Jump to content
Handy Johnson

Next Years Starting 5

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Thattimeofyear4 said:

I think we will see big improvements
He wasn't physically ready
He needed to red shirt imo

Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
 

 

I disagree, respectfully, with the statement he wasn't ready.

 

I think people on here are talking a lot about what Isaiah wasn't able to do last year.  But there's all kinds of things that he did do and did very well.  One thing we have to keep in mind is that he was a freshmen.  And freshmen make the adjustment from HS to major college hoops at different rates.  Sure, Isaiah might have struggled at times last year, but there were other times where he really showed his upside.

 

In my opinion, he needed to have a freshman year.  Not a redshirt freshman year, but a freshman year where he gets a really good read on where he is and where he needs to get to.

 

I see his role being a guy like Shavon Shields who takes his defenders off the dribble and can get to the rim.  Isaiah showed that ability.  He can spin in the lane, create some separation, and finish.  Great attribute.

 

He also, by the way, is a pretty skilled passer.

 

The thing he most needs to work on offensively is his jumper.  And given where his percentages were as a freshman, I think a complete overhaul wouldn't be out of the question.

 

You won't find very many good shooters whose guide hand is basically behind the ball and the left elbow winged out like that.  Look at any good shooter in the NBA, from Steph Curry and Kevin Durant to Kevin Love and Lebron James.  None of them shoot like that.  They all get that guide hand forward and the elbow more in.

 

For the love of God, Isaiah, model your shot off of someone good like that.  You have time this summer.  Watch yourself on video or in the mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, I'm not saying I think Isaiah won't ever be able to handle the ball. I agree that his biggest problem last year (beyond the lack of polish on his skills) was adapting to the speed of the game, and with a full offseason and a year under his belt, that should improve. But I think people are getting ahead of themselves trying to make him a point guard option next season. I actually wrote about the importance of Roby's development for my Friday column. I've been very high on him since he committed and remain so.

Edited by Jacob Padilla
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of great passers start off their careers somewhat turnover prone.  This is because they are unselfishly trying to make great plays instead of smart plays for their teammates.  Roby is an extremely talented passer.  I love his vision.  I see what he's trying to do.  It's gonna work when he gets big minutes this year and gets acclimated to the speed of the game.  What doesn't show up on the stat sheet for players like Roby is how crisp their passes are, how accurate their post entries and cross-court passes are, etc.  I think Roby is the kind of player we can run the offense through whether he brings the ball up or not.  He can get make opponents uncomfortable once he figures out how athletic he is.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the starting five is even going to be that relevant, honestly.  We'll have enough flexibility to mix and match how we want.  The more I think about it, the more I see:

 

Jordy-Duby-Borchardt

Copeland-Roby

McVeigh-Nana

Allen-Palmer-Gill

Watson-Taylor

 

Roby is definitely the wildcard here.  The other thing I'm interested in seeing is if Nana can play the 4.  He's only 6'6" but if he came in at 210lbs, he'd be a very sturdy 210lbs with great leaping ability and a willingness to rebound.  I think he'd be better there than McVeigh, which would free up Roby to play the 3.  He might end up being our best option as a stretch 4 after Copeland because he's an elite 3pt shooter.  I just see so many lineup options.  For example, a small ball, deep threat lineup could be:

 

Watson (40%)

Allen (50%)

Nana (40%)

Roby (35% pleeeeease)

Copeland (35%)

 

There's no way to guard that lineup, and it wouldn't be some horribly outmatched group defensively either.  We'd be a little light in the front court, but we'd have plenty of height and ridiculous speed.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LK1 said:

I'm not sure the starting five is even going to be that relevant, honestly.  We'll have enough flexibility to mix and match how we want.  The more I think about it, the more I see:

 

Jordy-Duby-Borchardt

Copeland-Roby

McVeigh-Nana

Allen-Palmer-Gill

Watson-Taylor

 

Roby is definitely the wildcard here.  The other thing I'm interested in seeing is if Nana can play the 4.  He's only 6'6" but if he came in at 210lbs, he'd be a very sturdy 210lbs with great leaping ability and a willingness to rebound.  I think he'd be better there than McVeigh, which would free up Roby to play the 3.  He might end up being our best option as a stretch 4 after Copeland because he's an elite 3pt shooter.  I just see so many lineup options.  For example, a small ball, deep threat lineup could be:

 

Watson (40%)

Allen (50%)

Nana (40%)

Roby (35% pleeeeease)

Copeland (35%)

 

There's no way to guard that lineup, and it wouldn't be some horribly outmatched group defensively either.  We'd be a little light in the front court, but we'd have plenty of height and ridiculous speed.  

