Marcus Foster

[catzacker]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

[Pete]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

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

We probably win against UT, @TCU and @TTU. Even good players have bad games

[Belvis Noland]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

We're better when Foster is playing well.  period.  at the same time, he was terrible in the ISU game, and in that particular game, the team was better with him on the bench.  Benching him was the right call. 

To me, this doesn't seem very controversial.  good/great players have off nights.  to beat UT and win a few games in the tourney, we'll need him to play well and play a lot of minutes.     

[MakeItRain]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

that's great

[michigancat]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

We're better when Foster is playing well.  period.  at the same time, he was terrible in the ISU game, and in that particular game, the team was better with him on the bench.  Benching him was the right call. 

To me, this doesn't seem very controversial.  good/great players have off nights.  to beat UT and win a few games in the tourney, we'll need him to play well and play a lot of minutes.   

The fact that the team was better with him on the bench does not mean benching him was the right call.

Sitting your best player because you think he is "off" is a lot like trying to time the stock market. You might avoid losses by pulling out your money, but you might miss out on even bigger gains.

[ksupamplemousse]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

We're better when Foster is playing well.  period.  at the same time, he was terrible in the ISU game, and in that particular game, the team was better with him on the bench.  Benching him was the right call. 

To me, this doesn't seem very controversial.  good/great players have off nights.  to beat UT and win a few games in the tourney, we'll need him to play well and play a lot of minutes.   

The fact that the team was better with him on the bench does not mean benching him was the right call.

Sitting your best player because you think he is "off" is a lot like trying to time the stock market. You might avoid losses by pulling out your money, but you might miss out on even bigger gains.

That is a very apt analogy.

[ArchE_Cat]

well, we're a better team without Marcus because at the end of the ISU game he wasn't in there and we won.  so marcus being gone isn't that big of a deal because of that one time.

We're better when Foster is playing well.  period.  at the same time, he was terrible in the ISU game, and in that particular game, the team was better with him on the bench.  Benching him was the right call. 

To me, this doesn't seem very controversial.  good/great players have off nights.  to beat UT and win a few games in the tourney, we'll need him to play well and play a lot of minutes.   

The fact that the team was better with him on the bench does not mean benching him was the right call.

Sitting your best player because you think he is "off" is a lot like trying to time the stock market. You might avoid losses by pulling out your money, but you might miss out on even bigger gains.

exactly. oscar =blind squirrle

[420seriouscat69]

I will say tho. oscar did a really good job of managing that Iowa State game down the stretch. Hate him all you want, he out coached Hoiberg that day.

[kso_FAN]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

[420seriouscat69]

If Marcus is in a funk scoring, he can be a liability on the court at times with his atrocious defense. I think it makes sense to sit him at times.

[Mixed-Nutz]

Foster's frustration could be leading to some bad defensive effort and forcing shots.

[pissclams]

marcus foster should play every minute of every game.  it's really fun to watch him play and he is our best player. 

[Dr Rick Daris]

by and large

 

[michigancat]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

That's a different argument. If you think he's now a 20% shooter, you probably shouldn't play him at all.

[Belvis Noland]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

That's a different argument. If you think he's now a 20% shooter, you probably shouldn't play him at all.

so, really, is there ever an appropriate time to sit your best player?  other than foul trouble or fatigue, of course. 

[ksupamplemousse]

by and large

 

Everyone knows that it's "Buy N Large".

[pvegs]

Over the past month, on multiple occasions,I have heard that Marcus cheering on the sideline shows his character is poor.  Never a good explanation as to why.
#tucklife


Gonna win 'em all!

Again, this is the gpc podcast, but they just said the cheering is only when there's a big moment and the cameras could be on him and the rest of the time he's checked out on the bench. Also, that he's an ass in the locker room and doesn't play hard in games in which he can't score. Not earth shattering stuff.

[sys]

Over the past month, on multiple occasions,I have heard that Marcus cheering on the sideline shows his character is poor.  Never a good explanation as to why.

he's cheering sarcastically, like martin used to do.  it's very mean.  "nice shot, jevon.  great decision, jevon.  you really helped the team, jevon."

[#LIFE]

OT but my favorite bench moment was when CK got the Nub crowd to yell right when their player was shooting a FT 

[michigancat]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

That's a different argument. If you think he's now a 20% shooter, you probably shouldn't play him at all.

so, really, is there ever an appropriate time to sit your best player?  other than foul trouble or fatigue, of course. 

In theory, no. (Also excluding injury)

[chum1]

KU game: +10 with Foster on the bench, -3 with Foster in the game

SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  10:01  16-16 +0
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  08:13  18-20 -2
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  12:40  41-47 -4
SUB IN : Foster, Marcus  02:25  64-60 +10
SUB OUT: Foster, Marcus  01:09  66-61 +1
00:00 70-63 +2

[Belvis Noland]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

That's a different argument. If you think he's now a 20% shooter, you probably shouldn't play him at all.

so, really, is there ever an appropriate time to sit your best player?  other than foul trouble or fatigue, of course. 

In theory, no. (Also excluding injury)

I imagine most coaches would disagree with you.  Particularly good coaches.

[michigancat]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

That's a different argument. If you think he's now a 20% shooter, you probably shouldn't play him at all.

so, really, is there ever an appropriate time to sit your best player?  other than foul trouble or fatigue, of course. 

In theory, no. (Also excluding injury)

I imagine most coaches would disagree with you.  Particularly good coaches.

I'm sure you're right. But I wonder what their justification would be?

[kso_FAN]

When a player's best trait is making threes and they go nearly a month and a half of the season and aren't even hitting 20% of those shots while shooting over 6 per game, its okay to sit him. And it reaches a point where they probably aren't your "best player" anymore. It doesn't mean they can't be again, but its pretty clear there was an attempt to let Marcus play/shoot through his issues and it simply hasn't happened. Meanwhile, he's a had a few games where did some other nice things (defense, rebounding), but by and large he simply hasn't been very good since before his suspension happened.

That's a different argument. If you think he's now a 20% shooter, you probably shouldn't play him at all.

As a sophomore, I think you play him as much as possible to work through the obvious funk he is in. I think oscar has done that. I think it reaches a point where you have to put your more productive players on the floor. I think oscar has done that.

I don't think oscar handled Foster perfectly, but those issues probably started last year or even the end of the last season and oscar didn't catch them in time to correct them when they should have been corrected. He's paying the consequences for that now and it might end with him losing potentially best player that he has in the program.