Next Years Starting 5

[atskooc]

Chimichanga?

 

For fucks' sake. 

[49r]

10 minutes ago, atskooc said:

Chimichanga?

 

For fucks' sake. 

 

Yeah, I can't decide if it's worse than spelling it "Tia Webster" or not...

[Norm Peterson]

2 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

Is it acceptable to go back to the original subject, or is this thread now reserved exclusively for quibbling?  Assuming the former...

 

Here was my original guess way back in January:

Watson

Taylor

Roby

Jacobson

Morrow

 

Here's what we know now but didn't know then:

-Morrow, Jacobson, and Horne transferred

-Palmer eligible

-Allen added to roster

-Copeland likely ineligible for first semester

 

So all things considered, my guess at opening day starters is now:

Watson

Taylor

Palmer

Roby

Chimichanga

 

Aphilso, I'm sorry that in the midst of all the quibbling, you didn't feel you'd had an opportunity to share your views on next year's starting lineup.

 

I mean, outside of your posts in this thread on Jan 30, twice on Feb 2, three times on Feb 3, twice on March 9, March 10, March 11, April 14, six times on April 22, April 23, April 28, May 22, June 5 and June 6. 

 

Also, do you want to revise your picks now that Thor has joined our team?

[The Polish Rifle]

With the Copeland situation looking bleak, ill take a stab at the starting lineup come the middle of non-con.

 

1- Watson

2- Palmer

3- Nana (Sleeper, 46% 3 point shooter in HS)

4- Roby

5- Jordy

 

So many question marks its crazy. Can Nana and Allen be big time contributors as freshman? Will Palmer be a the stud scorer we need? Can Roby and Jordy develop into the players we have seen flashes of? Can Copeland join the team midseason and still fit in and be productive?

 

If Miles gets this group to the NCAA tournament, I'd be cool with giving him a lifetime contract.

[Norm Peterson]

A recruiting class of Thor, Nana, and Thomas Allen.

 

Two small forwards and a combo guard.

 

By reputation at least, all three can shoot the damn ball.

 

Does this portend a shift in offensive philosophy?

 

Throw a frickin zone at us now, bitches. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2017 by Norm Peterson

[Ron Mexico]

7 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

A recruiting class of Thor, Nana, and Thomas Allen.

 

Two small forwards and a combo guard.

 

By reputation at least, all three can shoot the damn ball.

 

Does this portend a shift in offensive philosophy?

 

Throw a frickin zone at us now, bitches. 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't forget about Jordy's new found 3 point range :-)

 

[Huskerpapa]

I know a lot of people believe we have a number of question marks, I will place my rose colored glasses on and state that we have less question marks then most people wish to claim.  I believe we are going to see exponential growth out of our returnees and the talent of our new comers will shine. 

 

So, go ahead and pick us at the bottom of the Big Ten people, it is time for a bit of shock and awe!

[49r]

34 minutes ago, The Polish Rifle said:

If Miles gets this group to the NCAA tournament, I'd be cool with giving him a lifetime contract.

 

Let's not go crazy here...

[The Polish Rifle]

13 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

Let's not go crazy here...

I guess a better way of putting it - it would be a hell of a coaching job, roster building to x's and o's.

[aphilso1]

1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Aphilso, I'm sorry that in the midst of all the quibbling, you didn't feel you'd had an opportunity to share your views on next year's starting lineup.

 

I mean, outside of your posts in this thread on Jan 30, twice on Feb 2, three times on Feb 3, twice on March 9, March 10, March 11, April 14, six times on April 22, April 23, April 28, May 22, June 5 and June 6. 

 

Also, do you want to revise your picks now that Thor has joined our team?

 

Just quibbling then.  Got it.  Thanks for the clarification.

[khoock]

Even with all the unexpected departures in Miles tenure, ive always thought Miles has done well with his pieces... until the injury bug hits us.

 

The last two yrs are great examples.

- 15-16: That year was never going to be a great one with early departures from Terran and Walt. But an injured and limited Ed Morrow hurt us at a position we were already very young and inexperienced at. Then Shavon went down right when i thought we were getting hot-ish. 

- 16-17: Last yr differs from the previous bc i think if healthy, last year could've been special. Preseason injuries to Anton and Roby. And midseason injuries to Anton and Ed really hampered us.

