Prediction thread

Who plays more minutes Saturday: John Dawson or Derrick Wilson?

Derrick………unless Nova plays zone

Their stats could look like this:

Derrick: 30 mins, 5-7 FG, 3-4 FT, 0 TO, 5 AST, 13 PTS
John: 10 mins, 0-5 FG, 0-0 FT, 5 TO, 0 AST, 0 PTS

And people would still be bitching to the heavens that Derrick played more. :o

It will be interesting though after how well Steve and John played on Monday.

if derrick contributes to (at least) 23 points, we'll win the game. Then again, he's only pulled that off once this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

if derrick contributes to (at least) 23 points, we'll win the game. Then again, he's only pulled that off once this year.

---

Hey, didn't say that was what anybody reasonably expects, just sayin!

20 min / 20 min

Nova's only size is Ochefu and Pinkston. the rest of the rotation are guards. We will see a lot of 3 guard sets for MU on Saturday. No way the jumbo lineup is going to work against Nova...?

I'll say Derrick plays 25-28 minutes, and Dawson 12-15 minutes. I think this is a better match-up for Derrick because of Nova's pressure D and their playing mostly man.

Derrick plays more against 'Nova, but I think Dawson will see more than his average. If we can see that spread wf4l just guessed the rest of the year, I think we'll be pretty well set.

Who is more insufferable? Bleed or anyone else in the rest of the world?

I'm going with the one trick pony on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbiflyer

Who is more insufferable? Bleed or anyone else in the rest of the world?

I'm going with the one trick pony on this one.

---

Will have to give pbiflyer the win on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbiflyer

Who is more insufferable? Bleed or anyone else in the rest of the world?

I'm going with the one trick pony on this one.

---

I like those odds. I guess it would be one thing if I wasn't right the entire year on the points I was banging the drum on. But Saturday and Monday didn't prove any of that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

I like those odds. I guess it would be one thing if I wasn't right the entire year on the points I was banging the drum on.

---

LOL...What points have you actually been proven right on? This should be good...

With Saturday (our worst loss of the season) and Monday (our best victory of the season) Buzz offered his most drastic game plans season-to-date.

Saturday: Buzz shrunk the rotation, leaned on the JT/DW backcourt for 79 minutes, bench plays 42 minutes, underclassmen at 9 minutes played.

Monday: Buzz experimented with the line up, plays DW for 12 minutes, bench plays 78 minutes, underclassmen at 60 minutes played.

The main thread of my points this season is Buzz needs to stop going with the consistency (JT/DW backcourt) and experiment with the volatility of underclassmen (who are superior from a talent perspective). This point has always been met with the fact that the underclassmen haven't played either because they were hurt, not consistent enough in practice, or hadn't earn their stripes. From Saturday to Monday, there was no massive swing in practice that proved Dawson would be consistent. There was no difference in health issue with STJ. Buzz simply changed his strategy. It worked.

What he's done to this point in his tenure has obviously given fantastic results for the program (we have the best record over the last five years in conference, standing as testament to that point). This season represents him going too far to the point that effort and consistency will concure all. He needs to be able to alter his formula sometimes to consider the ingredients of the team.

After seeing the strongest embrace (season-to-date) of his consistency/trust model on Saturday equal the worst loss of the season, he drastically changed his rotation formula. He tinkered with the line up, underclassmen sparked the squad, and propelled us to victory.

If you think losing at Butler was the worst loss of his tenure you have a very short memory......

I meant season, don't want one word to get in the way of someone having to actually debate my point.

You ever stop to think that maybe none of that would've happened if Buzz hadn't been so demanding of certain players at the beginning of the year?

I sincerely don't know what you're talking about. Care to elaborate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

I sincerely don't know what you're talking about. Care to elaborate?

---

Would Dawson have been in a position to impact that game on Monday if Buzz had just handed him playing time earlier in the year when he didn't deserve it?

Not to mention that I am not sure that Buzz "tinkered with the rotation." Dawson got his chance at an extended run because of Derrick's foul trouble. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a 25/15, or even 30/10 split for the Nova game.

Do you want to know why Dawson got his extended run in the Georgetown game? Because Derrick Wilson told Buzz to leave him in. Derrick told Buzz that Dawson was hot, was riding a streak, and told him to leave him in. That says a hell of a lot about Derrick Wilson if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

I like those odds. I guess it would be one thing if I wasn't right the entire year on the points I was banging the drum on. But Saturday and Monday didn't prove any of that

---

That might be one of the most ridiculous things I have read in a long time.

So one game is a season-defining trend, even when IWB debunks it almost immediately? When will people learn to not make sweeping generalizations after an isolated incident.

was Monday our best performance to date?

No, not even close. The last 30 seconds of regulation and 5 minutes of OT were, but not the entire game.

For most of the second half Monday, we had no business winning because we weren't very good. That's what is funny to me about this sudden Dawson explosion. Yes, he played great in OT, but we were bad through 98.8% of regulation.

This just proves what Chicos has been saying recently on Scoop about how people only remember the end and forgot what led to it. Derrick has had similar performances this year against comparable opposition and been bashed. Dawson was awesome in OT, but acting like the offense flowed smoother throughout the game because of him is simply untrue. We were still bad, just in different ways.

