Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 252
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I may or may not have found a box score for this scrimmage that may or may not have been accidentally posted somewhere and Teddy Allen may or may not have put up 29 points in a 21-point Red team win t

#NewProfilePic

Just to bring this thread completely off the rails     Goodbye Kevin Cross Though I never knew you at all And it seems to me you lived your life Like a candle in the wi

Posted Images

Some behind a paywall notes (from a "source" who attends practice), so I wont copy and paste... 

The starting 5 is what we thought it would be. But we essentially have 7 starters. 

6th and 7th guys are Kobe ("players and coaches have raved about his play") and Shamiel ("phenomenal"). If Thor is our 8th guy, I think that's a real good sign. He was arguably the most consistent player on our team last year. 

Sounds like some mutual interest between Kobe and Hoiberg on Kobe returning for another year. This would be great, especially since he's apparently willing to accept a role as a non-starter. 

We're gonna play Creighton. 

 

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

Am I correct that none of our projected starters except Yvan played even a minute for us last year?

 

Next question: Would any of our starters from last year save Yvan crack the rotation this year?

 

Cheatham, maybe Burke. For this to happen though, the rotation would have to be expanded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hugh42 said:

Cheatham, maybe Burke. For this to happen though, the rotation would have to be expanded.

Agreed, Cheatham would be the most likely one. I think it could be tough, though, for anyone from last year besides Yvan to crack the starting rotation.

 

At this stage, you never know how reliable the information coming out of Hendricks really is. But you gotta think Banton, Allen and McGowens would just about be locks to start over anyone on last year's squad. And that's over our best players from a year ago.

 

In the frontcourt, we'll see an improved Yvan and it looks like Lat Mayen. Lat would be taking Thor's spot in the starting lineup. If Webster is the 6th man and Stevenson is the 7th (which I don't know to be the case, just going off of @millerhusker's post above) then it really is a stark indication of how bad our roster was a year ago that a returning starter gets passed up by 7 new guys.

 

I think Thor does enough things really well that he'll have a place in the rotation if he's not a starter. But there are some other guys I'd like to see get some minutes in order to develop, Eduardo Andre and Elijah Wood being two of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we are speculating on the starters and the significant minutes players might get I want to ask the open-ended question: why does Arop occupy a scholarship? Does anyone think if someone like C. Whitt has said yes to NU that Arop would have been asked to give up his scholarship? 

 

I could be wrong but it seems odd that in the hyper-competitive domain of recruiting we can afford to tie up a scholarship with a player who won't likely contribute. (Please tell me if I am wrong but I haven't heard anything from anyone of note on this board who is optimistic about Arop being a contributor going forward).

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hugh42 said:

 

Cheatham, maybe Burke. For this to happen though, the rotation would have to be expanded.

 

If he's here Mack is in the rotation and potentially starting. Somewhere past the lack of defense and maturity is elite speed and vision.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Husker Hoops Penitent said:

Since we are speculating on the starters and the significant minutes players might get I want to ask the open-ended question: why does Arop occupy a scholarship? Does anyone think if someone like C. Whitt has said yes to NU that Arop would have been asked to give up his scholarship? 

 

I could be wrong but it seems odd that in the hyper-competitive domain of recruiting we can afford to tie up a scholarship with a player who won't likely contribute. (Please tell me if I am wrong but I haven't heard anything from anyone of note on this board who is optimistic about Arop being a contributor going forward).

 

We'll cross the bridge of what happens if Bryce McGowens commits and we're over the limit on schollies when we get to it. Guys transferring out leaving us with open scholarships is pretty commonplace, especially for us. 

 

Otherwise, in a world where it's a nightmare to keep a roster together because everyone 'wants theirs' we have a guy who by all accounts is a plus for team chemistry, is from Nebraska, and who possesses what has been described as Power 5 D-1 athleticism so there is potential for him to contribute in a meaningful manner.  You should consider how fortunate we are to have someone like that at the end of our bench as opposed to pining to jettison whomever happens to occupy the end of our bench at any given time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Husker Hoops Penitent said:

Since we are speculating on the starters and the significant minutes players might get I want to ask the open-ended question: why does Arop occupy a scholarship? Does anyone think if someone like C. Whitt has said yes to NU that Arop would have been asked to give up his scholarship? 

