at least.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

No, the bottom line is it's about damn time people start accepting that this team is what it is. Playing Dawson and JJJ wouldn't have fixed the problems yesterday. Most of the complaints about Derrick yesterday that I've read seem to have been written by people that had no concept of what he provided to the team yesterday. It gets really annoying to see people make the same negative arguments when those arguments do not even remotely relate to reality. Derrick was good yesterday. He demanded coverage from the defense and kept the offense functioning. Buzz himself said after the game that yesterday might have been our best offensive performance of the season. Yet all we hear is how the defense was able to ignore Derrick, how Dawson's offense would have improved our odds of winning, and how we didn't do enough on the offensive end.

Derrick was very good on the offensive end yesterday. He missed a few bunnies, but he distributed well, was aggressive on the boards, and had our offense humming smoothly. Further, he didn't force his shot, doing a good job of taking what the defense game him. If he had any failing, it was that he was abused on defense, but my guess is had we played Dawson, he'd have been abused even worse by Archie and the rest of 'Nova's talented backcourt.

---

If we had better guards, we would not be talking about this. Derrick is fine in small doses. Jake would be good coming in for a couple minutes to come off of screens to shoot some threes. They are not good enough to play 60 plus minutes against good D1 teams. You can tell me how much you love Derrick Wilson all you want. I'm not saying MU would have won if Dawson played more. I'm saying Derrick is what he is, and is not good enough! I think Dawson can be good enough and he should be given the opportunity to develop! That may mean a few more turnovers. It may mean slightly worse defense. So what! I think the potential offensive output is worth it.

If Otule, Mayo, Taylor, Burton, Dawson, and Thomas had actually gone after some rebounds we wouldn't be talking about this. Derrick was not the problem yesterday, and the offense was as good as it's been this season, so now is really the wrong time to say "replace DeWil with Dawson", especially when Dawson wasn't particularly good yesterday.

Like BLT said, 'Nova was simply better in overtime. We could've had Junior, James, or Diener in there and we weren't going to beat them yesterday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

If Otule, Mayo, Taylor, Burton, Dawson, and Thomas had actually gone after some rebounds we wouldn't be talking about this. Derrick was not the problem yesterday, and the offense was as good as it's been this season, so now is really the wrong time to say "replace DeWil with Dawson", especially when Dawson wasn't particularly good yesterday.

Like BLT said, 'Nova was simply better in overtime. We could've had Junior, James, or Diener in there and we weren't going to beat them yesterday.

---

I you want to look at the season as one game, sure, you may be right. When you look at it as a whole, we are where we are because the guards are not good enough.

If we had Junior, James or Diener we probably would have won the game in regulation.......No way to know for certain but if our offense was good with Derrick I'm pretty sure it would have been better with any of those 3. Defensively I'm pretty sure DJ would have done a much better job on Archie and I doubt Junior or Diener would have done much worse(I actually thought Junior became a much better defender his last 2 years).

I think both sides tend to go to extremes in this argument.......IMO..Derrick is not good enough...unfortunately we do not have anyone who has proven to be better....So that leaves us where we are.....at 11-9 with a group of guards that aren't good enough........

Let's hope that we are better and more entertaining next year.......bad and boring is a bad combination for fans.....they tend to complain alot when that is what they are left to watch day after day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mufansince72

I you want to look at the season as one game, sure, you may be right. When you look at it as a whole, we are where we are because the guards are not good enough.

---

We are where we are for a number of reasons. Inconsistency from Jamil, Todd, and Davante is probably at the top of that list.

It just baffles me that people are so quick to give a pass to the guys we had high expectations for and blame the guys we had low expectations for. Most of the games we lost were lost because guys that needed to show up didn't, more often than not the three I listed above.

Would we be better off if we had better guards that could pick up the slack when Jamil, Davante, and Todd have bad games? Sure. But that doesn't excuse the stars of this team not showing up to play far too often for this team to have consistent success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

We are where we are for a number of reasons. Inconsistency from Jamil, Todd, and Davante is probably at the top of that list.

It just baffles me that people are so quick to give a pass to the guys we had high expectations for and blame the guys we had low expectations for. Most of the games we lost were lost because guys that needed to show up didn't, more often than not the three I listed above.

Would we be better off if we had better guards that could pick up the slack when Jamil, Davante, and Todd have bad games? Sure. But that doesn't excuse the stars of this team not showing up to play far too often for this team to have consistent success.

---

I agree with what you're saying Brew, but Todd, Jamil, and Davante are not star level performers. This is no star on this team, and that is what is terribly missing. Jamil and Davante are generally pretty good, and Todd is anything and everything from game to game. I hoped that Jamil could be a Jimmy Butler type all-around star, and Todd and Davante could lead a solid, half-court based offense. It did not happen that way, much to my unfortunate surprise, and this team is a just a couple of steps behind every other Buzz team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

We are where we are for a number of reasons. Inconsistency from Jamil, Todd, and Davante is probably at the top of that list.

It just baffles me that people are so quick to give a pass to the guys we had high expectations for and blame the guys we had low expectations for. Most of the games we lost were lost because guys that needed to show up didn't, more often than not the three I listed above.

Would we be better off if we had better guards that could pick up the slack when Jamil, Davante, and Todd have bad games? Sure. But that doesn't excuse the stars of this team not showing up to play far too often for this team to have consistent success.

---

I'm not excusing anyone. However, the three you mentioned would be better with better guard play. Derrick isn't very skilled at getting Davante the ball where he wants it. I would bet you even two or three of the assists credited to Derrick yesterday were quite generous. Passing the ball to Davante, then Davante backs his guy down and gets a bucket. Cheap assists from a home town scorekeeper.

See this is what I mean......You want this to be true to justify your opinion of Derrick.

Here is news....You don't need anything to justify your opinion......it is your opinion...you have a right to it.....

Can we just forget this topic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mufansince72

I'm not excusing anyone. However, the three you mentioned would be better with better guard play. Derrick isn't very skilled at getting Davante the ball where he wants it. I would bet you even two or three of the assists credited to Derrick yesterday were quite generous. Passing the ball to Davante, then Davante backs his guy down and gets a bucket. Cheap assists from a home town scorekeeper.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Markedman

See this is what I mean......You want this to be true to justify your opinion of Derrick.

Here is news....You don't need anything to justify your opinion......it is your opinion...you have a right to it.....

Can we just forget this topic?

[/B]

---

No kidding. Next thing you will re watch the game and file a formal complaint with the Big East to dock Derrick's stats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Markedman

See this is what I mean......You want this to be true to justify your opinion of Derrick.

Here is news....You don't need anything to justify your opinion......it is your opinion...you have a right to it.....

Can we just forget this topic?

[/B]

---

Cool! You are right, it is my opinion, just like Brews opinion is his/hers! No need to beat a dead horse I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mufansince72

Cool! You are right, it is my opinion, just like Brews opinion is his/hers! No need to beat a dead horse I guess.

---

Well, you pretty much seem to go out of your way to discredit everything Derrick does well, and harp on everything he doesn't. Confirmation bias.

I think the biggest problem with Derrick on Saturday is that he played too long. 36 minutes is simply too many and I think his defense suffered for it later on. I also don't think Dawson was *that* bad and should have gotten more like 15 minutes.