Marquette Game Thread 1/26/19

[Anti-Homer]

Xavier Simpson just got a triple double against Ohio State. Looks like we might have choose the wrong Pg

2019
Xavier Simsons stats points 8.9 rebounds 5.1 Assists 5.9
Quentin Goodin points 12 rebounds 2.6 Assists 4.9


sipson's highest points once over 20 points 24 Northwestern
goodin 3 times over 20 points 20, 21 22

simpson's highest rebound 3 times 10 or above 10, 10 and 11
goodin's highest game 9

asists
Simpson's 8, 8 10, 12 four high games
Goodin's 8, 10, 9 , 8

simpson certainly has better TO numbers

Simpson has also not been hurt.... Q's numbers have been terrible the game before he sat out after having good numbers the game prior to that bad game

Simpsson has had 4 games where he scored 3 or less points with one of those games 0 points
Goodin has had 2 games of 3 or less and no shutouts

Simpson's three point shooting (although he doesn't take many in some games) looks as dismal as Goodin's

Mman,

In terms of basketball acumen, you were rated as the 693 wisest poster, but will fall somewhere in the 800 range, with your illogical selection of data points and rambling analysis. How relevant is the number of games they've had with points over 10 and 20, or how many points they average a game, if accomplished inefficiently, and to the detriment to the team? The fact that Simpson shoots a higher fg percentage from the field (by 5%), makes the avg points/game comparison meaningless. Michigan's schedule has also been a lot stronger than X's, and XS is the 4th-5th scoring option, where Q should be for X, though he obviously considers himself as IB to Marhsall's 1a. Spoiler alert to both: Scruggs is the number one scoring option. Guess what: If you shoot more, even if a lot - most of the shots are ill-advised, there's a good chance you'll score more.

To your sole excellent point, both are poor 3 point shooters and should limit those. XS shoots 3 a game, while Q shoots 4.5 Again, advantage Simpson. You excluded arguably the most important data point for a pg, assists to turnover ratio. Simpson's is 3.5, wheres Goodin's is 1.75. That's HUGE.

I'm still a Goodin fan but he hasn't been a good shooter since probably the YMCA league, and that's ok, if he would understand his deficits and embrace his strengths. IF he develops a 10 foot pull up, and develops more consistency driving to the hoop, he can still be an effective 4th scoring option.

As someone who puts AH's Mentor on his business card, don't embarrass me again. MuskieNick is salivating at the thought of replacing you as my bball sensei.

[muskieman]

Mman,

In terms of basketball acumen, you were rated as the 693 wisest poster, but will fall somewhere in the 800 range, with your illogical selection of data points and rambling analysis. How relevant is the number of games they've had with points over 10 and 20, or how many points they average a game, if accomplished inefficiently, and to the detriment to the team? The fact that Simpson shoots a higher fg percentage from the field (by 5%), makes the avg points/game comparison meaningless. Michigan's schedule has also been a lot stronger than X's, and XS is the 4th-5th scoring option, where Q should be for X, though he obviously considers himself as IB to Marhsall's 1a. Spoiler alert to both: Scruggs is the number one scoring option. Guess what: If you shoot more, even if a lot - most of the shots are ill-advised, there's a good chance you'll score more.

To your sole excellent point, both are poor 3 point shooters and should limit those. XS shoots 3 a game, while Q shoots 4.5 Again, advantage Simpson. You excluded arguably the most important data point for a pg, assists to turnover ratio. Simpson's is 3.5, wheres Goodin's is 1.75. That's HUGE.

I'm still a Goodin fan but he hasn't been a good shooter since probably the YMCA league, and that's ok, if he would understand his deficits and embrace his strengths. IF he develops a 10 foot pull up, and develops more consistency driving to the hoop, he can still be an effective 4th scoring option.

As someone who puts AH's Mentor on his business card, don't embarrass me again. MuskieNick is salivating at the thought of replacing you as my bball sensei.

He can have you and may GOD have mercy on his soul. I just hope he has the stomach to take on someone like you. As for my data, I figured you wouldn't like it except for something negative. I gave data in a thread that has no data for some to make up their minds. It takes someone like you to demand more but I wanted to wet the appitite of the real fans and not pander to helpless knee ***** posters with their left handed compliments ... and look who came out to be the circus attraction.

As for simpson's average I see he like Q has not shot as well as they did last year. Both have taken the same number of shots (76) from the field with Q missing 9 more than Simpson. As for three point that both are shooting poor than we like but Q has a better % the last two years than Simpson. I wonder if their fans are yelling don't shoot when he hoists up a three like X fans do?

[muskieman]

Howard is shooting at an insane level and is almost impossible to guard right now. We still should not have lost that game with the lead we had nor the Providence game.

“We” didn’t...”they” did.

Actually I’m not so much thinking that Xavier “lost” it, as much as I’m thinking Marquette “took” it. Sometimes the Big Dog eats and the little dog goes hungry. Right now X is not the a Big Dog.

Like I said earlier. Watching the end of the game was like watching X last year when X made the cluch three and other teams missed them and X made the FTs

[Anti-Homer]

Mman,

In terms of basketball acumen, you were rated as the 693 wisest poster, but will fall somewhere in the 800 range, with your illogical selection of data points and rambling analysis. How relevant is the number of games they've had with points over 10 and 20, or how many points they average a game, if accomplished inefficiently, and to the detriment to the team? The fact that Simpson shoots a higher fg percentage from the field (by 5%), makes the avg points/game comparison meaningless. Michigan's schedule has also been a lot stronger than X's, and XS is the 4th-5th scoring option, where Q should be for X, though he obviously considers himself as IB to Marhsall's 1a. Spoiler alert to both: Scruggs is the number one scoring option. Guess what: If you shoot more, even if a lot - most of the shots are ill-advised, there's a good chance you'll score more.

To your sole excellent point, both are poor 3 point shooters and should limit those. XS shoots 3 a game, while Q shoots 4.5 Again, advantage Simpson. You excluded arguably the most important data point for a pg, assists to turnover ratio. Simpson's is 3.5, wheres Goodin's is 1.75. That's HUGE.

I'm still a Goodin fan but he hasn't been a good shooter since probably the YMCA league, and that's ok, if he would understand his deficits and embrace his strengths. IF he develops a 10 foot pull up, and develops more consistency driving to the hoop, he can still be an effective 4th scoring option.

As someone who puts AH's Mentor on his business card, don't embarrass me again. MuskieNick is salivating at the thought of replacing you as my bball sensei.

He can have you and may GOD have mercy on his soul. I just hope he has the stomach to take on someone like you. As for my data, I figured you wouldn't like it except for something negative. I gave data in a thread that has no data for some to make up their minds. It takes someone like you to demand more but I wanted to wet the appitite of the real fans and not pander to helpless knee ***** posters with their left handed compliments ... and look who came out to be the circus attraction.

As for simpson's average I see he like Q has not shot as well as they did last year. Both have taken the same number of shots (76) from the field with Q missing 9 more than Simpson. As for three point that both are shooting poor than we like but Q has a better % the last two years than Simpson. I wonder if their fans are yelling don't shoot when he hoists up a three like X fans do?

As for my data, I figured you wouldn't like it except for something negative

I love data., but not data presented without proper context. Also, change the word negaitve with

objective and relevant

and you're spot on.

I wonder if their fans are yelling don't shoot when he hoists up a three like X fans do?

Only the smart ones do, like anyone who understands the concept of R.O.I. Injury attorneys are on your side though. Does this mean you're an advocate of Q taking 4.5 treys a game?

On cue, Muskienick is pinging my phone. You're on thin, thin, ice, my friend.