Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cornfed24-7

Next years starting lineup.

Recommended Posts

STARTERS

C. Mack 6'2 So G 28 min

J. Green 6'3 Jr G 28 min

D. Burke 6'4 Jr G 30 min

S. Stevenson 6'6 So/Jr F 26 min

Y. Ouedraogo 6'9 Fr F 18 min

BENCH 

H. Cheatham 6'6 Sr G 24 min

M. Kavas 6'8 Sr G/F 20 min

K. Cross 6'8 Fr F 13 min

S. Curtis 6'4 Fr G 13 min

T. Thorbjarnarson 6'6 Jr G 0+ min

C. Easley 6'2 Fr G 0+ min

J. Piatkowski 6'4 Fr G 0+ min

 

REDSHIRTING

A. Arop 6'6 Fr F

D. Banton 6'8 So G/F

D. Walker 6'8 Jr F

 

My latest take.

Edited by khoock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

I don't see anyone redshirting who doesn't have to redshirt per transfer rules. Arop either earns a spot in the playing rotation or he comes in for garbage minutes in blowout games.  I don't think they'll have him on a 5-year plan.

I guess it depends on where they see him at now and where they project his ceiling to be at. If they see a very high ceiling in him it might be worth it to give him a year to just focus on getting bigger/stronger and working on his stroke.

 

Do you know how many (if any) players Hoiberg redshirted, that were eligible and healthy, while he was at Iowa State?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, khoock said:

STARTERS

C. Mack 6'2 So G 28 min

J. Green 6'3 Jr G 28 min

D. Burke 6'4 Jr G 30 min

S. Stevenson 6'6 So/Jr F 26 min

Y. Ouedraogo 6'9 Fr F 18 min

BENCH 

H. Cheatham 6'6 Sr G 24 min

M. Kavas 6'8 Sr G/F 20 min

K. Cross 6'8 Fr F 13 min

S. Curtis 6'4 Fr G 13 min

T. Thorbjarnarson 6'6 Jr G 0+ min

C. Easley 6'2 Fr G 0+ min

J. Piatkowski 6'4 Fr G 0+ min

 

REDSHIRTING

A. Arop 6'6 Fr F

D. Banton 6'8 So G/F

D. Walker 6'8 Jr F

 

My latest take.

We supposedly have an elite defender in Cheatham, so I'm curious why so many are willing to bring him off the bench instead of one of the more offense-minded backcourt players such as Green or Burke, especially because Cheatham came here as a grad transfer. Yes, I see you have him playing 24 minutes, but other teams will start their best offensive players, and it seems we want Cheatham out there defending from the start, to set a tone. Plus, he's a pretty good offensive player himself. Otherwise, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jayschool said:

We supposedly have an elite defender in Cheatham, so I'm curious why so many are willing to bring him off the bench instead of one of the more offense-minded backcourt players such as Green or Burke, especially because Cheatham came here as a grad transfer. Yes, I see you have him playing 24 minutes, but other teams will start their best offensive players, and it seems we want Cheatham out there defending from the start, to set a tone. Plus, he's a pretty good offensive player himself. Otherwise, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment.

Everyone says *insert Green, Mack, Cheatham, Burke* isnt coming off the bench. But i only see three of the four starting. I have been back and forth on Cheatham, Green, and Burke. Who knows maybe all 4 start, especially if Stevenson isnt eligible at the beginning of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, khoock said:

Everyone says *insert Green, Mack, Cheatham, Burke* isnt coming off the bench. But i only see three of the four starting. I have been back and forth on Cheatham, Green, and Burke. Who knows maybe all 4 start, especially if Stevenson isnt eligible at the beginning of the season.

I could very easily see all 4 starting. I'd almost go as far as to say its likely. I'm very comfortable saying Mack, Burke and Green will be starters when the season opens. I think it's pretty wide open from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, uneblinstu said:

I could very easily see all 4 starting. I'd almost go as far as to say its likely. I'm very comfortable saying Mack, Burke and Green will be starters when the season opens. I think it's pretty wide open from there.