 

Only think I don't like the Copeland-Roby thing.   Really don't want to see them on the same line.  They are the two most gifted players on the team in terms of upside.   I'd hate to see them eat each other's minutes.   We need both of them on the floor together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2017 at 9:29 AM, nustudent said:

Only think I don't like the Copeland-Roby thing.   Really don't want to see them on the same line.  They are the two most gifted players on the team in terms of upside.   I'd hate to see them eat each other's minutes.   We need both of them on the floor together.

 

Totally agree if possible.  It all depends on whether or not we can field a player at the 4 behind Copeland.  I saw McVeigh get beat up inside too much at that spot.  At only 6'6" I'm not sure Nana or Palmer would be any different.  That leaves Roby who can guard the 4.  

 

Having said this, because of Roby's developing skill set, he could potentially still get 25+ minutes a game being a spot guy at various positions--the opposite of a specialist.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2017 at 0:51 AM, LK1 said:

I'm not sure the starting five is even going to be that relevant, honestly.  We'll have enough flexibility to mix and match how we want.  The more I think about it, the more I see:

 

Jordy-Duby-Borchardt

Copeland-Roby

McVeigh-Nana

Allen-Palmer-Gill

Watson-Taylor

 

I just think it's way too early to try to name this hypothetical starting lineup.  There's still too much we don't know: how good is Thomas Allen?; how healthy will Anton Gill be?; will Copeland win his appeal?

 

I think Glynn is locked into the starting lineup.  Maybe Gill comes back as the player we saw in that scrimmage in 2015.  If Copeland doesn't win his appeal, you might see Watson, Gill, Palmer, Roby or McVeigh, and Tshimanga.  Or maybe Thomas Allen is all that.  Then sub him in for Gill.  

 

I'll say this: I don't see McVeigh-Nana being the top two options at the 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2017 at 0:51 AM, LK1 said:

I'm not sure the starting five is even going to be that relevant, honestly.  We'll have enough flexibility to mix and match how we want.  The more I think about it, the more I see:

 

Jordy-Duby-Borchardt

Copeland-Roby

McVeigh-Nana

Allen-Palmer-Gill

Watson-Taylor

 

Roby is definitely the wildcard here.  The other thing I'm interested in seeing is if Nana can play the 4.  He's only 6'6" but if he came in at 210lbs, he'd be a very sturdy 210lbs with great leaping ability and a willingness to rebound.  I think he'd be better there than McVeigh, which would free up Roby to play the 3.  He might end up being our best option as a stretch 4 after Copeland because he's an elite 3pt shooter.  I just see so many lineup options.  For example, a small ball, deep threat lineup could be:

 

Watson (40%)

Allen (50%)

Nana (40%)

Roby (35% pleeeeease)

Copeland (35%)

 

There's no way to guard that lineup, and it wouldn't be some horribly outmatched group defensively either.  We'd be a little light in the front court, but we'd have plenty of height and ridiculous speed.  

 

 

We are in a world of hurt if Nana has to play the 4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty interesting to see how much everyone's opinions are varying at this point.  I guess that's because everyone is building their lineups based on a different set of assumptions.  My assumptions are:

-Copeland is eligible the whole season

-Allen is all that and a bag of chips

-Only 8 guys get solid minutes every night, with everyone else fitting into the "gets major minutes in one game, and then doesn't get off the bench in the next one" role.  I see Nana, Jack, and Gill as the most likely guys for this category

-Returning starters get the benefit of the doubt in terms of starting, which benefits Taylor.  However, I see Roby as a prototypical 6th man, and expect him to get starter-esque minutes...maybe even more minutes than one or two starters.

 

I posted a projection back in April on how I expect Miles to use his lineup.  Other than subbing in "Duby" for "unknown backup center," I don't see any difference in how I expect the minutes to shake out.

 

PG: Allen (24) / Watson (16) / Taylor (spot minutes)

SG: Watson (17) / Gill (11) / Palmer (7) / Taylor (5)

SF: Taylor (15) / Palmer (8) / Roby (7) / Nana (5) / McVeigh (5)

PF: Copeland (20) / Roby (15) / McVeigh (5)

C: Jordy (24) / Duby (12) / Copeland (4) / Borchardt (spot minutes)

 

Total minutes per game projections: Watson (33), Allen (24), Jordy (24), Copeland (24), Roby (22), Taylor (20), Palmer (15), Duby (12), Gill (11), Jack (10), Nana (5)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, if reports we've heard are accurate, Palmer is better than a 15 min/game type player.  If those reports are accurate, and if your assumptions about Allen are accurate, aphilso, then we very well could see Palmer start at the 3 instead of Taylor.  And that's probably not far fetched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nustudent said:

Be very disappointed if Taylor is getting 20mpg.

