Early Season Random Thoughts

[royalfan]

1.  Athletes  Our athletic ability upgrade is very noticeable.  We have a lot of what I call "dudes."  When you know you are as athletic as the elite school guy across from you, there is no need to be scared.  I don't think our guys are or will be.  Possibly scared to win, like last night, but not scared of the opposition.  Morrow transformation is awesome to see.  Easy on the weights big guy.  Jacobson obviously is bigger than last year, but with that seems to have brought a little more athletic ability as well.  Dayton isn't the biggest team around, but he was affecting quite a few shots.  Then another type of athletic ability is having two guards that can get by people.  Obviously this is a stretch, but sort of reminds me of Boatright and Napier leading a surprise run.  Teams like that are tough to play against at the end of the game.  And sure enough Watson got game winning drive and foul.  We also have freaks like Roby coming in and swatting shots.  Nobody is used to playing against a guy like that.  They don't exist. 

 

2.  Offensive flow.  I have no clue how Lewis fell into our laps, but give the man a raise.  Damn, our offense looks improved.  Spacing is better, flow is better, confidence is better.  Guys like Jack know if open he is supposed to fire, and he is doing so without thinking about it.  Webster the same.  The spacing is so much improved that it is creating good driving angles as well.  We are getting into the paint and finding open guys or finishing.  It looks like an offense is supposed to look.  Big tip of the cap to Coach Lewis. 

 

3.  Webster    He is playing with a sense of urgency and has elevated his play about 3 levels.  Deadly combination of shooting and driving.  Very few college players can check him.  His 3 point shot give me confidence that it will go in for the first time in his time here.  Not just because of the results, but because it actually looks good and confident.  2nd team all big ten could be in the future for him on the ambitious side. 

 

4.  Watson.  One of the most annoying things ever for me to watch last year, was Watson taking so many 17-19 footers.  I despise long 2 point shots.  That is exactly what you want your opponent to be taking.  Yet he couldn't make threes last year.  It was a flawed approach, even though he did make a lot of them to be fair.  Now, he is not taking those.  I cannot think of one all year so far.  Instead, he has the same chance of making a three as he did a long 2 last year.  And he is taking those instead.  I think his outside shot is only going to improve during his time here.  Another deadly combination of shooting and driving ability.  Webster does it with elite athletic ability.  While fairly quick and athletic himself, Watson does it with fluid technique mixed in.

 

5.  Taylor.  Not a huge game impact here, but a tip of the hat to find a guy like him after White did us a bit dirty.  A guy that can come in and run things, can play really good D, has major level athletic ability etc. is really good.  If we get in foul trouble we still have an athletic ball handler that can play D. To be honest I don't think he is much worse than Parker was. 

 

6. McVeigh   Really like what I am seeing from him.  He knows he has a role to shoot when open.  He is doing so with confidence.  It isn't a deal where if he misses a couple, he is hesitant.  No, he is instructed to fire when open, and he is doing just that.  An open three from him is a good shot for us.  And we are getting him a lot of them with good drive and kick action.  Needs to keep working to become better rebounder, defender, and press breaker:)

 

7. Player development.  It took Miles a little bit to find his traction on the recruiting front, but they seem to have done so.  We showed signs of guys developing as well in this offseason.  We are always going to have to be a program that develops their players well, as we aren't going to get 5 star players.  This offseason has seemingly been the best on this front since Miles has been here.  Not sure if anything was done differently, but it is very encouraging, as I was really starting to doubt his ability to develop guys. 

 

I could probably go on for another hour, but those are a few random general thoughts on what I am seeing in the early part of the season. 

[Jugular]

Great job. The last 2 classes have fit very well with each other.  In the past, I don't know if that happened

[aphilso1]

Well stated, @royalfan.  My thoughts closely parallel yours.  A couple things I would add:

 

1. The starting lineup.  I really thought we'd have 8 or 9 guys of similar talent--a team with no stars, but also very little dropoff between starters and bench.  Boy was I ever wrong.  This starting lineup has 4 guys that can go off on any given night.  And compare the starters' weakest link (Jacobson) with our most recent NCAA Tourney team (Rivers), and it's not even close.  Really love this group of 5 guys we trot out for each tip-off.