If Stevenson is eligible i lean towards him at the four just bc he has weight and length we need and is still a solid 3 point shooter. But who knows it could be the four mentioned above AND Stevenson as starters (Hoiberg said hes not afraid to play 5 gaurds). Lot of unknowns. Thankfully practice will be starting up soon and in a couple months we will have 4 games under our belts to break down and analyze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, khoock said:

Not a single person, myself included, is giving Thor or Arop a chance to start or even be in the rotation.

 

I was just trying to figure out a way to express that, in addition to having a totally new coaching staff, no one who has suited up for a game as a Husker before will be among the starters this year, and that's why, unlike any other year we've ever seen before, projecting starters is such a crapshoot for us fans this year.

 

Still, interesting as always to get people's takes on what I think this year is an especially difficult thing to predict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, khoock said:

I guess it depends on where they see him at now and where they project his ceiling to be at. If they see a very high ceiling in him it might be worth it to give him a year to just focus on getting bigger/stronger and working on his stroke.

 

Do you know how many (if any) players Hoiberg redshirted, that were eligible and healthy, while he was at Iowa State?

 

Truthfully, I don't. It'd be interesting to find out. Is there a clone fan on the board who maybe has knowledge of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, khoock said:

If Stevenson is eligible i lean towards him at the four just bc he has weight and length we need and is still a solid 3 point shooter. But who knows it could be the four mentioned above AND Stevenson as starters (Hoiberg said hes not afraid to play 5 gaurds). Lot of unknowns. Thankfully practice will be starting up soon and in a couple months we will have 4 games under our belts to break down and analyze.

 

I would tend to agree with this. Stevenson at 245#, with a 7 ft wingspan and 40" vertical (don't know where I read that, but I believe I did) seems to be a guy who could bang and defend the post a bit.  And he's historically a pretty accurate 3-point shooter. And he has quite a leg up on Cross and Drago in terms of experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/31/2019 at 10:35 AM, hhcmatt said:

In the past the mindset under Miles was 'whoever you can guard is what you are'. The mindset with Hoiberg will be more 'you have to guard who we roll out there'.

 

This. I think Hoiberg is going to mirror Frost in a lot of ways. Create space and pick up the pace. Then, with all the opportunities to score, just hope our defense can "get in the way" enough to keep the other guys from getting as many as we do. Hoiberg/Sadler joke about Fred only giving Doc 10 minutes to practice defense, but it's probably not far off from his actual thought process. I feel like he'll be looking to put our 5 most lethal guys out there, and just accept whatever happens defensively.

 

 

On 5/31/2019 at 10:35 AM, hhcmatt said:

When we play against teams with post players quick enough to hang with the undersized 4s we will roll out it's probably going to end up with us losing.

 

Eh. Maybe not. I'm sure Fred will be able to find, and take advantage of, another mismatch. Unless we're going up against a roster of elite talent (KY, Duke, etc), there's probably a weak link defensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't say Hoiberg doesn't care about defense, but I think it's obvious he cares much more about being another "scoring explosion" at NU. The past 19 years of Nebrasketball have leaned on defense for their success, so it was more important to have the right guys that could limit the other team. With Hoiberg, I'm not that worried about having "enough size", because we're going to try and run the other team off the floor.

 

I'm ready to embrace small-ball. Look at Villanova. Jay Wright has ridden small-ball to pretty decent success over the years. Maybe we can win one (m#*f#$&*-ing) tourney game with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/30/2019 at 9:59 PM, AuroranHusker said:

All I Got, So Far:

 

On 5/31/2019 at 9:41 AM, Nebrasketball1979 said:

This is all you are missing, just drink the damn koolaid, enjoy the ride, and certainly don't ask legitimate questions, at least not until October! ?

 

 

 

 

I'VE BEEN DRINKING ALL THE DAMN KOOL-AID I CAN FIND... AND IT'S DELICIOUS...

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Searching 4 Chester Surles said:

I won't say Hoiberg doesn't care about defense, but I think it's obvious he cares much more about being another "scoring explosion" at NU. The past 19 years of Nebrasketball have leaned on defense for their success, so it was more important to have the right guys that could limit the other team. With Hoiberg, I'm not that worried about having "enough size", because we're going to try and run the other team off the floor.

 

I'm ready to embrace small-ball. Look at Villanova. Jay Wright has ridden small-ball to pretty decent success over the years. Maybe we can win one (m#*f#$&*-ing) tourney game with it.