If Starks makes that free throw, all these boards would still be in panic instead of resurrection mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brewcity77

For most of the second half Monday, we had no business winning because we weren't very good. That's what is funny to me about this sudden Dawson explosion. Yes, he played great in OT, but we were bad through 98.8% of regulation.

This just proves what Chicos has been saying recently on Scoop about how people only remember the end and forgot what led to it. Derrick has had similar performances this year against comparable opposition and been bashed. Dawson was awesome in OT, but acting like the offense flowed smoother throughout the game because of him is simply untrue. We were still bad, just in different ways.

If Starks makes that free throw, all these boards would still be in panic instead of resurrection mode.

---

I have to disagree here in that I thought it was a really well played game between both teams, with solid execution and limited mental mistakes on both sides. It did not look a game between teams that were 11-6 and 10-8 going in, and I think Georgetown can turn their season around when Trawick returns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by warriorfan4life

I have to disagree here in that I thought it was a really well played game between both teams, with solid execution and limited mental mistakes on both sides. It did not look a game between teams that were 11-6 and 10-8 going in, and I think Georgetown can turn their season around when Trawick returns.

---

Trawick will be out for quite a while. They really need Josh Smith, even if he struggle with conditioning.

I'd give you all a Golden Globe for best supporting actors in a comedy if they put me on the podium. I'm done arguing my points for the season because frankly trying to have you all understand my different perspective on this board is exhausting. It has come with its perks though, seeing grown men resort to name calling in attempt to be the biggest kid on this playground. Just a few facts about my PoV:

I love Marquette. I love Buzz and think he and this program are a damn near a perfect match. I think he has this program at the highest level it's been since before I was born. I am unbelievably appreciative of what he's done in his tenure to this point. I think given a few more years, he can take Marquette to an even higher level. That being said, I don't think any human that's walked this Earth this side of Jesus Christ is exempt of criticism. Coming in I thought we could compete for the BEast conference, I have since then readjusted expectations. I don't hate any player on this team, I believe some players could excel in different roles than they're currently being used in.

Unfortunately I don't think this board is a place that embraces different perspectives. The by-in-large opinion I've gathered from this board is we're 11-8 and it is what it is, programs have down years. Very little of it is Buzz's fault, certain players haven't stepped into roles they needed to, and we haven't won the 50-50 games. Scoop often is a place where ill-informed and crazed fans rant, while Hoops can often be murph or dodds giving a history lesson. If a random fan asked how would I describe bcb? I would title it Buzz's disciples.

From the few people I've talked to re: this board the general feeling is apparent: Buzz can do no wrong. Missed a recruit? Simple, the other school cheated. Lost a game? Obvious, players didn't play well enough. Turnover/disciplinary issues with the roster? These kids aren't buying into Buzz's system enough. Players under-performing? Not giving enough in practice. We've reached a point 5 years down the road where Buzz has done incredible things with the drastically different rosters he's been dealt. Even after 5 exemplary years, I think there are ways Buzz can better himself as a coach and the head of this program. I think he'd say the same.

When debate devolves to the point where subjective opinions and insider knowledge trump statistical evidence, I realize it's no longer a conversation worth having. I'll enjoy the insights Jim and Mark give, and continue to hold some kinship to the rest of you if for no other reason than you bleed enough blue and gold to yell your collective heads off at me. Ring Out Ahoya.

Bleed...

No one is saying that Buzz is infallible. But when you claim he is making mistakes and claim them to be "facts," without knowing the entire story, it makes you look silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleedbluegold03

Missed a recruit? Simple, the other school cheated.

---

I have often said Buzz has had his issues and has made mistakes.

But the line above is something I take very personally, as it is a direct shot at me. On the premium board I have explained if and when I knew of something that didn't smell right, and to a degree, exactly what it was. I don't lie about it, I don't make that crap up, and I don't say any of those things just to protect Buzz.

If you truly believe that, you are directly calling me a liar and that pisses me off beyond belief.

There is a difference between criticism and constant bitching. Sorry, bleed, but you fall in the latter. Especially as you do it about the same thing over, and over, and over ... again. Additionally, if someone does not subscribe to your narrow view, then they are either kool aid drinkers or blindly following Buzz. It does not matter if there are things they see that contribute to their thoughts, since they differ from yours, they are either ignorant or flat out wrong.

The problem with your "debates" and "arguments" is that you trivialize others viewpoints, as since they may differ from yours they must be flat out wrong. It then becomes an exercise for all posters.

Into every message board, a little willie warrior must fall.

My issue is you keep saying the same thing in a way like you know more than Buzz or any one else. In one game for Steve Taylor and 6 minutes for John Dawson you were right all year long and everyone else including Buzz were wrong.

John Dawson and Steve Taylor averaged 5 minutes or less per game going into the Georgetown game. So you saw them play for less than an hour and a half all year where Buzz sees them play for 2 hours ever day and you know more than him.

You were right and everyone else was wrong. You graduated a year ago right? With all those many years of experience and knowledge you should be coaching.

My biggest pet peeves is people saying "I told you so, I was right you were wrong!" Saying a team will win the Superbowl when you have called it all year sure, after a recruit picks a school that you predicted sure, but your "I was right all year and you guys and Buzz were wrong" shows that you are only 23, even makes it seem like you are 13.