Next seasons players

[hhcmatt]

50 minutes ago, REDitus said:

Given that we got out-rebounded 43-27 in the last game and Yvan and Stevenson didn't get any minutes and barely any minutes in the previous game, I'd say that's a pretty clear message that Hoiberg is not going to invest anymore time in those players.   It's unfortunate but it is what it is.   I would like to see all the players succeed but obviously the coaches don't believe there's enough progress there. 

 

Two completely situations. Stevenson has some usable talent but is a poor fit and Yvan is a good fit with underwhelming talent. The only message I saw was that he was playing the guys he thought would work in beating Penn St.  Assuming Stevenson wants to play minutes next year it's a win-win for us if he transfers. Yvan may or may not be content with the role of emergency backup post player; it's funny how much our value of team loyalty can be dependent on playing time.

[Minnesota_Husker]

Given that we got out-rebounded 43-27 in the last game and Yvan and Stevenson didn't get any minutes and barely any minutes in the previous game, I'd say that's a pretty clear message that Hoiberg is not going to invest anymore time in those players.   It's unfortunate but it is what it is.   I would like to see all the players succeed but obviously the coaches don't believe there's enough progress there. 
 
We should start a poll.   How many open scholarships will Nebraska have by the end of the month? 

Stevenson showed us some effort but I won’t lose any sleep over him leaving.

I would be very ok to lose a few guys if that opens up spots for a true PG(transfer) and some depth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[B-town hoopsfan]

1 hour ago, REDitus said:

 

 

We should start a poll.   How many open scholarships will Nebraska have by the end of the month? 

Over\under feels like 4.5 scholarships 

[Lohusker]

1 hour ago, B-town hoopsfan said:

Over\under feels like 4.5 scholarships 

I would say 3.5. There are 0 right now. 5 more players “could” leave, but that is on the high side, IMO . I’m thinking 3-4. 

[basketballjones]

I feel like we need to be pretty clear about what our expectations and understanding of “leaving” is....? Like if Thor, Lakes, and Webster don’t come back, that doesn’t count against anything “negative,” right? 

[hhcmatt]

19 minutes ago, basketballjones said:

I feel like we need to be pretty clear about what our expectations and understanding of “leaving” is....? Like if Thor, Lakes, and Webster don’t come back, that doesn’t count against anything “negative,” right? 

 

Almost positive Lakes counts as a schollie here next year if he comes back. The other two do not.

[REDitus]

I was thinking 4 would leave but 3.5, 4.5 or 5 all sound plausible to me as I have no idea in this day and age. 

 

I wouldn't mind having some guys stick around but I also think they could improve the team with a pt, big & wing (In that order. )     Who knows. 

[aphilso1]

2 hours ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Almost positive Lakes counts as a schollie here next year if he comes back. The other two do not.

 

This is truth.  The only guys who don't count against the schollie limit are guys that would have exhausted their eligibility this year, but decided to come back due to the one-time COVID rule making '20-'21 a free eligibility year.  Lakes was set to be in his final year of eligibility next year before all the one-time rule changes.  Ergo, he counts against the scholarship limit.

[Lohusker]

5 hours ago, hhcmatt said:

 

Almost positive Lakes counts as a schollie here next year if he comes back. The other two do not.

He had 1 year to play and planned to sit this year. When he got the waiver and played this year, he has now played 4 years of basketball. So he “should” be considered a Sr that doesn’t count against the limit for returning. Nothing official has come out though, and I know Washut doesn’t agree with me - but I’m holding to my theory until I hear differently

[BannedAccount]

Dont know if its been said thru all these pages but do we want players to leave?  13 schlorships and at most 10 will usually play.  Having guys like Shamiel and Yvan and woods can be ok if they accept their roles and understand that.  You arent going to have 13 4 or 5 star players.  The minutes wont work.  Im fine with all of them staying if they realize that and tranfering to lower schools doesnt mean more playing time.  The core needs to be strong and your role players that can contribute when needed due to fouls or injuries.  If there isn 7-8 solid guys, after that is just a bonus.  If anything, having a player or 2 redshirt or sit out would be ideal.  Just my $.02

[Minnesota_Husker]

Dont know if its been said thru all these pages but do we want players to leave?  13 schlorships and at most 10 will usually play.  Having guys like Shamiel and Yvan and woods can be ok if they accept their roles and understand that.  You arent going to have 13 4 or 5 star players.  The minutes wont work.  Im fine with all of them staying if they realize that and tranfering to lower schools doesnt mean more playing time.  The core needs to be strong and your role players that can contribute when needed due to fouls or injuries.  If there isn 7-8 solid guys, after that is just a bonus.  If anything, having a player or 2 redshirt or sit out would be ideal.  Just my $.02

I have mixed feelings on this.

