Just How Good Are We, Really?

[Dead Dog Alley]

1 hour ago, 49r said:

I will bet you a lot of money they'll still manage a top 4 league finish next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If Wisconsin finishes in the top four next year they should rename the coach of the year award as the Greg Gard award.

 

That said, I'd give it 50-50 odds that they do.

[Silverbacked1]

A couple of things have kind of made this year either turn one way or another so we my not totally know how good we are or aren't.

1)we played well what everybody has said is the toughest schedule in the country.  If we play a lesser schedule our record is probably better but does it make us any better for later in the year?. Did that schedule hurt or help or help us get better?

2)Injury to key people at key times also haven't helped any.  Do we win a few more games with a totally healthy team and a set rotation because of that health?

3)as many said to begin the year I feel our team is way ahead of where we have been the last couple of years, BUT... our record doesn't really show that.  With some luck and health are we 3 or 4 games above .500 in the league and looking at finishing in a the upper half of the league.  Then are we really looking at a good shot at making it into the NCAA and at worst a high home seed in the NIT.. Which also wouldn't hurt this team.

 

I do have to agree, we on here watch closer, live and die more than the casual fan.. And that will be the people you get Tim canned quicker than any of us.  Like the guys at Jimmy's party.  And the guy I was with down in DR with. Only see the record and haven't watched a game this year but know the team is going in the wrong direction.

 

 

[Swan88]

When Ed's foot won't work right, his talent level is way below a healthy Ed.

When Glynn Watson is hampered by a groin injury, his talent level is way below a healthy Watson.

When Jordy is walking in a boot, his talent level is below a healthy Jordy.

When Isaiah is hampered by a hip problem, his talent level is below a healthy Isaiah.

Without those injuries, we would be talking about how this team has turned a corner.  But the injuries are for real.  And that makes this season hard.  

 

 

[colhusker]

6 minutes ago, Swan88 said:

When Ed's foot won't work right, his talent level is way below a healthy Ed.

When Glynn Watson is hampered by a groin injury, his talent level is way below a healthy Watson.

When Jordy is walking in a boot, his talent level is below a healthy Jordy.

When Isaiah is hampered by a hip problem, his talent level is below a healthy Isaiah.

Without those injuries, we would be talking about how this team has turned a corner.  But the injuries are for real.  And that makes this season hard.  

 

 

A healthy Gill that finally gets the corner turned from his last injury is better than an injured Gill

[HB]

48 minutes ago, huskerbaseball13 said:

Dirk, may be right...I really don't know.  We aren't going to win in the Big Ten next year on talent alone.  But, his opinion should not surprise anyone considering just a few months ago Dirk believed that Arop would be playing in our rotation this year. 

 

Reminding me of that howler makes me feel a lot better about the situation.....

[Art Vandalay]

First let me say Dirk is a tool and has no clue what talent is but this is an interesting question.

 

How many guys right now would you consider Average or above Average in the BIG10? Right now I say Tai, Watson, and Ed (when healthy) would start or get big minutes for any team in the league. Not so much for the rest.

 

Good news IMO is that Jordy and Roby will probably get there in the next year or two. I think Palmer and Copeland will be prove themselves as well I hope. Horne, Jack, Taylor? Maybe not even getting minutes for other schools right now but I think at least Jack and Jeriah will develop into legit BIG10 role players if not more.

 

So my answer would be yes this year we have average talent in an average league. However I really think we will develop and have 7-8 legit BIG10 players next year and the years to come if we allow it to happen.

[49r]

6 hours ago, hhcdimes said:

 

They do. So do Jucos and international players.

I don't think Nana and his (LOI) status is currently counted. (currently a 2 star)

 

In that case I guess those standings seem to reflect the roster composition pretty accurately then.  Seems like what we are really excited about is maybe getting back to a place where we aren't at such a talent disadvantage as it compares to our peers in the league?

 

Not that it'll change the overall average star ranking much but you gotta think Nana's going to get that 3rd star by the time he gets here based on what we've been hearing from folks this season, don't you?

[Norm Peterson]

Last I saw (as in today) Akenten was a 3-star.

[hhcmatt]

26 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

Last I saw (as in today) Akenten was a 3-star.

 

Here's the fine print on those ratings. At some point his rating on the site will catch up with where he might end up.