 

2. Ability to adjust.  In the past, we've really struggled to find contributors off of the bench.  That '13-'14 group was the rare exception, with Miles able to plug and play a sniper (Gallegos), bruiser (Smith), or defensive pest (Benny) depending on the situation.  I love that even though our starters are clearly the best 5 we have right now, the bench has a bunch of guys that let us match up well with a variety of teams.  Once again, we can bring in an extra zone buster (Gill), a bruiser (Jordy), or defender/ballhandler (Taylor).  And that's not even mentioning a couple of guys in Roby and Horne who have a lot of all-around potential.

 

3. Protecting a lead.  While I'm disappointed with the late game execution last night, the mistakes made should be correctable.  What's nice is that we have the needed skillsets on this team to protect a late lead.  We're a great free throw shooting team, and we've got multiple guys that can hold the ball for 27 seconds before driving to the rim late in the shot clock.  Other than inbounding the basketball (again, that should be correctable) we seem like a team that is built to do the things needed to protect a late lead.

Edited November 25, 2016 by aphilso1

[mwash95]

I think for the first time in awhile, we have a team where no player with significant minutes is offensively handicapped, compared to the times where Benny, David Rivers, Mike Peltz were all playing big minutes (Peltz playing time was kind of unpredictable but you get it). Players are actually looking for their shots and look confident in doing so.

[Huskerpapa]

Just a couple of responses to very good analysis.

- I really think the Lewis hire was big.  There may have been a lot of fanfare with the hire, but he brings a lot to the table.  His work with the guard and wing group along with a few others elevated our game.  But I am wondering how much he has changed the offense or defense per se.  What do we know about his roles on the staff,

- There is a mention that MJ is our weakest leak.  I am not sure why that phrase would be used.  I would suggest that we do not have a weak link in our starting five. 

[hhcmatt]

1 hour ago, huskercwg said:

There is a mention that MJ is our weakest leak.  I am not sure why that phrase would be used.  I would suggest that we do not have a weak link in our starting five. 

 

It's because he's not really scoring.  He doesn't quite have a reliable post move that I've seen so he's almost a stretch 4 that is 0-2 from 3 pt range this year.
Non-scoring additions to a team are traditionally undervalued unless you do something else at such a level it's easy to notice. 

[royalfan]

Speaking of MJ. I hope his bulking up didn't affect his shooting ability.  This has a tendency to happen to people sometimes.  We need him to be able to be respected out there so it doesn't clog up driving lanes.   His presence inside has been a bit of a welcome surprise in any event.

[aphilso1]

6 hours ago, huskercwg said:

Just a couple of responses to very good analysis.

- I really think the Lewis hire was big.  There may have been a lot of fanfare with the hire, but he brings a lot to the table.  His work with the guard and wing group along with a few others elevated our game.  But I am wondering how much he has changed the offense or defense per se.  What do we know about his roles on the staff,

- There is a mention that MJ is our weakest leak.  I am not sure why that phrase would be used.  I would suggest that we do not have a weak link in our starting five. 

 

If we don't have a weak link in our lineup, then we should be the odds-on favorite to win the national title.  

 

In seriousness, I'll go ahead and explain my thought since I was the one who called MJ the starting lineup's weakest link.  As far as scoring is concerned, he's been mostly a non-factor.  He's a contributor on the boards, but not to the same extent as Ed.  And for defense, we've yet to play a team with a dominant PF so it's tough to say how much he's improved over last year.  He has gotten in some foul trouble though, which was one of his Achilles' heals from last season.  Don't get me wrong--I like MJ, I'm glad he's on our team, and I think he absolutely fits in our starting lineup.  But there is clearly a gap between what the other starters bring to the table and what MJ does.  However, and as I pointed out in my previous post, he's pretty darn good for being our least productive starter.  I would take him over two of the starters (Rivers and freshman Webster) on our last NCAA Tourney team.

Edited November 26, 2016 by aphilso1
brain fart

[Huskerpapa]

2 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

If we don't have a weak link in our lineup, then we should be the odds-on favorite to win the national title.  

 

In seriousness, I'll go ahead and explain my thought since I was the one who called MJ the starting lineup's weakest link.  As far as scoring is concerned, he's been mostly a non-factor.  He's a contributor on the boards, but not to the same extent as Ed.  And for defense, we've yet to play a team with a dominant PF so it's tough to say how much he's improved over last year.  He has gotten in some foul trouble though, which was one of his Achilles' heals from last season.  Don't get me wrong--I like MJ, I'm glad he's on our team, and I think he absolutely fits in our starting lineup.  But there is clearly a gap between what the other starters bring to the table and what MJ does.  However, and as I pointed out in my previous post, he's pretty darn good for being our least productive starter.  I would take him over two of the starters (Rivers and freshman Watson) on our last NCAA Tourney team.

