Marcus Foster

[catzacker]

man, I remember when Beasley only scored 5 points against Xavier.  Frank prolly should have sat his ass the rest of the season. I mean, when you look at that one game, it should give you enough data to extrapolate.

[chum1]

man, I remember when Beasley only scored 5 points against Xavier.  Frank prolly should have sat his ass the rest of the season. I mean, when you look at that one game, it should give you enough data to extrapolate.

No one is suggesting that.

[MakeItRain]

Marcus is still our best player and I obviously want him to stay, but one of the biggest reasons he was so much better than everyone else is that he was the only guard willing to be a threat. We spent 90% of the season with Nigel, Wes, and Justin completely unwilling to step up. I'll assume that part of that reason is that Marcus is so ball dominant, but those guys can't get a pass for not doing anything. We had a stretch where Jevon was our #2 guard scoring threat.

Marcus' suspension and subsequent reduction in playing time has put these guys in a position to be more assertive and it's working for them. There has been a couple of changes in roles that has seemed to help Justin and Nigel but hurt Marcus. I'd like all of these guys to stay and I'd like to see what the offense looks like with multiple guards willing to be assertive, maybe the coaches would be confident enough to pick up the pace.

[catzacker]

man, I remember when Beasley only scored 5 points against Xavier.  Frank prolly should have sat his ass the rest of the season. I mean, when you look at that one game, it should give you enough data to extrapolate.

No one is suggesting that.

We're not better off with Foster if he's going to play like crap.

seems like it.  i mean, Jevon can play like crap, but play him.  Wes has sucked something rough ridin' awful for like the entire damn season, he's in.  Edwards hasn't even looked like he knew he was playing basketball for the entire rough ridin' season, he's in.  nigel, according to oscar, doesn't even know we have scouting reports, he's in.

but for god's rough ridin' sake, don't play marcus.  don't.

[Pete]

You should have gotten a shirt that said "I am not the weak link".

Oh, I didn't play.  I just pestered the coach constantly.

[chum1]

man, I remember when Beasley only scored 5 points against Xavier.  Frank prolly should have sat his ass the rest of the season. I mean, when you look at that one game, it should give you enough data to extrapolate.

No one is suggesting that.

We're not better off with Foster if he's going to play like crap.

seems like it.  i mean, Jevon can play like crap, but play him.  Wes has sucked something rough ridin' awful for like the entire damn season, he's in.  Edwards hasn't even looked like he knew he was playing basketball for the entire rough ridin' season, he's in.  nigel, according to oscar, doesn't even know we have scouting reports, he's in.

but for god's rough ridin' sake, don't play marcus.  don't.

I wouldn't make a blanket statement that the team is always better when Foster is in. It was at one point, but maybe he decided to transfer and quit trying or something. Things change.

[MakeItRain]

man, I remember when Beasley only scored 5 points against Xavier.  Frank prolly should have sat his ass the rest of the season. I mean, when you look at that one game, it should give you enough data to extrapolate.

No one is suggesting that.

We're not better off with Foster if he's going to play like crap.

seems like it.  i mean, Jevon can play like crap, but play him.  Wes has sucked something rough ridin' awful for like the entire damn season, he's in.  Edwards hasn't even looked like he knew he was playing basketball for the entire rough ridin' season, he's in.  nigel, according to oscar, doesn't even know we have scouting reports, he's in.

but for god's rough ridin' sake, don't play marcus.  don't.

Zacker, what are you arguing? It seems pretty obvious that chum isn't advocating for a permanent benching of Marcus but in situations like yesterday when it was pretty obvious he didn't have it and the offense worked better when he was out, there's nothing controversial about that.

[kso_FAN]

Marcus has still played 70% of the minutes available this season. He's in a funk since his suspension that he can't seem to get out of. Hopefully this next week it will happen.

It seemed this past week that the guys finally decided they could win without Marcus playing well. Of course, this wasn't some conscious thing, but clearly from Nino's comment of "We live and die by Marcus, he always takes the big shots for us" there was a belief that they couldn't win without him playing well. It took other guys like Nigel stepping up and finally finishing games to do it (playing at home helped), but its nice to see that barrier broken. If things can get figured out with Foster and he's back next year with most of the other players, then this team "could" be better off for it.

[Cire]

Rodney and jake used to constantly be running around screens to get looks.  Marcus is either in terrible shape and can't do that or isn't willing to

[MakeItRain]

Rodney and jake used to constantly be running around screens to get looks.  Marcus is either in terrible shape and can't do that or isn't willing to

There's some truth to all of that but our offense doesn't set off ball screens to get shots for guards.

[michigancat]

This isn't even close. When Foster was in, we were outscored by 22.

SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  15:53  2-10  -8
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  12:06  12-10 +10
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  05:58  21-29 -10
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  12:52  45-53 0
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  10:36  48-60 -4
0:00  70-69 +13

The team definitely had better stretches of play with him off the court, but they're still a better team with him on the court.

Should he have played more yesterday?

Yes

[Mixed-Nutz]

Foster played well against KU for the most part. He didn't hit shots and forced some up. But played well.

Edwards probably had is best half as a wildcat yesterday. I think that has a little to do with Foster not playing in the second half.

[sys]

Rodney and jake used to constantly be running around screens to get looks.  Marcus is either in terrible shape and can't do that or isn't willing to

mcgruder and pullen could catch, change momentum and shoot.  foster is not great at that.  he's better with his momentum going towards the basket or stationary.  he has an amazingly fast release and good elevation, so he also doesn't really need to be running the baseline past a double pick to get open.

i'm sure there are lots of things that could be done to get foster more good shots and lots he could do to help that.  but i don't think having him in constant motion looking for a catch and shoot off a ton of picks is the right option for him.

and yeah, he also doesn't have great endurance.  another reason the above wouldn't help.

[Panjandrum]

and yeah, he also doesn't have great endurance.  another reason the above wouldn't help.

Does anyone on this team have great endurance? I'm not sure how to evaluate strength and conditioning outside of subjective visual judgements, but it feels like the team, as a whole, lacks conditioning.

[Missouriscribe]

and yeah, he also doesn't have great endurance.  another reason the above wouldn't help.

Does anyone on this team have great endurance? I'm not sure how to evaluate strength and conditioning outside of subjective visual judgements, but it feels like the team, as a whole, lacks conditioning.

Right you are, right you are

[Asteriskhead]

and yeah, he also doesn't have great endurance.  another reason the above wouldn't help.

Does anyone on this team have great endurance? I'm not sure how to evaluate strength and conditioning outside of subjective visual judgements, but it feels like the team, as a whole, lacks conditioning.

they're ridiculously soft.

[chum1]

This isn't even close. When Foster was in, we were outscored by 22.

SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  15:53  2-10  -8
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  12:06  12-10 +10
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  05:58  21-29 -10
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  12:52  45-53 0
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  10:36  48-60 -4
0:00  70-69 +13

The team definitely had better stretches of play with him off the court, but they're still a better team with him on the court.

Should he have played more yesterday?

Yes

I may have, too, if there were like 1000 games in a season. Even then, though, things happen. Maybe a player gets injured for the first time in his career, for example, and he looks like he can run and jump, yet has stat line is full of zeros. I wouldn't leave him in the lineup just because his season or career stats are the best.

It's interesting, I think, that not only did the team have better stretches when Foster was out, and not only was the overall scoring differential 45 (!) points, but all negative scoring differentials came only when Foster was in. Coincidence or red flag?

[michigancat]

This isn't even close. When Foster was in, we were outscored by 22.

SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  15:53  2-10  -8
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  12:06  12-10 +10
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  05:58  21-29 -10
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  12:52  45-53 0
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  10:36  48-60 -4
0:00  70-69 +13

The team definitely had better stretches of play with him off the court, but they're still a better team with him on the court.

Should he have played more yesterday?

Yes

I may have, too, if there were like 1000 games in a season. Even then, though, things happen. Maybe a player gets injured for the first time in his career, for example, and he looks like he can run and jump, yet has stat line is full of zeros. I wouldn't leave him in the lineup just because his season or career stats are the best.

It's interesting, I think, that not only did the team have better stretches when Foster was out, and not only was the overall scoring differential 45 (!) points, but all negative scoring differentials came only when Foster was in. Coincidence or red flag?

It's not particularly interesting or meaningful.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

It's definitely meaningful. I suppose some people might not find it interesting.
Foster was dogshit against ku and isu. It's good that Edwards and Nigel have stepped up.

[chum1]

If it's just a coincidence, it's a pretty interesting one.

[chum1]

Raises questions like: is oscar sabotaging Foster so he can get the tucks on his side!?!?

[michigancat]

If it's just a coincidence, it's a pretty interesting one.

Is it?

[wetwillie]

Raises questions like: is oscar sabotaging Foster so he can get Chum1 on his side!?!?

yes, yes I do believe he is.

[Rage Against the McKee]

and yeah, he also doesn't have great endurance.  another reason the above wouldn't help.

Does anyone on this team have great endurance? I'm not sure how to evaluate strength and conditioning outside of subjective visual judgements, but it feels like the team, as a whole, lacks conditioning.

they're ridiculously soft.

Yeah, Nigel puking and cramping during a game in February is a sign that it's time for a new strength coach.

[catzacker]

If it's just a coincidence, it's a pretty interesting one.

Is it?

I think one data point is always meaningful enough to make decisions/projections. Take oscar's head coaching record for example.