Marquette Game Thread

[Chicagojayfan]

...

I think the real question isn't what any of us think about our PG, and when, or if, he'll start to consistently put the "point" in point guard. The real question is whether Mac has any confidence in him in high leverage situations after nearly half a season and, if he doesn't (and there are troubling signs that that's the case), then where are we?

It's not unprecedented that Mac goes with the guys he trusts earlier on in the season.

Mo Watson played 30 minutes 3x in his first 10 games with us (also had a 15 minute, 21 minute, 24 minute game), 7x in his next 10, 7x in his next 10

I was at that Loyola game we lost on the road with Mo playing and he, frankly, didn't play all that well, but obviously he turned out great after time.

[Jaybird]

That road game last year was a complete embarrassment, but some seem to think Nembhard would have saved us right: Oh, yeah, last year on the road against Marquette Nembhard went 2/10, 1/6 from 3 PT Range, had 4 assists and 3 turnovers.. and for reference he shot better at home against them but had a 6/5 Assist/Turnover ratio in that game (Yay, but he would have saved us right????? /s

Who’s saying this? I haven’t seen any posts like that. Sounds like a straw man argument.

[go_jays]

As for the pace of the game, I don't think the pace bothered us as much as the problems we had protecting the offensive glass. Not only did we give up extra chances, we screwed our chances at getting transition. In 5 games that we've had with a pace of 70 factor or more, we've gone 4-1 including beating Alabama. Slow paces bother us a lot more, but in order for us to play with the kind of pace we want, we need to be effective in getting defensive rebounds

Some matchups are good and some are bad. In Marquette's case they turned us over 15 and 16 times last year as well. In particular the road game last year was an embarrassment for us. We turned it over 16 times, hit some 2 PT shots, but were 20% from 3 PT range, and had an offensive rating of 80.6 (2nd worst of the year last year with only that terrible NU game being worse). We struggled against their D last year and this year, but at least this year we shot the ball well, while also turning it over which made it a closer game

That road game last year was a complete embarrassment, but some seem to think Nembhard would have saved us right: Oh, yeah, last year on the road against Marquette Nembhard went 2/10, 1/6 from 3 PT Range, had 4 assists and 3 turnovers.. and for reference he shot better at home against them but had a 6/5 Assist/Turnover ratio in that game (Yay, but he would have saved us right????? /s

We'll agree to disagree then. Otherwise, how do you explain the 18 turnovers? And giving up offensive rebounds is an inability to adjust to, and make, the transition, IMO. Because making the transition actually begins when the ball goes up. Not after it is rebounded.

Also... a deeper dive into the PG situation...This thought just came to me. When we have Trey and Ashworth in at the same time... If Trey is assuming the PG position and Ashworth the off-guard/2. Then we have a natural off-guard playing the PG. And a natural PG playing the off-guard. While some, and I think most of us, were looking at that as an abundance of riches. It might actually be hindering the flow of things.

[McKinney's Neighbor]

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.

[Chicagojayfan]

As for the pace of the game, I don't think the pace bothered us as much as the problems we had protecting the offensive glass. Not only did we give up extra chances, we screwed our chances at getting transition. In 5 games that we've had with a pace of 70 factor or more, we've gone 4-1 including beating Alabama. Slow paces bother us a lot more, but in order for us to play with the kind of pace we want, we need to be effective in getting defensive rebounds

Some matchups are good and some are bad. In Marquette's case they turned us over 15 and 16 times last year as well. In particular the road game last year was an embarrassment for us. We turned it over 16 times, hit some 2 PT shots, but were 20% from 3 PT range, and had an offensive rating of 80.6 (2nd worst of the year last year with only that terrible NU game being worse). We struggled against their D last year and this year, but at least this year we shot the ball well, while also turning it over which made it a closer game

That road game last year was a complete embarrassment, but some seem to think Nembhard would have saved us right: Oh, yeah, last year on the road against Marquette Nembhard went 2/10, 1/6 from 3 PT Range, had 4 assists and 3 turnovers.. and for reference he shot better at home against them but had a 6/5 Assist/Turnover ratio in that game (Yay, but he would have saved us right????? /s

We'll agree to disagree then. Otherwise, how do you explain the 18 turnovers? And giving up offensive rebounds is an inability to adjust to, and make, the transition, IMO. Because making the transition actually begins when the ball goes up. Not after it is rebounded.