 

I could be wrong but it seems odd that in the hyper-competitive domain of recruiting we can afford to tie up a scholarship with a player who won't likely contribute. (Please tell me if I am wrong but I haven't heard anything from anyone of note on this board who is optimistic about Arop being a contributor going forward).

 

With the approval of the one time transfer for next year I'd expect Fred to have a talk with him after the season about his future here and find a nice place for him to land and be able to play right away.  Should we land Bryce someone will have to leave, which someone always does, and he seems to be the most likely candidate.  

 

The thing that throws a wrinkle in that is if Webster comes back how does the scholarship process work.  If its like the expected for the other Nebraska can pay for his scholarship above and beyond the limit giving us an extended roster.  If not them someone else would have to go.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Husker Hoops Penitent said:

Since we are speculating on the starters and the significant minutes players might get I want to ask the open-ended question: why does Arop occupy a scholarship? Does anyone think if someone like C. Whitt has said yes to NU that Arop would have been asked to give up his scholarship? 

 

I could be wrong but it seems odd that in the hyper-competitive domain of recruiting we can afford to tie up a scholarship with a player who won't likely contribute. (Please tell me if I am wrong but I haven't heard anything from anyone of note on this board who is optimistic about Arop being a contributor going forward).

 

Let's see what he does this year.

 

He has some tools to build some game around. I wouldn't say he's a hopeless cause. He's a good kid who's willing to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheKamdyMan said:

 

The thing that throws a wrinkle in that is if Webster comes back how does the scholarship process work.  If its like the expected for the other Nebraska can pay for his scholarship above and beyond the limit giving us an extended roster.  If not them someone else would have to go.  

 

It's probably safe to assume the NCAA will treat the scholarship overage in basketball the same way they are treating it in football.  And in football they've said that any extra-year of eligibility senior won't count toward the 2021 scholarship limit, but will count toward the 2022 limit. 

 

Simply put, coaches have a one year grace period before they have to start managing the scholarship traffic jam.  So Webster would just be an extra scholarship player for us in 2021-2022, but if someone like Teddy wanted to come back in 2022-2023 then we'd have one less open scholarship to fill.

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

Am I correct that none of our projected starters except Yvan played even a minute for us last year?

 

Next question: Would any of our starters from last year save Yvan crack the rotation this year?

 

1. Correct. 

2. Crack the rotation, yes--Mack would crack the rotation in certain games if we didn't have enough help at guard.  Beyond him, I don't see Burke or Cheatham cracking the lineup because they can't shoot.  With the exception of Yvan, every other guy in the rotation is at least a reasonable threat from deep.  Banton might not be a great outside threat, but he will do all kinds of things to have a positive effect on the game if his outside shot isn't falling.  The shooting ability of McGowans, Allen, Mayen, Webster, Stevenson and Thor are really what changes the look of the team.  

3.  I'd also be beyond shocked if Thor isn't in the rotation this season.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're kidding ourselves if we think that Mack isn't still a starter on this roster.  He was one of those guys that was destined to either be The Man or off the team, and unfortunately he was the latter for us.  But seriously, he would've thrived this year surrounded by so many playmakers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aphilso1 said:

We're kidding ourselves if we think that Mack isn't still a starter on this roster.  He was one of those guys that was destined to either be The Man or off the team, and unfortunately he was the latter for us.  But seriously, he would've thrived this year surrounded by so many playmakers.

Maybe. But it's not surprising no Power 5 coaches wanted him after he decided to transfer. There's certain players you can't win with, no matter how talented they are. Cam needs the ball in his hands to be productive, and he's what they call a "ball-stopper". A guy like that usually isn't happy playing next to other playmakers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, millerhusker said:

Some behind a paywall notes (from a "source" who attends practice), so I wont copy and paste... 

The starting 5 is what we thought it would be. But we essentially have 7 starters. 

6th and 7th guys are Kobe ("players and coaches have raved about his play") and Shamiel ("phenomenal"). If Thor is our 8th guy, I think that's a real good sign. He was arguably the most consistent player on our team last year. 

