Marquette Game Thread

[bluejayfan00]

Exactly, and that's my point. Neither one of them are really playing PG or Off-Guard when they play that way. They are playing something in-between... and I think it's because of all the mental switching they have to make all the time. And that's not a good thing.

If you think back to when Trey was playing Point for us at the end of his freshman year, he was playing PG and ONLY PG because R2 wasn't available. And he did it really well. But he wasn't having to make that switch. Last year, they may have played that way sometimes, but I don't think it was nearlyl as much as Trey and Ashworth are being asked to do it this year.

The problem is... the whole reason that Trey came back is because they wanted to see how he handled the Point as a defined role for him. Unfortunately, and I HATE to say this... BUT, so far, Id' have to say it has not looked good for him. I really HOPE that it gets worked out going forward... for both his sake and the team's sake.

I could be all wrong about this... and I hope that I am. But my gut tells me that it has been an issue. The added pressure on Trey and even Ashworth (because he's prolly not ever played the 2 before) has not be positive, I don't think.[/quote]

I think we're misunderstanding each other. Ashworth has never been a true point, and that's why we're struggling because we don't have one. He's being forced into more ball handling and initiating than he's probably comfortable with, and Trey is having to juggle both hats. Ashworth has played the "2" or off the ball plenty, he did at Utah State a lot. One of the reasons we've always had such an elite offense is we've always had a really good pure point guard, and one who is used to playing what that spot demands. Not only were they good at getting stuff for others and initiating offense, but they could also score on their own, too. R2, MZ, Mo, Chatman, Antoine, and you could go back to the Valley does even further. Ashworth is an undersized combo guard. He's never really been asked in college to handle a team and lead the offense in a way we tend to ask our point guards to do. I'm guessing/assuming, but I think Mac thought because Ashworth has a lot of experience playing off the ball while also being able to handle it at times, mixed with how Trey played at the end of his Freshman year handling the PG duties, and with what he needed to do individually to increase his stock, Mac thought it would be interchangeable, and it's clearly not. That I agree with you on. Trey and Ashworth are not completely comfortable in the roles they are playing, more so Ashworth. He could be a good scoring option off the ball against lesser competition and with guys he had played with for a few years, but he's clearly struggling to do that against better/bigger competition while also adjusting to a new scheme and teammates.

My biggest gripe with Mac right now is and has been the roster construction. I didn't complain about it a lot right after we got Ashworth, because you need to give things a chance. But, I was really worried that we were going to have no rim pressure from our guards spots (we don't), I was worried Kalk's offense would suffer a bit without having a true PG to feed him easy looks to get him going (his impact offensively has been impacted, IMO), I was worried that when we play good teams that can scout and run out athletes, how we were going to score in the half court if 3's weren't falling and our initial sets didn't work, and we're seeing all that play out right now. I've said this before, but I never understood people assuming Ashworth was just going to be a wash with R2. And don't get me wrong, R2 isn't Chris Paul. He had plenty of weaknesses. But, people also forget how freaking good he was at times. He had maybe the best NCAA tournament performance by a Jay, ever, against Baylor. He went toe to toe with really good guards from Arkansas, Xavier, etc etc etc. It wasn't ever fair to think Ashworth could compare to him. And for all his boneheaded turnovers and shot selection, we miss Art. We miss him on the boards, defensively, in the open court, and believe it or not, in the half court. We all remember the ridiculous catch and pump fake 3 times before putting it on the floor and falling or turning it over. But, we forget the times he could simply make things happen that other guys couldn't do last year or this year. The threat of his athleticism is missing. I love Mason and Traudt for their shooting ability, but they're not even being maximized because we don't have guys who can break down a defense and cause it to collapse to free up those guys for more shots.

I really think this year will simply come down to how well we shoot the ball, and if we can get Ashworth and Trey to shoot closer to their normal career percentages, and if Baylor can keep going at the level his has been.

[Chicagojayfan]

You're not going to draw fouls if no one on the team can drive the ball (or frankly - dribble at all). Most of our players will dribble a few times and pick up their dribble. Fouls are most frequently called at the rim and we don't have anyone - other than Baylor - that regularly attacks the rim.

This roster doesn't make a lick of sense. Zero ball handling, play-making, wing defense, or general athleticism. An over abundance of guys whose primary skill is set shooting...on a team with probably the worst PG play we've had since the MVC days. Mac showed up to the vegan festival with a cooler full of ribeyes. I don't get it at all.

Coming into that game we had shot more free throws than the other team in every game we played. It's pretty crazy to force 18 turnovers and only be called for 7 fouls. That's actually unbelievable.

I do agree that we don't attack the rim enough. Part of that is not knowing who your distributor is. Part of that is Kalk not being aggressive enough on his touches.

Agree on the last part, but to add to the anomaly here. We tend not to foul and Marquette averages 14 or 15 a game. This was by far the lowest foul total they've had this season w/ 7 and the next closest was 13 in two blowouts of Georgetown and Southern also at home.

It's also the fewest called against an opponent of ours this year. Next closest was Nebraska at 10, and we probably average near 15 as well for our opponents.

Note on history here - we had 3 games last year with less than 10 called and lost all of them by decent margins (Xavier, Marquette, Nebraska) and SD State had 11 called on them which we lost also

Given our history, I'm a bit shocked that we made it that close of a game

[go_jays]

Exactly, and that's my point. Neither one of them are really playing PG or Off-Guard when they play that way. They are playing something in-between... and I think it's because of all the mental switching they have to make all the time. And that's not a good thing.