Rankings Note: Rankings data shown based on latest ESPN Rankings released on 2017-01-24, Scout Rankings released on 2017-01-11, and Rivals Rankings released on 2016-02-02

[Jugular]

5 hours ago, huskerbaseball13 said:

Dirk, may be right...I really don't know.  We aren't going to win in the Big Ten next year on talent alone.  But, his opinion should not surprise anyone considering just a few months ago Dirk believed that Arop would be playing in our rotation this year. 

 

Exactly!!! Dirk thought Arop would be seeing serious minutes THIS YEAR!!! Dirk doesn't know shit about sports, let alone basketball

[nustudent]

Nana may be a 4* when it's all said and done.   Rivals basketball guy posted the other day that he'll be in the final top 150 update as he has really impressed 

[Fullbacksympathy]

2 hours ago, nustudent said:

Nana may be a 4* when it's all said and done.   Rivals basketball guy posted the other day that he'll be in the final top 150 update as he has really impressed 

 

Yup.  He's cut from every bit of the same cloth as Morrow and Watson in his respective skill sets and athleticism.  

[jimmykc]

To answer the question posed by the title: Just mediocre with the present injuries considered. Perhaps the question Dirk should have asked is how good will we be next year if everyone returns, stays healthy, and the new players arrive? Unfortunately, that is like looking at the recipe for a complex dish and asking " How does it taste, really?"

[Norm Peterson]

6 minutes ago, formerlybis said:

In the past, you've had one or two guys that were really good, but the role players were, well, not. It also seems to me that you've generally had those guys be "ballhogs" - you want your best players to have the ball, but you get too dependent on them (e.g. Petteway, Shields/White). Even this year, Webster/Watson might fit that description. However, it does seem like the role player guys like Morrow/Jacobsen/McVeigh talent levels are better than in the past. Is it better than some of the other programs in the league? Hard to say - each team has got some pieces, but it's how you put those pieces together that matters, and I think guys like Crean and Groce are just awful at that. 

 

I've liked Miles from before he was with you guys, but I can't say he's done a fantastic job here. When you made the NCAAs a couple of years ago, I thought you played a nice brand of hoops, but you haven't been able to recapture that run consistently.

 

Thanks for giving us your non-Husker fan point of view.  In my opinion, Petteway was a ballhog.  When he was on, he was unstoppable.  He wasn't always on.  But he was always pretty much a ballhog.  And, for Terran Petteway, that meant taking some ill-advised shots, like NBA 3-pointers early in the shot clock before we'd even have 3 people touch the ball in the half court.

 

Webster is not a Petteway even though you see the same kind of thing where we have two guys as our primary scoring options.  Tai isn't out there taking bad shots or rushing things or trying to do it all himself.  Terran might try to go one on five.  Tai doesn't do that.  Tai is our statistical leader in assists and one of the top assist players in the conference, which is a big thing considering that our assist numbers are otherwise shitty (woohoo! we're number 14!!!)

 

Most of the problem with our assist numbers is that our supporting cast don't take -- or when they take, they don't make -- enough shots.  If we were just average in terms of 3 point makes in the league this season, we'd have 45 more makes, which is like 2 extra assists per game.

[formerlybis]

1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Thanks for giving us your non-Husker fan point of view.  In my opinion, Petteway was a ballhog.  When he was on, he was unstoppable.  He wasn't always on.  But he was always pretty much a ballhog.  And, for Terran Petteway, that meant taking some ill-advised shots, like NBA 3-pointers early in the shot clock before we'd even have 3 people touch the ball in the half court.

 

Webster is not a Petteway even though you see the same kind of thing where we have two guys as our primary scoring options.  Tai isn't out there taking bad shots or rushing things or trying to do it all himself.  Terran might try to go one on five.  Tai doesn't do that.  Tai is our statistical leader in assists and one of the top assist players in the conference, which is a big thing considering that our assist numbers are otherwise shitty (woohoo! we're number 14!!!)

 

Most of the problem with our assist numbers is that our supporting cast don't take -- or when they take, they don't make -- enough shots.  If we were just average in terms of 3 point makes in the league this season, we'd have 45 more makes, which is like 2 extra assists per game.

Yeah, my ballhog perception may be a holdover impression from the Petteway era.

 

It's interesting you bring up assists. Over at Badger boards, there's a long-standing debate about their value (and also that assists are not the opposite of turnovers, so why is the ratio so popular?). Do you really care whether a basket is made with or without an assist? There isn't any more value for a basket made with an assist, so who cares - just make shots. The other side says they are a measure of the quality of shots that the offense generates - i.e., a high percentage of assists to FGM means you're getting open looks. Well, as you've noted, you can get open looks and not make them (and you can get assists on very contested made shots, too). IMO, it's way more important for ballhandlers to keep their turnovers low than to generate assists. 