 

Unfortunately injuries are apart of the game and happen to everyone. But if we get some luck on our side for the injury front i've got confidence in Miles whether Copeland is eligible the entire year or not.

[Norm Peterson]

1 hour ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Just quibbling then.  Got it.  Thanks for the clarification.

 

Y'know, I've always been a little fuzzy on the distinction between "irony" and "coincidence" as those terms are used on message boards.

 

Is it ironic or is it coincidental that you persist in quibbling about the existence of quibbling in this thread?

 

Or would "hypocritical" be a better word for it?

[Norm Peterson]

I think it's safe to start planning around Copeland's absence to start the year.  I didn't want to offer a starting lineup that didn't include him until we kinda reached this point.

 

There are still so many possibilities.  For me, there are three categories of players I'm projecting as starters:  players I'm certain will start; players I think will probably start; and players who I think have as good of a shot as anyone else and, while not necessarily probable starters at least seem more probable than other options at this point.

 

So ...

 

Glynn Watson -- lock to start in the back court

Thomas Allen -- as good a shot as anyone else as the 2nd backcourt guard

James Palmer -- as good a shot as anyone else to start at wing

Isaiah Roby -- probable starter at the 4

Jordy Tshimanga -- probable starter at the 5.

 

Now, I also could see ...

 

Glynn Watson at the point

Evan Taylor at the 2

Jack McVeigh at the 3

Isaiah Roby at the 4

Jordy T at the 5

 

That would be the experienced lineup.

 

[Donkey]

I have trouble seeing Taylor starting.  He is the best option when Watson rests.  I expect 15 minutes a game (mostly while Watson is getting a breather) and would be worried if he gets more.

 

Thor's commitment is interesting as it give Miles 7 guards of which 4 of them are 6-5/6-6.  I would not be surprised seeing those 7 guards playing the 1-3 which would leave Jordy, Roby, Copeland, and Okeke at the 4/5 (and possibly Borchardt).  If that is true, Jack seems to be the odd man out.    

[khoock]

So many ppl keep posting about Jack being the odd man out and i just dont see it. Especially if Copeland is ineligible for the first 10ish games. That leaves Jack and Roby as our PF duo.

 

Plus i think Jack has the right mindset to work on his flaws and perfect what hes good at.

[Norm Peterson]

17 minutes ago, khoock said:

So many ppl keep posting about Jack being the odd man out and i just dont see it. Especially if Copeland is ineligible for the first 10ish games. That leaves Jack and Roby as our PF duo.

 

Plus i think Jack has the right mindset to work on his flaws and perfect what hes good at.

 

Jack:  6'8" tall, 7 ft wingspan, not a ball handler, slow in the open floor, inconsistent to good perimeter shooter.

Thor:  6'6" tall, uncertain wingspan, can handle the ball, fast in the open floor, not sure but possibly somewhere between inconsistent and not bad perimeter shooter.

 

It's kind of interesting because their shooting strokes are sort of mirror images of each other.  Technique is very similar.  Not a lot of jump, and kind of a push with their dominant hand.  Very compact strokes, should be very repeatable.  Not a lot of moving parts and very quick releases.  BUT IT'S GOT TO GO IN!

 

Not saying Thor starts over Jack.  Not saying that at all.  Jack has the advantage of experience and time in the system.  Plus he's longer, and therefore can play a position we don't have as much depth at.  Very unlikely he gets supplanted by the new kid.  However, judging by the film, Thor looks like the kind of kid I think we'd hoped Jack was going to be.  As long as that perimeter jumper is falling.

[Norm Peterson]

30 minutes ago, Donkey said:

Thor's commitment is interesting as it give Miles 7 guards of which 4 of them are 6-5/6-6.  I would not be surprised seeing those 7 guards playing the 1-3 which would leave Jordy, Roby, Copeland, and Okeke at the 4/5 (and possibly Borchardt).  If that is true, Jack seems to be the odd man out.    

 

Thor's commitment is really interesting.

 

Remember Jeriah Horne?  He was recruited as a PF because of his bulk.  Maybe a stretch 4 because of his shooting ability.  His actually game on the floor, though, translated more like a 3.  He was a good shooter who wasn't very explosive, which was his weakness as a wing.  But when you're out on the wing, you don't have to be a husky guy like Jeriah.  And it looks to me like Thor brings to the table the things we might have gotten out of Jeriah had he stuck around.  And in a package that appears to be much faster from one end of the floor to the other.  Probably a better fit for this program at this particular point in time.