Sounds like some mutual interest between Kobe and Hoiberg on Kobe returning for another year. This would be great, especially since he's apparently willing to accept a role as a non-starter. 

We're gonna play Creighton. 

 

 

Good stuff.

 

Looking forward to the season this year.    Trying not to think about next year because it could be messy unless they chose not to count returning seniors against the scholarship totals.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, millerhusker said:

Some behind a paywall notes (from a "source" who attends practice), so I wont copy and paste... 

The starting 5 is what we thought it would be. But we essentially have 7 starters. 

6th and 7th guys are Kobe ("players and coaches have raved about his play") and Shamiel ("phenomenal"). If Thor is our 8th guy, I think that's a real good sign. He was arguably the most consistent player on our team last year. 

Sounds like some mutual interest between Kobe and Hoiberg on Kobe returning for another year. This would be great, especially since he's apparently willing to accept a role as a non-starter. 

We're gonna play Creighton. 

 

No mention of Walker? Is he No. 9 then? Seems like he'd be part of the rotation, even if it's just a few minutes per half. Some fouls to give, some rebounds to grab ...

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

No mention of Walker? Is he No. 9 then? Seems like he'd be part of the rotation, even if it's just a few minutes per half. Some fouls to give, some rebounds to grab ...

I'd have to imagine he's in the mix also, but towards the end of the rotation. Depends how Yvan looks this year and how Lat shoots. 

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

No mention of Walker? Is he No. 9 then? Seems like he'd be part of the rotation, even if it's just a few minutes per half. Some fouls to give, some rebounds to grab ...

I expect Walker to be the 9th guy and get a good amount of playing time to start the season. I’m interested to see how our lineups evolve as the year goes on. I have a hunch we’re going to like our small-ball lineup with Lat at the 5 and Shamiel/Thor at the 4. It more resembles Hoiberg’s best Iowa State teams. He would often start a guy like Anthony Booker (6’9”  255lbs.), but only play them 10 to 12 minutes a game, and have Niang move to the “5” for the majority of the game.  A lot of NBA teams do this (Javale McGee started every regular season game for the Lakers but was like 10th on the team in minutes played). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Husker Hoops Penitent said:

Since we are speculating on the starters and the significant minutes players might get I want to ask the open-ended question: why does Arop occupy a scholarship? Does anyone think if someone like C. Whitt has said yes to NU that Arop would have been asked to give up his scholarship? 

 

I could be wrong but it seems odd that in the hyper-competitive domain of recruiting we can afford to tie up a scholarship with a player who won't likely contribute. (Please tell me if I am wrong but I haven't heard anything from anyone of note on this board who is optimistic about Arop being a contributor going forward).

I think arop, if he develops right, could be a contributor by his junior/senior year. If he can develop a consistent shot, I thought he showed enough last year on defense that can be built upon. We knew we would be taking on a project when they brought him in. This next year however, he likely won't contribute barring injuries. I'm semi optimistic on him however. We'll see him in cleanup with Wood 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, aphilso1 said:

We're kidding ourselves if we think that Mack isn't still a starter on this roster.  He was one of those guys that was destined to either be The Man or off the team, and unfortunately he was the latter for us.  But seriously, he would've thrived this year surrounded by so many playmakers.

 

He is a terrible defender and below average shooter.  He's also skinny for a big boy conference, and a headcase.  There is plenty not to like about his game with regard to the B1G.  We're essentially trading him for Webster--a scorer, scholar, and upperclassman who is a better all around player.  I really don't know where Mack would've gotten his minutes on this team unless he was coming off the bench for a small ball lineup.  He does have elite speed and passing abilities, so he definitely would've seen minutes.  But a starter running the show among new alpha guards like McGowans?  No chance.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I want this year is good basketball. Last year was glimpses of it, but by the end of the year the train fell off the tracks. I think this team can be good, but I just want good basketball. Mack leaving was in the best interest of everyone involved. Cross should do really well at Tulane and I'm honestly excited to see how he does. Burke will probably get a deal overseas. I'm just ready for the season to get here. 

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...