 

If I had to pick which player wasn't getting their deserved share of respect this offseason, it'd be Taylor hands down. Is he incredible at any one thing? Debatable but he's an above average defender, a capable ball handler, and by season's end he had a pretty reliable mid-range game. Don't confuse this for "he's going to be all-conference" or "he deserves 25 minutes a game"...but I wouldn't be shocked if he had a good year, and I wouldn't mind at all if he was in the rotation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, unl said:

 

If I had to pick which player wasn't getting their deserved share of respect this offseason, it'd be Taylor hands down. Is he incredible at any one thing? Debatable but he's an above average defender, a capable ball handler, and by season's end he had a pretty reliable mid-range game. Don't confuse this for "he's going to be all-conference" or "he deserves 25 minutes a game"...but I wouldn't be shocked if he had a good year, and I wouldn't mind at all if he was in the rotation.

 

I'll give you that he exceeded my expectations last year, but the bottom line is...he's not a guy that should be playing more than 10 minutes a game in a reserve role if you aspire to be an above average team.  If he's playing 20 mpg, then that means Gill didn't recover and/or Palmer/Allen/Akenten aren't playing to their expectations or there is another injury.   He's not a guy who will hurt you, but he's not a guy who offers you anything above average either.

Edited by nustudent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also not be surprised to see Allen off the bench for Watson.  Allen can definitely be a true point guard if we need him there.  Those two will either be devastating on the court together or as a continuous offensive threat at point.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

Pretty interesting to see how much everyone's opinions are varying at this point.  I guess that's because everyone is building their lineups based on a different set of assumptions.  My assumptions are:

-Copeland is eligible the whole season

-Allen is all that and a bag of chips

-Only 8 guys get solid minutes every night, with everyone else fitting into the "gets major minutes in one game, and then doesn't get off the bench in the next one" role.  I see Nana, Jack, and Gill as the most likely guys for this category

-Returning starters get the benefit of the doubt in terms of starting, which benefits Taylor.  However, I see Roby as a prototypical 6th man, and expect him to get starter-esque minutes...maybe even more minutes than one or two starters.

 

I posted a projection back in April on how I expect Miles to use his lineup.  Other than subbing in "Duby" for "unknown backup center," I don't see any difference in how I expect the minutes to shake out.

 

PG: Allen (24) / Watson (16) / Taylor (spot minutes)

SG: Watson (17) / Gill (11) / Palmer (7) / Taylor (5)

SF: Taylor (15) / Palmer (8) / Roby (7) / Nana (5) / McVeigh (5)

PF: Copeland (20) / Roby (15) / McVeigh (5)

C: Jordy (24) / Duby (12) / Copeland (4) / Borchardt (spot minutes)

 

Total minutes per game projections: Watson (33), Allen (24), Jordy (24), Copeland (24), Roby (22), Taylor (20), Palmer (15), Duby (12), Gill (11), Jack (10), Nana (5)

 

You had me at "bag of chips"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, unl said:

 

If I had to pick which player wasn't getting their deserved share of respect this offseason, it'd be Taylor hands down. Is he incredible at any one thing? Debatable but he's an above average defender, a capable ball handler, and by season's end he had a pretty reliable mid-range game. Don't confuse this for "he's going to be all-conference" or "he deserves 25 minutes a game"...but I wouldn't be shocked if he had a good year, and I wouldn't mind at all if he was in the rotation.

 

Taylor is an intriguing guy and I agree with you that he isn't getting a lot of respect.  I think part of that is that we think we know what we have with him and we know how good a team we were (or weren't) last year, and so we're naturally hoping that some of the unknown commodities on the team will turn out to be significant upgrades.

 

But Taylor is an intriguing player.  He didn't hit a 3-pointer until the Northwestern game in early January and, from that point on, he was 30% from downtown.  He was never a volume shooter from deep but he definitely got better as the season went along.  He hit 4 of his last 8 three point attempts.  We would certainly take those numbers if that progress was something he could sustain.

 

He has good length and he can get to the rim, maybe not as reliably as Webster, but he is a threat to penetrate.  And, if he's shooting 30% or better from three, he's a guy you'll have to guard out there.  In some ways, he's like a stretched-out Benny Parker:  good D, adequate shooter, unselfish glue guy who can handle the ball.  Except he's 6'5".

 

He was third on the team in minutes last year, behind only Tai and Glynn.  I think it's safe to say that if he gets displaced in the rotation, it's going to take someone really good to beat him out.  And if that really good guy emerges, that's a good thing, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Taylor is an intriguing guy and I agree with you that he isn't getting a lot of respect.  I think part of that is that we think we know what we have with him and we know how good a team we were (or weren't) last year, and so we're naturally hoping that some of the unknown commodities on the team will turn out to be significant upgrades.
 