Yvan for example- I would love for him to stick around and grow and learn... but the eye test tells me he just isn’t that naturally gifted. If he is open to learning and taking a lower level role, then sure.. happy to have him stick around but I don’t think he is ever going to be a major Minute guy.

Stevenson seems like a good dude who is not a bad guy off the bench. Happy if he is ok with being a 7-10 minute guy.

Wood- no idea on him. Again, if he is ok with just chilling and growing, I am cool with that.


I like the pieces we have coming in but certainly wouldn’t be against getting on the transfer market. I am ok with losing all three of the above if it means getting in more needed talent(PG/shooters)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jason2486]

For once, it'd be nice to have an offseason with no attrition. I feel like so often in recent years, we fill spots of players who leave with one year gap fillers that also don't pan out. It'd be nice to have guys start to stay for 4-5 years and see what they could become by their senior year. Think about how well that would potentially affect team chemistry as well.

[kleitus]

1 hour ago, jason2486 said:

For once, it'd be nice to have an offseason with no attrition. I feel like so often in recent years, we fill spots of players who leave with one year gap fillers that also don't pan out. It'd be nice to have guys start to stay for 4-5 years and see what they could become by their senior year. Think about how well that would potentially affect team chemistry as well.

 

Attrition the way hoiberg does it will work if your big 4 or 5 guys don't transfer. 

 

The whole point is to grab 2 or 3 sit-out transfers every year which helps both in practice (depth) and when people move on to the NBA or graduation.  Throw in some glue guys or young recruits as temporary glue guys and you have a solid roster most years after you get the routine established. 

[HB]

3 hours ago, jason2486 said:

For once, it'd be nice to have an offseason with no attrition. I feel like so often in recent years, we fill spots of players who leave with one year gap fillers that also don't pan out. It'd be nice to have guys start to stay for 4-5 years and see what they could become by their senior year. Think about how well that would potentially affect team chemistry as well.

 

Actually, I don't think it would be nice to have an  offseason with no attrition.  We have to have an immediate, substantial talent upgrade to be competitive in this league. 

 

We just finished 14th twice in a row.   Some of these guys aren't going to suddenly become good, or dramatically improve their game.  You're not going to win in the Big with guys like Lakes, Stevenson, Yvan, Wood, just to name some obvious ones.  While Bryce may hit the ground running (not a given in this league; 4 and 5 stars struggle in the bigtime conferences every year as true freshmen), the others will take longer, if at all.   So go get some dudes.   Eventually, it would be nice to lessen the transfer mercenaries, but right now its absolutely necessary.  (And would love to get Ty Ty, partially just to see the heads of the Jayskers explode).   

Edited March 12, 2021 by HB

[thrasher31]

Attrition happens at every school every year. It is no different here. 

 

ESPECIALLY with the one time transfer rule passing. I'd be shocked if a school doesn't have at least one player transfer. It's not an isolated Nebraska thing at all

[B-town hoopsfan]

1 hour ago, kleitus said:

 

Attrition the way hoiberg does it will work if your big 4 or 5 guys don't transfer. 

 

The whole point is to grab 2 or 3 sit-out transfers every year which helps both in practice (depth) and when people move on to the NBA or graduation.  Throw in some glue guys or young recruits as temporary glue guys and you have a solid roster most years after you get the routine established. 

Yup I think you want to try to carry over 8-10 guys every year no matter there skill level for experience and chemistry benefits

[Shawn Eichorst's Toupee]

Just to throw some numbers in there, in 2020, there were 1,030 players who transferred amongst the ~350 D1 schools. On average, that's almost 3 players per school who transfer.

 

I think we sometimes get a little bit too caught up in how many people transfer versus who transfers and why they transfer. 

[aphilso1]

24 minutes ago, Shawn Eichorst's Toupee said:

Just to throw some numbers in there, in 2020, there were 1,030 players who transferred amongst the ~350 D1 schools. On average, that's almost 3 players per school who transfer.

 

I think we sometimes get a little bit too caught up in how many people transfer versus who transfers and why they transfer. 