Also... a deeper dive into the PG situation...This thought just came to me. When we have Trey and Ashworth in at the same time... If Trey is assuming the PG position and Ashworth the off-guard/2. Then we have a natural off-guard playing the PG. And a natural PG playing the off-guard. While some, and I think most of us, were looking at that as an abundance of riches. It might actually be hindering the flow of things.

How do you explain the 15 and 16 turnovers last year (and much worse shooting performance) against Marquette when we had a more established reliable ballhandler. Sometimes matchups are just tough and teams can't stack enough good players to match up to every team they face

That said, I think you are right that we're still working through the ways in which we want to ball to flow on offense, and while I understand Mac playing Bello as much as he has (he's gone conservative like that that before when introducing new players to a lineup) I think the next 8 games will tell us a lot about where he thinks the offense should go this year and I think we'll work it out

[HaRdWoOd]

Isnt the point guard sort of irrelevant? They are all basically wing players.
There is no pressure on the rim, too reliant on three's. No one that can beat their man off the dribble from the wing and when they do, it gives me Kaluma vibes. Its jab step, dribble right, behind the back dribble, spin move, two foot jump stop, shot fake, fade away. If you have to make that many moves to get into the paint with the ball in your hand, its ball stopping and everyone is standing around watching. Its a reason, they kept getting called for shot clock violations. A lot of standing around watching.
Can someone let Kalk know the season started and we are getting ready for game 14? He looks like he is ready to go to the bench for a power nap. Body language is everything. He has had his clocked cleaned way too often this year and Saturdays performance might have been the worst. Three rebounds in 35 minutes? You can do that just by playing 35 minutes and the ball hits you in the hands. Stop saying "he blocks out so Trey and Baylor can get rebounds". I'm not buying that. Thats ridiculous. Ighodaro had 16 rebounds. I want my 7'1" center blocking out AND going to get the ball. We go whole halves without a Kalkbrenner post touch and that has to stop. I know his offense is limited but we need him to post up hard and demand the ball. We need to Alabama Kalk to be more consistent.

[bluejayfan00]

As for the pace of the game, I don't think the pace bothered us as much as the problems we had protecting the offensive glass. Not only did we give up extra chances, we screwed our chances at getting transition. In 5 games that we've had with a pace of 70 factor or more, we've gone 4-1 including beating Alabama. Slow paces bother us a lot more, but in order for us to play with the kind of pace we want, we need to be effective in getting defensive rebounds

Some matchups are good and some are bad. In Marquette's case they turned us over 15 and 16 times last year as well. In particular the road game last year was an embarrassment for us. We turned it over 16 times, hit some 2 PT shots, but were 20% from 3 PT range, and had an offensive rating of 80.6 (2nd worst of the year last year with only that terrible NU game being worse). We struggled against their D last year and this year, but at least this year we shot the ball well, while also turning it over which made it a closer game

That road game last year was a complete embarrassment, but some seem to think Nembhard would have saved us right: Oh, yeah, last year on the road against Marquette Nembhard went 2/10, 1/6 from 3 PT Range, had 4 assists and 3 turnovers.. and for reference he shot better at home against them but had a 6/5 Assist/Turnover ratio in that game (Yay, but he would have saved us right????? /s

We'll agree to disagree then. Otherwise, how do you explain the 18 turnovers? And giving up offensive rebounds is an inability to adjust to, and make, the transition, IMO. Because making the transition actually begins when the ball goes up. Not after it is rebounded.

Also... a deeper dive into the PG situation...This thought just came to me. When we have Trey and Ashworth in at the same time... If Trey is assuming the PG position and Ashworth the off-guard/2. Then we have a natural off-guard playing the PG. And a natural PG playing the off-guard. While some, and I think most of us, were looking at that as an abundance of riches. It might actually be hindering the flow of things.

He's not though. That's the entire issue.

[go_jays]

As for the pace of the game, I don't think the pace bothered us as much as the problems we had protecting the offensive glass. Not only did we give up extra chances, we screwed our chances at getting transition. In 5 games that we've had with a pace of 70 factor or more, we've gone 4-1 including beating Alabama. Slow paces bother us a lot more, but in order for us to play with the kind of pace we want, we need to be effective in getting defensive rebounds

Some matchups are good and some are bad. In Marquette's case they turned us over 15 and 16 times last year as well. In particular the road game last year was an embarrassment for us. We turned it over 16 times, hit some 2 PT shots, but were 20% from 3 PT range, and had an offensive rating of 80.6 (2nd worst of the year last year with only that terrible NU game being worse). We struggled against their D last year and this year, but at least this year we shot the ball well, while also turning it over which made it a closer game

That road game last year was a complete embarrassment, but some seem to think Nembhard would have saved us right: Oh, yeah, last year on the road against Marquette Nembhard went 2/10, 1/6 from 3 PT Range, had 4 assists and 3 turnovers.. and for reference he shot better at home against them but had a 6/5 Assist/Turnover ratio in that game (Yay, but he would have saved us right????? /s

We'll agree to disagree then. Otherwise, how do you explain the 18 turnovers? And giving up offensive rebounds is an inability to adjust to, and make, the transition, IMO. Because making the transition actually begins when the ball goes up. Not after it is rebounded.

Also... a deeper dive into the PG situation...This thought just came to me. When we have Trey and Ashworth in at the same time... If Trey is assuming the PG position and Ashworth the off-guard/2. Then we have a natural off-guard playing the PG. And a natural PG playing the off-guard. While some, and I think most of us, were looking at that as an abundance of riches. It might actually be hindering the flow of things.

How do you explain the 15 and 16 turnovers last year (and much worse shooting performance) against Marquette when we had a more established reliable ballhandler. Sometimes matchups are just tough and teams can't stack enough good players to match up to every team they face

That said, I think you are right that we're still working through the ways in which we want to ball to flow on offense, and while I understand Mac playing Bello as much as he has (he's gone conservative like that that before when introducing new players to a lineup) I think the next 8 games will tell us a lot about where he thinks the offense should go this year and I think we'll work it out

I explain the 15 and 16 to the same issue. They are one of the few programs that can play at the pace we like to play at... and at times they do it BETTER.

[go_jays]

As for the pace of the game, I don't think the pace bothered us as much as the problems we had protecting the offensive glass. Not only did we give up extra chances, we screwed our chances at getting transition. In 5 games that we've had with a pace of 70 factor or more, we've gone 4-1 including beating Alabama. Slow paces bother us a lot more, but in order for us to play with the kind of pace we want, we need to be effective in getting defensive rebounds

Some matchups are good and some are bad. In Marquette's case they turned us over 15 and 16 times last year as well. In particular the road game last year was an embarrassment for us. We turned it over 16 times, hit some 2 PT shots, but were 20% from 3 PT range, and had an offensive rating of 80.6 (2nd worst of the year last year with only that terrible NU game being worse). We struggled against their D last year and this year, but at least this year we shot the ball well, while also turning it over which made it a closer game

That road game last year was a complete embarrassment, but some seem to think Nembhard would have saved us right: Oh, yeah, last year on the road against Marquette Nembhard went 2/10, 1/6 from 3 PT Range, had 4 assists and 3 turnovers.. and for reference he shot better at home against them but had a 6/5 Assist/Turnover ratio in that game (Yay, but he would have saved us right????? /s

We'll agree to disagree then. Otherwise, how do you explain the 18 turnovers? And giving up offensive rebounds is an inability to adjust to, and make, the transition, IMO. Because making the transition actually begins when the ball goes up. Not after it is rebounded.

Also... a deeper dive into the PG situation...This thought just came to me. When we have Trey and Ashworth in at the same time... If Trey is assuming the PG position and Ashworth the off-guard/2. Then we have a natural off-guard playing the PG. And a natural PG playing the off-guard. While some, and I think most of us, were looking at that as an abundance of riches. It might actually be hindering the flow of things.

He's not though. That's the entire issue.

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.

[#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.