 

The problem is, it's be easier to ride a small ball team to a tournament win than it is to get to the tournament with such a lineup, when you are in a conference that is full of legitimate post players.  For example, that Loyola team that made the Final Four would have probably finished 8th in the Big Ten that year, because they would have had matchup problems inside every game.  For another example, if last year's Nebraska team had been in the Big East it would have won the conference and also a couple tournament games.

 

The good thing about next year is, the staff will get a good idea as to how well this is going to work - will the mismatches on offense be greater than the mismatches on defense - and be able to adjust their recruiting strategies if necessary.

Edited by Dead Dog Alley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dead Dog Alley said:

For example, that Loyola team that made the Final Four would have probably finished 8th in the Big Ten that year, because they would have had matchup problems inside every game.  For another example, if last year's Nebraska team had been in the Big East it would have won the conference and also a couple tournament games.

 

No one can really say whether either of those examples would play-out that way. We do know, however, that Doc's '08-09 team ("smallest team in Div I"), had the 15th best defensive efficiency in the country. That was done in the Big 12, where plenty of legit post players roam, loads of blue-chip talent sign, and is fairly offensive-oriented on a yearly basis. Doc's teams didn't have nearly the offense a Hoiberg team will employ, so I imagine the results might look a bit better than Doc managed alone.

 

Also, Villanova should have been, by every estimation, killed inside vs all the length UNC had in the '16 title game. But it went the other way. So I'm gonna ride with Hoiberg's plan until it's clear that it absolutely won't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dead Dog Alley said:

The good thing about next year is, the staff will get a good idea as to how well this is going to work - will the mismatches on offense be greater than the mismatches on defense - and be able to adjust their recruiting strategies if necessary.

 

*Didn't see the edit before posting.*

 

Totally agree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me we'll see a combination of: 

Mack

Green

Burke/Cheatham 

The last guard spot will be dependant on matchup for that game. If we're playing team with a bigger guard you'll likely see Cheatham. 

To caveat, you'll likely see all 4 on the floor to close the game

Curtis probably spots Mack's minutes at PG also. 

 

Up front my gut tells me it'll be:

Stevenson

Yvan

If Cross elevates his play and adjusts quickly you could see him plugged in for big minutes. 

Kavas will likely be one of the first guy's off the bench. 

 

We'll likely find out more during the Italy trip. 

There's versatility with this team. Having options is not usually a bad thing. 

Edited by thrasher31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Searching 4 Chester Surles said:

 I feel like he'll be looking to put our 5 most lethal guys out there, and just accept whatever happens defensively.

Here's the thing about Cheatham: he could be one of our five most lethal offensive players AND the single most effective defensive player. Plus he's the only backcourt player who has played a major conference schedule from beginning to end (insert denigratory Big East comment here). Stevenson played a full season in the ACC, so I'd put him in the lineup as soon as he's eligible, everything else being equal.

Edited by jayschool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jayschool said:

Here's the thing about Cheatham: he could be one of our five most lethal offensive players AND the single most effective defensive player. Plus he's the only player who has played a major conference schedule from beginning to end (insert denigratory Big East comment here).

 

Yeah. This. He's one of the knownest of the unknowns.  We know he's a career roughly 36.7% from three, which is solid.  I'm not sure how well he penetrates compared to guys like Dachon and Cam Mack, but I know he has the ball skills to get to the lane. (He has to be getting shots somehow/somewhere when treys are only like a fourth of the shots he takes.)  I'd say it's entirely possible Haanif starts.

 

I could see it being Mack, Green, Cheatham, Stevenson, Kavas.  That's 4 guys who can scorch the nets and another who blows by defenders and delivers them the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, thrasher31 said:

There's versatility with this team. Having options is not usually a bad thing. 

 

When have we had four absolute bucket-getters like Burke/Green/Mack/Curtis? Talk about options.

 

I realize I should maybe temper my own expectations ("Nebrasketball: If it can go wrong, it probably will."), but damn that 4-headed monster looks like it's going to be a problem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jayschool said:

Here's the thing about Cheatham: he could be one of our five most lethal offensive players AND the single most effective defensive player.

