Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hhcmatt

2020 PF Ben Carlson

Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by khoock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by HB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...