 

I liked Jeriah, don't get me wrong.  But I think a place like Tulsa will be a good spot for him.  He'll be one of the top scoring options on their team as soon as he's eligible.  He was just a tweener for us, though: Lacked the size to play inside; lacked the speed to play outside.

[nustudent]

I think Glynn, Jordy and Isaiah are locks.   I'm hoping Palmer and one of Nana or Allen start.   But it's more likely that one, if not both of Taylor or McVeigh start as well.

[Donkey]

2 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Jack:  6'8" tall, 7 ft wingspan, not a ball handler, slow in the open floor, inconsistent to good perimeter shooter.

Thor:  6'6" tall, uncertain wingspan, can handle the ball, fast in the open floor, not sure but possibly somewhere between inconsistent and not bad perimeter shooter.

 

It's kind of interesting because their shooting strokes are sort of mirror images of each other.  Technique is very similar.  Not a lot of jump, and kind of a push with their dominant hand.  Very compact strokes, should be very repeatable.  Not a lot of moving parts and very quick releases.  BUT IT'S GOT TO GO IN!

 

Not saying Thor starts over Jack.  Not saying that at all.  Jack has the advantage of experience and time in the system.  Plus he's longer, and therefore can play a position we don't have as much depth at.  Very unlikely he gets supplanted by the new kid.  However, judging by the film, Thor looks like the kind of kid I think we'd hoped Jack was going to be.  As long as that perimeter jumper is falling.

 

I will not contest Jack's stroke or hard work ethic.  However, the consensus of people I trust say Jack lacks athleticism.  I wonder if there is truth to this belief.  Jack's inside game is not strong.  He length compensates for smaller, quicker players.  He seems to lack strength at times.  I am not trying to dog on Jack, but he does seem more limited than other players.  I have no problems with Jack finding his spots along the 3pt line and attempting shots.  I am just not sure how he fits other roles.  For that reason I feel he is better off the bench.

 

I understand some will be quick to counter that Jack will probably be playing international ball after college.  So did Shang Ping.    

[Dean Smith]

On 8/7/2017 at 6:18 PM, Donkey said:

 

I will not contest Jack's stroke or hard work ethic.  However, the consensus of people I trust say Jack lacks athleticism.  I wonder if there is truth to this belief.  Jack's inside game is not strong.  He length compensates for smaller, quicker players.  He seems to lack strength at times.  I am not trying to dog on Jack, but he does seem more limited than other players.  I have no problems with Jack finding his spots along the 3pt line and attempting shots.  I am just not sure how he fits other roles.  For that reason I feel he is better off the bench.

 

I understand some will be quick to counter that Jack will probably be playing international ball after college.  So did Shang Ping.    

I dont agree his inside game is  not strong, I believe he just doesn't get the ball in the post enough. I think he has some of the best post moves on the team, using both hands around the hoop. 

[khoock]

My argument wasnt that Jack will bc that is not what i have predicted. I just dont see why some ppl think he will be buried deep on the bench (im assuming thats what ppl mean by "odd man out"). I think he will be in our rotation and i have pegged as our 6th man.

[Huskerpapa]

Jack does not have terrific ups, or at least he doesn't display his jumping prowess.  But he does work well in the paint, he has a good imagination, and he positions himself well.

[*Deleted Account*]

So........another win for me and a loss for norm.....looks like Copeland is missing 2 B10 games now...Nebraska screwed themselves on the dates they submitted. Need to quit kissing BTN's ass

[uneblinstu]

6 minutes ago, DOATHLON said:

So........another win for me and a loss for norm.....looks like Copeland is missing 2 B10 games now...Nebraska screwed themselves on the dates they submitted. Need to quit kissing BTN's ass

Some news break? Miles said today that isn't decided yet and there's no deadline for them to get the paperwork in.

[Norm Peterson]

18 minutes ago, DOATHLON said:

So........another win for me and a loss for norm.....looks like Copeland is missing 2 B10 games now...Nebraska screwed themselves on the dates they submitted. Need to quit kissing BTN's ass

 

Huh?

 

You said he'd miss all of non-con and 4 Big Ten games.  I said he'd be eligible for the KU game on 12/16 at the latest.

 

How am I wrong and you right?