 

Oh absolutely. But if there are other weak spots in the line-up (defensively), whether that's a mismatch in the front or back court, I think Fred will gladly take it... if it's net-plus offensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had to guess and rank the guards from quickest/fastest to not as quick/fast as the other guys, how do you think you'd score it?

 

My guess starts with Mack, then goes to Burke.  Next is probably Cheatham and then Jervay and finally Curtis. If you count Stevenson as a guard, he's probably next, and then Kavas. And Kavas ain't slow.  Watch his film. He has pretty good straight-line speed.  I don't know about his lateral quicks and change of direction, but he ain't slow.

 

Whereas Cross is like a souped up Jeriah Horne, I'd say Matty Kavas is like a souped up Jack McVeigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2019 at 5:34 PM, Dead Dog Alley said:

 

The best case scenario wins 25 games.

 

The other wins 15.

 

Well, we didn't get the best case scenario; we got the "no Roby, no Jayce Johnson" scenario.

 

I bring this up now because there's still time for you to reconsider your prediction.  If you told me no Roby, no Johnson, and 15 wins is the over/under, I'll take the overs.  For sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 8:51 AM, aphilso1 said:

Personally, I will wait to submit my predictions until the carousel has stopped spinning and we have a better idea of who will be on the roster.  I'd also like to dig into everyone's tape a little more before I stick my foot in my mouth.  But at face value, it does seem like Mack and Green are locks.  Everyone seems to think Burke is too, but I personally haven't seen enough of his video to agree or disagree.

 

Well, I've had plenty of time to digest the final roster.  Still have no clue what the starting lineup will be.  In decreasing order of probability, my guesses are:

1. Mack: LOCK.  The only guy that is for sure going to be a day 1 starter.  True point guard with elite level athleticism and vision, and can fill it up too.  He's for sure one of the five.

2. Green: 90%.  I'm dropping him from a lock to a near lock due to the addition of Curtis.  I think their skills are similar enough that only one of the two will start.  I'm still guessing that will be Green, with Curtis essentially backing up both Mack and Green.  Or maybe Burke slides into this spot over both Green and Curtis.  I don't know.  Now I'm wondering if 90% is actually too high.  Whoa are these guys again?  And where's my beer? My head hurts already, and we're just getting started.

3. Kavas: 60%.  Dude is a sniper, and he's the only one of those we've got.  Hoi-ball requires snipers.  On the other hand, I'm not sure he's quick enough to cover a B1G SG or SF, nor strong enough to bang with a B1G PF (or even C, out of necessity). So maybe he comes off the bench with the ultimate green light, and told to shoot a bunch in not a lot of minutes to minimize the amount of possessions he defends.  I don't know.  My headache is getting worse.

4. Ouedraogo: 50%.  Based on Hoiberg's ISU lineups, I'm assuming he wants someone built like Yvan/Cross/Walker to earn a starting spot.  Walker isn't eligible, so Drago and Cross will be given every opportunity to duke it out for that spot.  Drago looks like the better of the two to my eye, so he gets the nod here.  But there's always the chance that neither are ready to be a starter, and we go really small instead.  

5. Cheatham: 40%.  Seems like a guy who can do a little bit of everything.  Very versatile.  While I think he's likely one of our 5 best players, that versatility also makes him an ideal 6th man candidate.  Hence why my confidence level isn't higher that he'll start, although I've got a got feeling he'll be top 5 in minutes played even if he comes off the bench.

 

The non-starters, ordered by likelihood of proving me wrong:

Stevenson: 35%

Cross: 30%

Burke: 30%

Curtis: 20%

Arop: 10%

Thor Squared: 10%

Some weirdness happens and a guy not currently on our roster starts, because Nebrasketball: 25%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@aphilso1 I think you can borrow some of the percentages you assigned to Akol and Thor and divvy them up among players further up the list. I agree with @khoock that there's basically not any chance of them starting. And I would further say there's less than a 1 in 5 chance that Curtis jumps over 4 other players and moves into the starting lineup, so you can probably adjust that downward too.  In my opinion, anyway.  Finally, I think there's better than a 3 in 10 chance that Burke starts.  Just some suggestions.  You don't have to take them.

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...