If you think back to when Trey was playing Point for us at the end of his freshman year, he was playing PG and ONLY PG because R2 wasn't available. And he did it really well. But he wasn't having to make that switch. Last year, they may have played that way sometimes, but I don't think it was nearlyl as much as Trey and Ashworth are being asked to do it this year.

The problem is... the whole reason that Trey came back is because they wanted to see how he handled the Point as a defined role for him. Unfortunately, and I HATE to say this... BUT, so far, Id' have to say it has not looked good for him. I really HOPE that it gets worked out going forward... for both his sake and the team's sake.

I could be all wrong about this... and I hope that I am. But my gut tells me that it has been an issue. The added pressure on Trey and even Ashworth (because he's prolly not ever played the 2 before) has not be positive, I don't think.

I think we're misunderstanding each other. Ashworth has never been a true point, and that's why we're struggling because we don't have one. He's being forced into more ball handling and initiating than he's probably comfortable with, and Trey is having to juggle both hats. Ashworth has played the "2" or off the ball plenty, he did at Utah State a lot. One of the reasons we've always had such an elite offense is we've always had a really good pure point guard, and one who is used to playing what that spot demands. Not only were they good at getting stuff for others and initiating offense, but they could also score on their own, too. R2, MZ, Mo, Chatman, Antoine, and you could go back to the Valley does even further. Ashworth is an undersized combo guard. He's never really been asked in college to handle a team and lead the offense in a way we tend to ask our point guards to do. I'm guessing/assuming, but I think Mac thought because Ashworth has a lot of experience playing off the ball while also being able to handle it at times, mixed with how Trey played at the end of his Freshman year handling the PG duties, and with what he needed to do individually to increase his stock, Mac thought it would be interchangeable, and it's clearly not. That I agree with you on. Trey and Ashworth are not completely comfortable in the roles they are playing, more so Ashworth. He could be a good scoring option off the ball against lesser competition and with guys he had played with for a few years, but he's clearly struggling to do that against better/bigger competition while also adjusting to a new scheme and teammates.

My biggest gripe with Mac right now is and has been the roster construction. I didn't complain about it a lot right after we got Ashworth, because you need to give things a chance. But, I was really worried that we were going to have no rim pressure from our guards spots (we don't), I was worried Kalk's offense would suffer a bit without having a true PG to feed him easy looks to get him going (his impact offensively has been impacted, IMO), I was worried that when we play good teams that can scout and run out athletes, how we were going to score in the half court if 3's weren't falling and our initial sets didn't work, and we're seeing all that play out right now. I've said this before, but I never understood people assuming Ashworth was just going to be a wash with R2. And don't get me wrong, R2 isn't Chris Paul. He had plenty of weaknesses. But, people also forget how freaking good he was at times. He had maybe the best NCAA tournament performance by a Jay, ever, against Baylor. He went toe to toe with really good guards from Arkansas, Xavier, etc etc etc. It wasn't ever fair to think Ashworth could compare to him. And for all his boneheaded turnovers and shot selection, we miss Art. We miss him on the boards, defensively, in the open court, and believe it or not, in the half court. We all remember the ridiculous catch and pump fake 3 times before putting it on the floor and falling or turning it over. But, we forget the times he could simply make things happen that other guys couldn't do last year or this year. The threat of his athleticism is missing. I love Mason and Traudt for their shooting ability, but they're not even being maximized because we don't have guys who can break down a defense and cause it to collapse to free up those guys for more shots.

I really think this year will simply come down to how well we shoot the ball, and if we can get Ashworth and Trey to shoot closer to their normal career percentages, and if Baylor can keep going at the level his has been.[/quote]

Well, I have to admit that the only play that I saw of Ashworth last year, was his highlights... he was def playing point. e was always bringing the ball up and initiating the action. And even saw some pic n roll action with his 5. He didn't get to the rim that often, but he was deadly from mid-range and he was able to do some superb distribution out of that as well. So I guess we're seeing 2 different things. So if he wasn't playing point, who was for them?

[go_jays]

OK, the above post got screwed up. It's attributing what you wrote to me and what I wrote to you and the end doesn't show the difference. Weird

[#RollJays]

You're not going to draw fouls if no one on the team can drive the ball (or frankly - dribble at all). Most of our players will dribble a few times and pick up their dribble. Fouls are most frequently called at the rim and we don't have anyone - other than Baylor - that regularly attacks the rim.

This roster doesn't make a lick of sense. Zero ball handling, play-making, wing defense, or general athleticism. An over abundance of guys whose primary skill is set shooting...on a team with probably the worst PG play we've had since the MVC days. Mac showed up to the vegan festival with a cooler full of ribeyes. I don't get it at all.

Coming into that game we had shot more free throws than the other team in every game we played. It's pretty crazy to force 18 turnovers and only be called for 7 fouls. That's actually unbelievable.

I do agree that we don't attack the rim enough. Part of that is not knowing who your distributor is. Part of that is Kalk not being aggressive enough on his touches.

Agree on the last part, but to add to the anomaly here. We tend not to foul and Marquette averages 14 or 15 a game. This was by far the lowest foul total they've had this season w/ 7 and the next closest was 13 in two blowouts of Georgetown and Southern also at home.

It's also the fewest called against an opponent of ours this year. Next closest was Nebraska at 10, and we probably average near 15 as well for our opponents.

Note on history here - we had 3 games last year with less than 10 called and lost all of them by decent margins (Xavier, Marquette, Nebraska) and SD State had 11 called on them which we lost also

Given our history, I'm a bit shocked that we made it that close of a game

And it should be noted that Nebraska’s game plan was to let us shoot. It seems as if Big East officials are just going to swallow their whistles which is kinda sad because it takes away from the game.