From a box score perspective you are right, his production is dwarfed by others. 

[Silverbacked1]

1 hour ago, huskercwg said:

From a box score perspective you are right, his production is dwarfed by others. 

In this tournament it has been McVeigh.  He had some trouble last night and is looking like deer in the headlights right now.

[AuroranHusker]

1 hour ago, Silverbacked1 said:

In this tournament it has been McVeigh.  He had some trouble last night and is looking like deer in the headlights right now.

 

I'd agree with Jack being the 5th of the 5 starters. If McTrey isn't knocking down long-distance jumpers, he's kind of a liability in other phases of the game.

[hskr4life]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Roby move into the starting lineup sometime soon.  He found Glynn for like 3 open treys tonight and does a lot of things that don't show up in stats.

[AuroranHusker]

Roby is going to a good one for a good long while.

 

I really like that kid.

 

[hhcmatt]

Even after struggling through 1-10 3pt shooting for this tournament McVeigh is still shooting 38.4% and long range shooting is still a major need for us.

Is Roby starting if he hadn't sat out two plus months?  Maybe.  On the flip side of this coin, how do we feel about Tai and Watson shouldering the 3pt shooting for this team? (or even Jacobson taking on more)  To me if you don't need a guy to knock down open 3s on the floor to make your offense work then McVeigh becomes less compelling to start/give a majority of minutes.

 

At this point though to me it makes a lot of sense to play Jack a lot of minutes and know that he's a good enough shooter that the last two games are more the exception than the standard.

[kleitus]

Jack has obviously taken a step forward this year.  I think the mistake the night before got in his head a bit.  been there.  it sucks and how he reacts is going to determine how good he is going to be.  a shooter has to be able to ignore misses and mistakes or it'll eat them alive.

 

He's a good shooter.  and even good shooters have nights like last night.  seems like he will end up around 37-42% on 3's which is decent.  (aw3 was 41% as a junior jack is a sophomore).

 

The hardest step forward is the next one.  the difference between a guy like say... andrew white ... as a shooter and a guy like kyle korver or the obvious ones like steph curry can be summed up in two words.

 

When they're open an opponent goes "ah shit".  even when having a bad night or when they make mistakes in other parts of the game.

 

Jack had looks.  he missed.  I think he will be better than andrew white by the time he is gone from here.  the question im asking is if he takes that upper leap or not.

[Norm Peterson]

There's a place for analytics but sometimes I think some people put too much reliance on it. 

 

Some of us who watch basketball talked last year about what a good shooter Glynn is, how he's clutch.  We were told we were focussing too much on the memorable shots he made and, really, his eFG% (or whatever) was totally bad; 39% overall and 27% on threes wasn't good but he was a freshman and, as the OP pointed out, sometimes his shot selection suffered as a result. Plus -- nerves -- he missed his first 8 three pointers of his collegiate career.

 

Fast forward a year and we're playing good teams in the non-con and he's playing like an all-conference performer:  53% from the floor; 41% from beyond the arc; 15+ ppg; 3 bds; 3 assists; 1 TO per game.  I think a lot of us saw his ability as a shooter a year ago and it just didn't translate into percentages across the whole of the season.  If you're focussed only on analytics and numbers websites, you're going to miss identifying young talent that will develop.

 

I think the entire sophomore class has taken a huge step forward from where they were a year ago and Glynn is just the headliner of that group.  The other notable one would be Ed Morrow.  Because of Ed alone, we are a much better team than we were a year ago.  His power and athleticism down low adds a dimension we just didn't have last year.  Part of that is on the defensive end, and  I can confidently say we aren't going to make any opponent's reserve PF look like an All-American this year the way we did a year ago.  The other part is his offense.  He's doubled his minutes and nearly tripled his point production from a year ago.  He's also tied (with Jordy, woot woot) for the team lead in offensive rebounds.

 

Tai Webster is the other big improver and, really, he's just continued from where he left off last year, taking another step forward like the coaches said they expected him to do.  Can we dispense finally with this myth that Coach Miles doesn't develop players or that Tai Webster was a miss in recruiting?  He's our leading scorer, he's hitting 50% of his treys, he leads the team in assists and he's second in rebounding.  Plus he's our defensive stopper on the other end of the floor.  He's taken over for Shavon Shields as the guy who can get to the rim and finish.  And, honestly, at 54% on 2-point shots, he's actually been better at finishing than Shavon was.

