Player review: Trent Lockett

Photo by A. Martina Ibanez-Baldor

What he did well: Pardon the immediate cliche, but every great team–Elite team, for that matter–has that one player who does more that doesn’t show up in the box score than what does. In 2012-’13, that player was Trent Lockett. The Arizona State transfer did not match the statistics he put up for three years with the Sun Devils, or come close for that matter, but as the season went on he found his role on the team and excelled in it. Whether it was a deflection on defense, saving a ball going out of bounds on offense or playing help defense inside, Lockett really did it all for Marquette.

At the top of that list, in this writer’s opinion, was his offensive rebounding. Lockett attempted 92 shots around the rim this past season, and a decent amount of those came after he crashed the glass weak-side and used his remarkable athleticism to haul in the board over taller opponents. His 8.1 offensive rebounding percentage trailed only Chris Otule and Davante Gardner, higher than Jamil Wilson’s (7.5) and Juan Anderson’s (7.5). For a 6-foot-5 guard who played primarily on the wing, those are impressive numbers.

But it wasn’t just the offensive rebounds. Lockett wound up leading Marquette with 5.1 rebounds per game. He did this in just 26.6 minutes per game, and while that was more time than Gardner, Otule or Wilson played per game, it’s still impressive considering Lockett never played the “four;” all his rebounding damage was done on the perimeter.

When the season began Lockett looked a step slow, rarely beating his man off the dribble and being a step late in getting rid of the ball or pulling up for a jumper, resulting in player control fouls and turnovers. But later in the year it was apparent he was using more of his body to get into the lane, where he attempted the vast majority of his field goals. Lockett is a big 6-foot-5, and a smart one, too. His free throw rate trailed only Davante Gardner’s, and that same physical style that helped him grab offensive rebounds also drew fouls.

He was a solid–not stellar–defender after playing primarily zone for three years with the Sun Devils. He was physical inside but did get beat off the dribble more times than he probably should have. His block and steal percentages were fine, however, and on the whole he helped the Marquette defense.

What he could have done better: Being the glue guy on a team that made the Elite 8 was all fine and dandy (more cliches), but on the whole Lockett underwhelmed in his only season in the blue and gold.

Playing with more talent than he ever had at Arizona State, he wasn’t going to match the 13.0 points per game he averaged as a junior. Still, 7.0 points on 41 percent shooting, down more than eight percentage points from a year ago, was a major hit for Marquette’s inconsistent offense. And as much as he went to the free throw line per field goals attempted, his 2.9 attempts per game were down from the 5.1 he averaged as a junior. Again, he didn’t have the ball in his hands this year as much as he did at Arizona State, but his scoring was down and it was rarely pretty.

It got better toward the end of the year, but turnovers were an issue all year. Playing a faster tempo than he was used to at Arizona State, Lockett averaged 1.9 turnovers, including 3.3 the last six games before the NCAA Tournament. He took much better care of the ball during March Madness, committing just three times in 125 minutes. All in all, Lockett was never asked to do too much with the ball in his hands because it led to turnovers.

Best performance: It’s not a major surprise that Lockett’s best game came the same night Marquette performed its best as a team. After advancing to the Sweet 16 for the third straight season, the Marquette defense faced a daunting task in trying to stop the Miami Hurricanes offense. 300-pound center Reggie Johnson was out, but this lethal group still had firepower on the perimeter inside.

What occurred was an onslaught from Buzz Williams and the Golden Eagles, led by Lockett’s 11 rebounds and stifling defense on Trey McKinney Jones, who shot 3-of-10 in the loss. Vander Blue made headlines for his performance on the defensive end, but Lockett was just as good, if not better, in locking down the Hurricanes, who shot 35 percent from the field and committed seven turnovers.

Lockett also contributed eight points on 3-of-6 shooting and handed out two assists. It was a solid a game as he had played all season, and his defensive presence led Marquette to its first Elite 8 appearance in 10 seasons.

Worst performance: Few players performed well when the Golden Eagles dropped their quarterfinals affair to Notre Dame in the Big East Tournament, but Lockett was especially bad. He scored just two points on 1-of-3 shooting and grabbed six rebounds in 22 minutes, but he also committed five turnovers and failed to get to the free throw line. Furthermore, Pat Connaughton and Jerian Grant, Lockett’s two main assignments, went off in the win. It was a typical “bad” box score for Lockett: low field goal percentage, turnovers, solid rebounds and underwhelming scoring.

2013-’14 outlook: Trent has completed his eligibility at Marquette.