 

Last year we lost:

Mack (best player on team)

Burke (starter)

Green (part-time starter)

Cross (rotation player with 3 years of eligibility)

Easley (walk-on rotation player who shot 41% from 3pt range at SDSU this year)

Curtis (non-rotation player with 3 years of eligibility)

 

That is in addition to losing 2 of the 4 remaining rotation players to exhausted eligibility. 

Result: 1 starter returning; 2 of 9 rotation players returning in '20-'21

 

In HCFH's first offseason we lost:

Allen (starter with 3 years of eligibility)

Akenten (rotation player)

Harris (borderline rotation player with 3 years of eligibility)

Heiman (end of rotation player with 3 years of eligibility)

 

That is in addition to losing 6 of the 7 remaining rotation players to exhausted eligibility and the NBA draft.

Result: 0 starters returning; 1 of 11-ish rotation players returning in '19-'20.

 

In two years we have lost four starters plus a big minute rotation player, as well as multiple players with three years of eligibility.  These are not as straightforward as losing a 5th year grad transfer looking for playing time, or a kid who put in two years but has yet to crack the rotation.  Admittedly, there are extenuating circumstances with many of these examples.  However, none as big as the circumstances surrounding the hiring of Doc Sadler in 2006.  For those that don't remember, Collier left us high and dry late in the off-season and thus Doc was hired late.  Maric was home for the off-season at the time and decided that playing professionally overseas sounded a lot better than rebuilding a team from scratch with a coach he had never even heard of before.  So what does Doc do?  First act as head coach was to fly to Australia and re-recruit Maric and build the team around him.  

 

[hhcmatt]

For us, "No Attrition" is having just 2-4 guys that aren't going to change the course of the program transfer out. At minimum one guy has to go for us to get a PG.

[hhcmatt]

6 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

For us, "No Attrition" is having just 2-4 guys that aren't going to change the course of the program transfer out. At minimum one guy has to go for us to get a PG.

 

We're bringing in Bryce, Keisei, and WIlhelm

The guys I think we want/need back: Trey, Walker, Andre, Dalano, Lat

That's 8 guys.  If you look at those 8 guys as your starting rotation, then you have

 

Trey, Bryce, Banton, Dalano, Walker with Keisei, Wilhelm, and Andre in your rotation.  That's a starting 5 with a guy who hasn't played a minute of D-1 and that's a bench that is a center with 2 guys who haven't played a minute of D-1. When Hoiberg says they'd absolutely want Thorir and Kobe back, it's not lip service.

 

I don't think the other 5 guys should go; I think that some of them should go because we need to fill out this roster. We absolutely need a PG.  The other needs might be dictate by who might leave.  For instance if Yvan leaves do we need a 3rd center or are we going to roll out Lat/Wilhelm if we have either foul trouble or injury.

[Huskerone]

I'd just like to feel like we are starting to build something.  I'm not sure I've felt that after the past 3 years.  I know what Hoiberg started with, basically Thor, so an epic build for sure, thus I've given him a pretty liberal amount of grace.  I'm sure Hoiberg hoped for more out of his first class, but was an epic bust.  Maybe now longer relationships with recruits, means more of the type of players he wants, less reaches, maybe translates into less transfers?  I just hope the foundation is finally starting to be built.  Hopefully the players that decide to stay are bricks of that foundation. 

 

Can't fall further than last place, so its only up from here, right?

 

 

[HuskerFever]

14 minutes ago, Huskerone said:

I'd just like to feel like we are starting to build something.  I'm not sure I've felt that after the past 3 years.  I know what Hoiberg started with, basically Thor, so an epic build for sure, thus I've given him a pretty liberal amount of grace.  I'm sure Hoiberg hoped for more out of his first class, but was an epic bust.  Maybe now longer relationships with recruits, means more of the type of players he wants, less reaches, maybe translates into less transfers?  I just hope the foundation is finally starting to be built.  Hopefully the players that decide to stay are bricks of that foundation. 

 

Can't fall further than last place, so its only up from here, right?

 

 

 

We will see improvement next season, I'm very sure of that. Will that improvement be reflected in the wins column? I guess we'll see.

[hhcmatt]

41 minutes ago, HuskerFever said:

 

We will see improvement next season, I'm very sure of that. Will that improvement be reflected in the wins column? I guess we'll see.

 

We would have had 10+ wins this year if we'd had our normal allotment of cupcakes

[Bugeaters1]

And so it begins not much of a factor.

 

[Minnesota_Husker]

And so it begins not much of a factor.
 

WELP... Now we are screwed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk