Marquette plays today too ya know. Stanford @ Marquette 5:45 CST

[BuckyTuba]

how can you say the refs hosed marquette? their coach fouled out in the first half.

[jason21nl]

James took the ball to the hole and got denied got his board and did the same thing and threw up a horrible shot. On the last play before OT dude jacked up the 3 with like 8 secs left. You can see a huge difference between WI and Marq. WI would have ran some sort of play at the end of regulation.

[Blazer25]

Marquette gave it their all, not the players fault Crean doesn't/can't recruit anyone over 6'7"(they're losing both Fitzgerald and Barro who are the only guys taller than that too) or someone that can shoot.(they shot well tonight but that's usually not the case) You're not going too far without either. James/McNeal/Matthews probably won't all be back.

Pretty much all of this is wrong so I'm not sure where to start.

 

Mbakwe 6-7

Burke 6-8

Hazel 6-7

Heyward 6-6

 

All coming back. As for not recruiting big guys, I'd rather have MU's version of bigger athletic guys than the 7 foot stiffs the Badgers run out there every night.

 

As to not recruiting shooters? Steve Novak ring a bell?

 

Obviously no one on the roster is a shooter of that caliber but that's not quite the game they've played this year. They have 4 guys on the floor that can go to the rim as well as anyone in the country.

 

Michigan State won a national championship without a big man or a "pure shooter".

 

When they get some calls they win. When they don't they struggle. They shot well tonight even though they didn't get the foul calls around the hoop.

[Blazer25]

how can you say the refs hosed marquette? their coach fouled out in the first half

Seriously?!? Their coach was out at the free throw line arguing a call after he had already been warned to stay in the coaches box.

 

How bout with 13 min to go Stanford was in the double bonus and had only "committed" 2 fouls.

[RyDogg66]

I was pulling for Marquette the whole way, on the edge of my seat jumping up and yelling for the good and the bad, and I didnt see Marquette getting hosed by the refs, I just saw them get beat on a great shot by Lopez.

[Blazer25]

I didnt see Marquette getting hosed by the refs, I just saw them get beat on a great shot by Lopez.

Now that I've had time to decompress I'd say I agree with you Rydogg.

 

It really sucks that this is the end of the line for them. They are a blast to watch play the game.

[don1481]

I've had time to decompress and I still say that Stanford got a lot of calls that were at best questionable. I saw the same thing with Duke today -the refs giving them calls that they shouldn't have gotten. At least Duke blew it. So I guess that much made my day a little better.

[Glennron]

Wow, I'm a pretty big fan of Marquette but I really didn't think they were getting hosed. They just didn't have an answer for the Lopez's. McNeal played out of his mind for 4 minutes in overtime, he just couldn't hit the easier shots when it ended, hard to blame anyone for that.

 

I had seen a few Stanford games before this one, but I never realized what a punk ass Robin Lopez was. I couldn't believe how often he was taunting, he really should've been the one with two technicals.

 

All coming back. As for not recruiting big guys, I'd rather have MU's version of bigger athletic guys than the 7 foot stiffs the Badgers run out there every night.

 

You haven't seen the Badgers play, have you?

[Teatoe993]

Is it me, or does Robin Lopez look like that Ogre dude from the Revenge Of The Nerds movies?

[BuckyTuba]

7 foot stiffs??

 

DID YOU SEE STIEMSMA TODAY?

 

He was all over the place offensively. It's a shame that he didn't play like that his entire career at Wisconsin. That was the player that I expected him to be like.

[LouisEly]

With the exception of their last possession in regulation and their last possession in overtime, Marquette played a great game. And yeah, Lopez should have been T'd up for taunting and running his mouth long before the double T's on him and Blackledge, so he should have been in the locker room; but then again he wouldn't have been the one bricking the free throws at the end of regulation. Marquette was getting a lot of guys shoved around on rebounds that the refs weren't calling, while Marquette was getting called for fouls on any shot that Stanford put up down below. Tough loss.

 

Stanford was a top-10 team for a reason - very few teams in the country can match up with a team that has two athletic 7-footers who can shoot. Scary that they are only sophomores.

[Roscoe Chill]

Why is it that hardcore Marquette fans knock the Badgers whenever they get a chance? 31-4.

[Fatter than Joey]

I didnt see Marquette getting hosed by the refs, I just saw them get beat on a great shot by Lopez.

 

Yeah -- Besides that last shot Lopez took, he got 2 very easy entry-pass layups to start the OT -- Marq. couldn't guard him.

[thebruce44]

Stiemsma did look great yesterday.

 

I am a MU fan first, and this was a tough loss. Im excited to think that all three guards may be back next year. They don't need offense from the post since any of their guards can drive to the rim and Lazar is kinda a tweener. If Mbakwe and Burke can provide some interior defense (Mbakwe played great against Hibbert, so there is no reason to think he can't) they could be very good next year and match up defensively with anyone.

 

And if anyone thinks loosing Fitzgerald and his 6-9 height is a bad thing (Mr. QL), they clearly have not watched more than a handfull of games this year. If Fitzy wasn't knocking down 3s there is no reason to have him in the game. He was a huge defensive liability. He may have be listed at 220, but he played weaker than the 165 of Acker. Not to mention consistently making stupid fouls and giving the other team 3 point plays.

 

I am convinced that an athletic 6-7 or 6-8 player can properly defend a more unathletic 7 footer and that seemed to be true until yesterday's game.

[homer]

Blazer,

You need height to win a national championship. Some Sporting News guy was on Chicago radio the other day mocking Bob Knight's prediciton that Pitt would win it all because they didn't have anyone over 6'8" that contributed. He did some research and found that only like one or two teams the last 20 years without a player taller than 6'8"made it to the Final Four. Also, there have been studies done that show that taller teams in general beat shorter teams - not saying it can't be done the other way but maybe it's not a coincidence that MUs best run in the tourney in recent memory was when they had Robert Jackson in the middle.

[Blazer25]

You need height to win a national championship. ...He did some research and found that only like one or two teams the last 20 years without a player taller than 6'8"made it to the Final Four.

Other teams have had combinations similar to MU and won a national title. None of these teams had a main contributor over 6-9.

 

UNLV '90

Arkansas '94

Arizona '97

Michigan State '00

Maryland '02

Syracuse '03

 

I think that research is kind of bunk. Either that or the guy didn't look very hard.

 

All teams have players taller than 6-8. Not all of them contribute equally. Barro is a very good defender but a suspect offensive player.

 

What I'm saying is having "big-ish" guys (6-8, 6-9) that can move, jump, rebound, defend and score is better than having a bunch of Stiemsma's in my opinion.

 

It's great if you can recruit two athletic 7-footers but that is not realistic.

 

 

not a coincidence that MUs best run in the tourney in recent memory was when they had Robert Jackson in the middle.

Some guys named Wade and Novak might disagree with you.

[Blazer25]

Why is it that hardcore Marquette fans knock the Badgers whenever they get a chance? 31-4.

Wow that's juvenile.

 

Here's a juvenile response:

12/8/07

5:00pm Marquette 81 UW 76 @ Kohl Center Madison, WI

 

 

It's amazing to me how so many Badger-only fans have the little brother syndrome when it comes to MU basketball. Why not root for both teams?

 

 

I root hard for the Badgers whenever they're not playing MU. I hope they win the whole deal. I'm actually a hockey partial season ticket holder. I just find their style of basketball less exciting to watch.

 

Kind of like watching the Bears make it to the Superbowl. Effective yet boring.

[danzig6767]

With the exception of their last possession in regulation and their last possession in overtime, Marquette played a great game. And yeah, Lopez should have been T'd up for taunting and running his mouth long before the double T's on him and Blackledge, so he should have been in the locker room; but then again he wouldn't have been the one bricking the free throws at the end of regulation. Marquette was getting a lot of guys shoved around on rebounds that the refs weren't calling, while Marquette was getting called for fouls on any shot that Stanford put up down below. Tough loss.

 

Stanford was a top-10 team for a reason - very few teams in the country can match up with a team that has two athletic 7-footers who can shoot. Scary that they are only sophomores.

McNeal was outstanding in that game and the whole latter half of the season. With that said, he had three critical misses thatcould have either won the game for sure or nearly locked it up. I was very bothered by that three point shot he took at he end of regulation, it hocked me that he didn't attack the paint.

He also missed two close shots that could have given MU a three point lead and forced Stanford to tie with a three. There is luck involved at the end of many close games. McNeal had an easier shot in the paint than Lopez had for the win, but McNeal missed a shot he usually makes and Lopez his from behind the backboard. The bad luck play everyone has forgot was the rebound that allowed the other Lopez to hit the game tying free throw. That Stanford guy who got the rebound and passed to Lopez only got the board because the shot missed so bad that it hit the bottom of the backboard.

Lastly, i had one beef on that final shot. I told my buddy during the timeout, MU should double Lopez almost instantly after the ball was inbounded and if Stanford drilled a long open jumper because of that, so be it, just don't let Lopez get a look no matter what.

 

[danzig6767]

You need height to win a national championship. ...He did some research and found that only like one or two teams the last 20 years without a player taller than 6'8"made it to the Final Four.

All teams have players taller than 6-8. Not all of them contribute equally. Barro is a very good defender but a suspect offensive player.

 

What I'm saying is having "big-ish" guys (6-8, 6-9) that can move, jump, rebound, defend and score is better than having a bunch of Stiemsma's in my opinion.

 

It's great if you can recruit two athletic 7-footers but that is not realistic.

Depends on the system a team runs. I look at Barro and think he did a great job developing over the four years from what he started out as. With that said, Barro is a type of big that Bo Ryan likely would never recruit.

I watched nearly every Marquette game and don't agree that their lack of size and post up scoring wasn't a problem. There are a lot of games in college ball where teams can get away with not have much at the center position, but often in a few critical games you'll run into teams where the lack of size causes a real problem and Stanford was one of those games. If Marquette had anyone that could handle Lopez better defensively, they are in the Sweet 16 right now and IMO would have been a legit Final Four contender.

Just having a couple 6'11-7' foot guy around that can defend the paint when needed is something i hope Crean finally brings into the program. I love all the guard/swingman depth, but at some point it gets a bit redundant compared to having such little size.

 

[Blazer25]

Danzig,

I agree 95% with you.

Barro did develop nicely and was a fantastic defender late in his career for MU. I hope Crean finds more guys like him.

As for the Lopez twins and lack of whatever for MU...if McNeal's shot goes in to put MU up by 3 in OT we're not having this conversation either.

MU did fine against Stanford until Barro fouled out. Yes the twins did dominate but they do that to teams that have big guys just as well. None of Stanford other guys did anything.

[danzig6767]

I said the same thing in an earlier post about that same floater in the lane that McNeal missed, game is likely over if he makes that. With that said, if you were allowed to make trades in college ball, i really would love to have been able to remove either an Acker or Cubillan and add say Stiemsma to the roster.

 

With Barro leaving, Burke at 6'8 will be the biggest guy on the roster next year and i'm just not a fan at all of such a small front court. Sure it's true that there aren't many 6'10-7' foot guys that are good defenders and skilled offensively, the ones that can do both get recruited by everyone. Still though, i'd rather that Crean at least recruited a few that could at least defend the paint even if they aren't much on offense. For me, i'd like that better size balance than having six guards, even if the guards might all be better skilled overall than the big/bigs he would bring in.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I know this is a Marquette thread, but I see Steimsma getting knocked a lot. I think people just have a really built in mindset that any white guy over 6'8" tall is a gangly, unathletic clod who can't do a thing.

 

Stiemsma is never going to be mistaken for a scorer, but he does do a lot of things well. He defends very well, he moves around on defense....he doesn't just stand in the paint and take up space. He passes very well for a big guy, he rebounds well. He's got a strong understanding of the swing offense, and he knows that he's not going to get but a shot or 2 in most games. That being said, he's more than capable of knocking down the 12-15 foot jumper if the opposition gives it to him.

 

Since it's a Marquette thread though.........I watched a lot of Marquette games this year, and as others have said, they certainly could have benefited from having more than one"big" guy to do the dirty work in the paint. The focus is of course, the guards, but MU relied too much on those 3 guys to make things happen as individuals. On a given night if they were having issue getting to the hoop and creating their own shots, they struggle as a team. Yes, they score in the paint because they take the ball to the hoop, but that's not really the same as having an inside game, as they're not really post up players. MU has as much athletic talent as anyone, I just had a strong feeling their lack of size and consistency would hurt in the tourney if they got matched up against a team with solid bigs, and it did.

[homer]

All teams have players taller than 6-8. Not all of them contribute equally. Barro is a very good defender but a suspect offensive player.

 

What I'm saying is having "big-ish" guys (6-8, 6-9) that can move, jump, rebound, defend and score is better than having a bunch of Stiemsma's in my opinion.

 

It's great if you can recruit two athletic 7-footers but that is not realistic.

 

The study I was quoting limited the height to 6'8" and MSU (only one I bothered to look up) had a couple of 6'9" guys that played significantly. I know it's just an inch so probably not worth discussing. But I do think that Marquette is undersized. If they had just ONE Stiemsma in the middle (not saying they need three of him) they would be a much better team.

[bork]

Marquette has 6-10/245 Chris Otule coming in next year. Sounds like a late bloomer (grew 7 inches in a year). Reports say he is very athletic, good hands. Rebounding and shotblocking are his strengths. Unfortunately, the other recruits are guards and wings.

 

I think the ideal lineup would be

PG James

SG McNeal

SF Hayward

PF Mbakwe

C

 

With Matthews coming off the bench. But with the roster makeup, they may end up with Hayward and Mbakwe down low.

[TooLiveBrew]

They don't need offense from the post since any of their guards can drive to the rim and Lazar is kinda a tweener.

The problem I saw from this season was their tendency to kick out & rely on the 3, though, as opposed to actually going to the rim. I know they do go to the rim, but not nearly as much (from what I watched) as they opt to kick. When you rely on the trey, your offense instantly has an achilles heel, obviously. Couple that with a lack of a solid post game, and that's an offense with some holes in it. Crean likes the wing-oriented offense, to be sure, though.