[royalfan]

In regards to this thread and to the fire Miles thread, one thing I don't like to dwell on but is the simple truth.  We are a terrible shooting team.  However, this team was largely designed on having White being on it.  He is an elite shooter.  No question in my mind that we would be a hell of a lot better if he were here.  The stuff about being better without him and this and that is pretty asinine.  We aren't better without him.  Not even close. 

[Huskerpapa]

It was interesting listening to the presser today.  One example of good information was the discussion around MJ's outside shot.  I have been telling those willing to listen that he was a very good exterior shooter.  Today the discussion centered on MJ bulking up in order to bang in the paint.  As a result, his outside shot left him.  It is something he will really work on during the off season. 

 

 

[jason2486]

2 hours ago, huskercwg said:

It was interesting listening to the presser today.  One example of good information was the discussion around MJ's outside shot.  I have been telling those willing to listen that he was a very good exterior shooter.  Today the discussion centered on MJ bulking up in order to bang in the paint.  As a result, his outside shot left him.  It is something he will really work on during the off season. 

 

 

Agreed! He has one of the nicest shots I've seen that just doesn't go in as often as it looks like it should. I think he will continue to get better, and he may even have a bit of stretch-4 in him before it's all said and done!

[colhusker]

7 hours ago, jason2486 said:

Agreed! He has one of the nicest shots I've seen that just doesn't go in as often as it looks like it should. I think he will continue to get better, and he may even have a bit of stretch-4 in him before it's all said and done!

Been telling CH-JR and CH-III I thought a big part of MJ's struggles shooting was the extra bulk from the start of the season.

[jimmykc]

I think you are probably right, col, but the bulk has also made him a better offensive rebounder so the shooting will eventually come and I'll accept the trade off for now. I think MJ has the potential to become another Bob Wiesenhahn by the time he is a senior.

[colhusker]

1 hour ago, jimmykc said:

I think you are probably right, col, but the bulk has also made him a better offensive rebounder so the shooting will eventually come and I'll accept the trade off for now. I think MJ has the potential to become another Bob Wiesenhahn by the time he is a senior.

I know it's a different school but I could see him and Morrow (pending another big coming) having a role similar to Greg Church at Missouri when they had Sundvold and Stipanovich.  

[Blindcheck]

11 hours ago, huskercwg said:

It was interesting listening to the presser today.  One example of good information was the discussion around MJ's outside shot.  I have been telling those willing to listen that he was a very good exterior shooter.  Today the discussion centered on MJ bulking up in order to bang in the paint.  As a result, his outside shot left him.  It is something he will really work on during the off season. 

 

 

I believe that MJ's shot looks like it could be a threat...however, when you take 1 maybe 2 jumpers a game and miss them...small sample sizes set in and confidence can get rattled.

 

He needs to have a game where he shoots till he is hot....possibly in the offseason leagues and in the non conference schedule. 

[AuroranHusker]

18 hours ago, royalfan said:

In regards to this thread and to the fire Miles thread, one thing I don't like to dwell on but is the simple truth.  We are a terrible shooting team.  However, this team was largely designed on having White being on it.  He is an elite shooter.  No question in my mind that we would be a hell of a lot better if he were here.  The stuff about being better without him and this and that is pretty asinine.  We aren't better without him.  Not even close. 

 

Yeah, ticks me off every game where NU is 1 shooter short. And, that happens a lot. The shooting on this roster is not very good. I have heard good things about Akenten, Palmer & Copeland so maybe next year will be better in that regard.

[hhcmatt]

12 hours ago, huskercwg said:

It was interesting listening to the presser today.  One example of good information was the discussion around MJ's outside shot.  I have been telling those willing to listen that he was a very good exterior shooter.  Today the discussion centered on MJ bulking up in order to bang in the paint.  As a result, his outside shot left him.  It is something he will really work on during the off season. 

 

This has also been known as the Ubel Paradox

[hhcmatt]

23 hours ago, formerlybis said:

It's interesting you bring up assists. Over at Badger boards, there's a long-standing debate about their value (and also that assists are not the opposite of turnovers, so why is the ratio so popular?)

 

This is a fairly universal old school vs new school argument similar to batting average to OBP or the value of RBIs.