2020 PF Ben Carlson -> Wisconsin

[Norm Peterson]

11 hours ago, royalfan said:

I certainly don't think Miles staffs have been tremendous at player development.  

 

My biggest concern about player development has been among the bigs. Our bigs haven't learned to post up for sh!t and don't seem to be able to defend the post.

 

And Northwestern gets Dererk Pardon to play like an All-American against us in one of his first games as a college player.

 

But part of that could be system and part of that could be the players themselves.  Because, for instance, Brandon Ubel went from mediocre to massive in one year under Miles:

 

SEASON	TEAM	MIN	FGM-FGA	FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
2012-13	NEB	33.0	4.2-8.7	.480	0.2-0.9	.207	3.0-3.7	.802	6.7	1.6	0.8	0.6	3.2	2.0	11.5
2011-12	NEB	28.2	2.5-4.8	.517	0.2-0.7	.250	1.6-1.9	.825	5.3	1.3	0.3	0.4	2.5	1.0	6.7
2010-11	NEB	20.1	2.0-3.8	.516	0.2-0.9	.250	1.9-2.4	.792	3.7	0.6	0.3	0.3	2.3	1.0	6.1
2009-10	NEB	15.8	1.4-3.5	.411	0.3-0.7	.524	1.2-1.5	.796	2.0	0.1	0.2	0.2	1.6	1.3	4.4

[khoock]

Part of the problem with the development of our bigs is attrition. Name me one big that Miles has recruited (excluding grad transfers) and had finish their eligibility here?

 

I cant think of anyone. Tanner Borchardt will be the first but he started as a walk on.

 

- Walt P quit

- Morrow, Hammond, Jacobson, and Tshimanga all transferred. 

 

But i would argue that all of them got better from Fr to So year or were better players than they were at their previous school.

 

Forgot about Leslie Smith but his ACL injury messed him up.

Edited October 30, 2018 by khoock

[hskr4life]

4 hours ago, hhcmatt said:

We've probably been better at physical development than skills development. 

I'd say the most impressive thing we do is take transfers who struggled at their old school and unlock their potential.

 

I've used this argument before in conversation outside of the board and got hit with "The transfers hit their potential because it was their last chance to, not because Miles unlocked it."  How true that is, I don't know.

[Swan88]

9 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

 

I've used this argument before in conversation outside of the board and got hit with "The transfers hit their potential because it was their last chance to, not because Miles unlocked it."  How true that is, I don't know.

Ha!  Your friend is irritated by Miles’s success with transfers and can’t let positivity go unopposed—that’s a fan of another team.

[throwback]

14 minutes ago, hskr4life said:

 

I've used this argument before in conversation outside of the board and got hit with "The transfers hit their potential because it was their last chance to, not because Miles unlocked it."  How true that is, I don't know.

I'd counter if it was that easy, everybody would do it.

 

NU's hit rate on that type of transfer -- going from basically non-contributor or underwhelming player at the old school to high-level contributor at NU -- is incredibly high under Miles. 

[hskr4life]

3 minutes ago, Swan88 said:

Ha!  Your friend is irritated by Miles’s success with transfers and can’t let positivity go unopposed—that’s a fan of another team.

 

At the time it was more of a "You have got to be kidding me, that is the argument that you are going to go with" reaction from myself.  

[hskr4life]

Just now, throwback said:

I'd counter if it was that easy, everybody would do it.

 

NU's hit rate on that type of transfer -- going from basically non-contributor or underwhelming player at the old school to high-level contributor at NU -- is incredibly high under Miles. 

 

Agreed.  Our best players under Miles have mostly been transfers.  The two times we have reached the post-season under Miles... transfers got us there.  Our NCAA Tourney bid and likely 2nd tourney bid... transfers got us there or are going to get us there.

 

With transfers looking to be more likely, look for Miles to excel in the future using this route.

[Huskerpapa]

This year's team has two exceptional transfers and next year's team will have at least one.  But outside some of the elite teams, I see many teams building and supplementing line-ups with transfers and jucos.  Heck, with 600 +/- transfers per year, that is going to happen.  But now you are going to start seeing home grown talent mix with those transfers.  Isaiah, Glynn, Tanner, Nana and Thomas are hopefully with us from beginning to end.  Those players are developing.  Heck, last year I never wanted to see Nana on the floor (he should have redshirted darn it), but now he will likely be an important part of the rotation.  