But Taylor is an intriguing player.  He didn't hit a 3-pointer until the Northwestern game in early January and, from that point on, he was 30% from downtown.  He was never a volume shooter from deep but he definitely got better as the season went along.  He hit 4 of his last 8 three point attempts.  We would certainly take those numbers if that progress was something he could sustain.
 
He has good length and he can get to the rim, maybe not as reliably as Webster, but he is a threat to penetrate.  And, if he's shooting 30% or better from three, he's a guy you'll have to guard out there.  In some ways, he's like a stretched-out Benny Parker:  good D, adequate shooter, unselfish glue guy who can handle the ball.  Except he's 6'5".
 
He was third on the team in minutes last year, behind only Tai and Glynn.  I think it's safe to say that if he gets displaced in the rotation, it's going to take someone really good to beat him out.  And if that really good guy emerges, that's a good thing, right?

No doubt

Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/2/2017 at 4:40 PM, Thattimeofyear4 said:

I think we will see big improvements
He wasn't physically ready
He needed to red shirt imo

Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
 

As someone who is been through the parent of a student athlete (different sport) thing, it is refreshing to see a parent that is not blaming their child's coach.  I also agree with Norm that Isaiah ready in many ways.  I think it was a confidence thing trying to catch up to the speed of the game.  I love the upside shown.  Looking forward to seeing his improvement this year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Taylor is an intriguing guy and I agree with you that he isn't getting a lot of respect.  I think part of that is that we think we know what we have with him and we know how good a team we were (or weren't) last year, and so we're naturally hoping that some of the unknown commodities on the team will turn out to be significant upgrades.

 

But Taylor is an intriguing player.  He didn't hit a 3-pointer until the Northwestern game in early January and, from that point on, he was 30% from downtown.  He was never a volume shooter from deep but he definitely got better as the season went along.  He hit 4 of his last 8 three point attempts.  We would certainly take those numbers if that progress was something he could sustain.

 

He has good length and he can get to the rim, maybe not as reliably as Webster, but he is a threat to penetrate.  And, if he's shooting 30% or better from three, he's a guy you'll have to guard out there.  In some ways, he's like a stretched-out Benny Parker:  good D, adequate shooter, unselfish glue guy who can handle the ball.  Except he's 6'5".

 

He was third on the team in minutes last year, behind only Tai and Glynn.  I think it's safe to say that if he gets displaced in the rotation, it's going to take someone really good to beat him out.  And if that really good guy emerges, that's a good thing, right?

 

All excellent points. 

 

I think that being the last addition to the team in '16, combined with this being his fourth team in four years at four different levels of competition (high school, mid-major, JUCO, then B1G), made Taylor a little gun shy.  And it's easy to see why.  With that kind of recent history, I too would want to "do all the little things" and prove that I'm a good teammate.  It takes a while to earn coaches' and teammates' trust.  And you don't earn that trust by playing selfish.  But with a year in the system and now potentially being this year's team captain, I think you'll see a more assertive Evan Taylor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will tweak the question just a bit...who is the leader on this team?  Perhaps there are two or three.  Leaders tend to find the floor as others will follow their lead.  My perception is that Evan is one of the leaders.  Then again, even though he is a senior, others have as much tenure on the team.  Could the leader be Glynn?  Don't know, so I thought others may know, or perhaps guess :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, huskercwg said:

I will tweak the question just a bit...who is the leader on this team?  Perhaps there are two or three.  Leaders tend to find the floor as others will follow their lead.  My perception is that Evan is one of the leaders.  Then again, even though he is a senior, others have as much tenure on the team.  Could the leader be Glynn?  Don't know, so I thought others may know, or perhaps guess :)

 

 

I definitely think Evan is going to be the epitome of a senior leader.  He's a gritty, tough dude and excellent defender.  I've really enjoyed watching him play.  Is second the idea that he can be our 6'5" Benny Parker.  If he can shoot over 35% from 3, there's no reason not to give him big minutes.  That's a big if though.  With the exception to the 5, I think solid long range shooting is going to be a requirement for spots 1-4 to get significant minutes, which is a luxury we haven't had during Miles' tenure.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taylor is nothing more than average.  There's nothing wrong with that.   But if Taylor is getting big minutes, then someone else is either hurt or not living up to their rankings.  There are only so many minutes to go around.  I definitely see some roles for him.  But if he is playing upper teens to lower 20s in minutes...that means one, or two of Gill/Palmer/Allen/Nana is probably hurt or not cutting it.

Edited by nustudent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×