 

I said before the season started that we'd be better than we were a year ago, regardless of what the analytics websites seemed to think. 

 

 

Edited November 26, 2016 by Norm Peterson

[hhcmatt]

46 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

I said before the season started that we'd be better than we were a year ago, regardless of what the analytics websites seemed to think. 

 

Analytics alone should never be the answer: They should be a way to double-check what your eyes and also tend to give you a baseline for what you have been doing.  

 

However, they don't tell you if someone's been injured.

They don't tell you if someone's mom is going gravely ill.

They don't tell you if half the team can't stand each other.

 

I'd say you certainly have your finger on the pulse of this program enough to see that Watson wasn't going to turn into Joe McCray and remember that Ed Morrow was at one point a posterization machine.  If we can keep this team healthy and get our newer players more experience without giving away games we're going to keep exceeding those preseason expectations. 

[HuskerBB]

14 hours ago, hskr4life said:

I wouldn't be surprised to see Roby move into the starting lineup sometime soon.  He found Glynn for like 3 open treys tonight and does a lot of things that don't show up in stats.

 

??? Glynn did not make any 3's in the 1st half - Gill had the only one we made in the first half.  Roby did not play in the 2nd half until the last minute when we pulled our starters.   Not sure how Roby "found Glynn" for open treys when Roby was on the bench???

 

That said - I do like Roby a lot and could easily see him starting for us by the end of the year.

 

 

Edited November 26, 2016 by HuskerBB

[Huskerpapa]

I was once told that good analytics simply support what your gut and eyes are telling you.  If the analytics do not support your eyes and gut, they are bad analytics

[HuskerBB]

6 hours ago, kleitus said:

Jack had looks.  he missed.  I think he will be better than andrew white by the time he is gone from here.  the question im asking is if he takes that upper leap or not.

 

Boy I hope you are right about this but I don't see it at all.  I like what Jack brings as a spot-up shooter but don't seem him ever coming close to being the player that Andrew White was for us - or is for Syracuse now.

 

[Huskerpapa]

Jack looks to be about a half tic off on his shots.  It looks like he is rushing the shot rather than simply flowing into the shot.  He hesitates for just an eye blink and then rushes to launch.  Perhaps I am totally wrong, but he hasn't looked as smooth as he did at home.

[HuskerBB]

1 minute ago, huskercwg said:

Jack looks to be about a half tic off on his shots.  It looks like he is rushing the shot rather than simply flowing into the shot.  He hesitates for just an eye blink and then rushes to launch.  Perhaps I am totally wrong, but he hasn't looked as smooth as he did at home.

 

I think maybe the near disastrous end to the game the night before was still in his head a little bit last night and made him a bit more tentative.

[Dean Smith]

It may not be saying much but Jack handles the ball better than White right now. He looks awkward at times but I like it when he penetrates or especially when he gets a post up because he can be really effective around the basket. I think we should use the  post up aspect of his game more. If he's not now, he will be a better rebounder and defender than White as well. The difference being White wants to do those things to increase his draft stock and Jack wants to do those things to help his team. If you remember when the team was discussing slogans for the year, Jack's was, "Just Win."

Edited November 26, 2016 by Dean Smith

[royalfan]

9 minutes ago, huskercwg said:

Jack looks to be about a half tic off on his shots.  It looks like he is rushing the shot rather than simply flowing into the shot.  He hesitates for just an eye blink and then rushes to launch.  Perhaps I am totally wrong, but he hasn't looked as smooth as he did at home.

 

You are not wrong.  I can't explain the problem exactly, but what you said might be exactly right.  Something was off in these two games with his stroke, and not just because they weren't going in. 

[royalfan]

3 minutes ago, Dean Smith said:

It may not be saying much but Jack handles the ball better than White right now. He looks awkward at times but I like it when he penetrates or especially when he gets a post up because he can be really effective around the basket. I think we should use post up aspect of his game more. If he's not now, he will be a better rebounder and defender than White as well. The difference being White wants to do those things to increase his draft stock and Jack wants to do those things to help his team. If you remember when the team was discussing slogans for the year, Jack's was, "Just Win."

We have to be careful with allowing Jack to become too soft, by being only a 3 point gunner.  We need him to get better in these aspects you talked about to become a complete threat.