[hhcmatt]

1 hour ago, hskr4life said:

 

I've used this argument before in conversation outside of the board and got hit with "The transfers hit their potential because it was their last chance to, not because Miles unlocked it."  How true that is, I don't know.

 

Kaleb Joseph

[bigFRED]

1 hour ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Kaleb Joseph

Still wish we had him

[Norm Peterson]

2 hours ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Kaleb Joseph

 

We'll see how well ISU unlocks Jacobson or Marquette unlocks Morrow.

[nustudent]

Speaking of Morrow, he started the exhibition game for Marquette.   Went 7 for 8 and and finished with 16 and 6 in 15 minutes

[atskooc]

32 minutes ago, nustudent said:

Speaking of Morrow, he started the exhibition game for Marquette.   Went 7 for 8 and and finished with 16 and 6 in 15 minutes

Was he a post or a wing?

[nustudent]

Post

[atskooc]

57 minutes ago, nustudent said:

Post

Figured. 

[Chuck Taylor]

Curiosity got the better of me, so I checked and he started at center, ahead of their 6-10 starter from last year. So, yeah, apparently the wing skills are quite there yet. 

[atskooc]

12 minutes ago, Chuck Taylor said:

Curiosity got the better of me, so I checked and he started at center, ahead of their 6-10 starter from last year. So, yeah, apparently the wing skills are quite there yet. 

I think the other guy was held out with an injury.

 

[Section_316]

God I wish we had Morrow

[Norm Peterson]

47 minutes ago, Section_316 said:

God I wish we had Morrow

 

Unless he's grown up in the year he sat out, I'd rather we had Jacobsen.

 

I think we could have afforded to lose two of the three big men who transferred away, but not all three.  We needed one of the group. Just for depth if nothing else.  And, in terms of all-around attributes, I'd go with Jacobsen over the other two.

[nustudent]

7 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Unless he's grown up in the year he sat out, I'd rather we had Jacobsen.

 

I think we could have afforded to lose two of the three big men who transferred away, but not all three.  We needed one of the group. Just for depth if nothing else.  And, in terms of all-around attributes, I'd go with Jacobsen over the other two.

 

Unfortunately we hitched our wagon to the wrong one and it cost us all three

[nustudent]

1 hour ago, Chuck Taylor said:

Curiosity got the better of me, so I checked and he started at center, ahead of their 6-10 starter from last year. So, yeah, apparently the wing skills are quite there yet. 

 

Do people really think he was going to play wing?   It was just a cover to justify the transfer

[HB]

1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Unless he's grown up in the year he sat out, I'd rather we had Jacobsen.

 

I think we could have afforded to lose two of the three big men who transferred away, but not all three.  We needed one of the group. Just for depth if nothing else.  And, in terms of all-around attributes, I'd go with Jacobsen over the other two.

 

I gotta go with 316 on this one.    Assumes Ed doesn't have the attitude he copped in his sophomore year, or the foot problems.  But just based on his game, we're in greater need of his power and athleticism at the 4/5 than whatever Jacobson brings to the table.   Ed is more of a pure post in the college game (despite any illusions he had to the contrary).   We can duplicate the "all-around attributes" of Jake with what we have, but we don't have what Ed can bring.   

Edited October 31, 2018 by HB

[nustudent]

Both of them would've helped last year and both of them would be a huge add on this year

[MandRHusker]

1 hour ago, HB said:

 

I gotta go with 316 on this one.    Assumes Ed doesn't have the attitude he copped in his sophomore year, or the foot problems.  But just based on his game, we're in greater need of his power and athleticism at the 4/5 than whatever Jacobson brings to the table.   Ed is more of a pure post in the college game (despite and illusions he had to the contrary).   We can duplicate the "all-around attributes" of Jake with what we have, but we don't have what Ed can bring.   

Ed works fine on the offensive end of the floor, especially if he has learned to pass the rock back out versus being a black hole and trying to score 3 on 1. It's the defensive end where he struggles at the post.

[Coaches kid]

4 hours ago, MandRHusker said:

Ed works fine on the offensive end of the floor, especially if he has learned to pass the rock back out versus being a black hole and trying to score 3 on 1. It's the defensive end where he struggles at the post.

I agree with this observation. Seemed like Ed would block some shots as a help defender, but he was average at best defending guys his height or bigger in the post. I think he would have helped us as a role player this year. That being said, team chemistry and unity are huge intangibles, and when he was here, IMO, he was not a net positive for those intangibles.