If this team has a surprise star, who's it going to be?

[Norm Peterson]

Every now and then, a player comes along who turns out to be special when you weren't really expecting it. A lot better than you thought. A lot better than anyone thought. And, as a result, the team does better on the season than anyone expected.

 

Sometimes it's a total newcomer who was way under the radar; sometimes it's a vet who's been around awhile and it just never clicked before and, all of a sudden, boom, he becomes a world beater. A few years ago, that guy was James Palmer, Jr., who was far better than probably anyone had any right to expect. Before him, it was Terran Petteway.

 

For this team to climb out of the cellar this year, I am convinced that at least ONE of our guys is going to have to have a special year. ONE of our guys is going to have to be way better than we thought he'd be. A guy that opposing teams are forced to game-plan around. A guy that could carry the team. A guy that will challenge for All-Conference honors.

 

Many of us think our roster is composed of a bunch of role players with very little star power. Do we have a star this year? If so, who is that guy going to be? And, throw this in there as well, will he be good enough to win us some games we weren't supposed to win?

 

Thoughts?

[Cazzie22]

I selected Wilcher.  I don’t believe he will be a “star” but he may need to be productive on offense and should receive opportunities to score.  We will need his shot to go Dow  with some consistency.

[jimmykc]

I don't expect us to have a "star" like last year (thank goodness)

[nustudent]

Lloyd 

[AuroranHusker]

I picked Jemarques Lawrence -- more by association due to his prior winning pedigree -- to make an instant impact for this 2022-23 NU squad. Hopefulness of winning, basically.

[Handy Johnson]

6 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

Every now and then, a player comes along who turns out to be special when you weren't really expecting it. A lot better than you thought. A lot better than anyone thought. And, as a result, the team does better on the season than anyone expected.

 

Sometimes it's a total newcomer who was way under the radar; sometimes it's a vet who's been around awhile and it just never clicked before and, all of a sudden, boom, he becomes a world beater. A few years ago, that guy was James Palmer, Jr., who was far better than probably anyone had any right to expect. Before him, it was Terran Petteway.

 

For this team to climb out of the cellar this year, I am convinced that at least ONE of our guys is going to have to have a special year. ONE of our guys is going to have to be way better than we thought he'd be. A guy that opposing teams are forced to game-plan around. A guy that could carry the team. A guy that will challenge for All-Conference honors.

 

Many of us think our roster is composed of a bunch of role players with very little star power. Do we have a star this year? If so, who is that guy going to be? And, throw this in there as well, will he be good enough to win us some games we weren't supposed to win?

 

Thoughts?

Bandoumel is the obvious choice here in the Palmer/Petteway mold, but if it’s possible I hope we’re UNDER-selling Blaise & he becomes a real difference maker on both ends of the Court. Especially offensively…

[millerhusker]

I don't think we have that guy. I think the surprise will be that this will end up being Nebraska's best shooting team in over a decade. We haven't had a team shoot better than 34% from three since Doc was the head coach, which is sad but not surprising. Doc and Collier each had three teams that shot better than 36%, and each had one team that was close to 40%. On paper and in the press conferences, this year's team looks and sounds like a Doc/Barry team. There is no talk of leaving early for the NBA and no talk of how many points they scored in junior college. There is talk of selflessness, toughness and defense (I know, let's see it before we believe it). I just think the percentages will be up, due to the mindset and skillset of our personnel. Better decisions. There will be less off the dribble, off balance, contested, fadeaway threes. More catch and shoot threes. Our lead ball handler and decision maker is a guy who grew up in Lincoln, wasn't recruited by anyone and doesn't seem to care about attention, which is the exact opposite of what we've had in the past. Maybe since Jake Muhleisen. He also shot 38% last year. Bandoumel shot 35%. Wilcher shot 41% and it seemed like he had an off year. They say Wilhelm and Keisei can shoot it. Hoieberg also loves getting open threes in transition. If we are better on defense and better rebounding the ball, there should be more opportunities for that. Just my thoughts. 

[aphilso1]

Before practices started I would have said Lloyd.  But the more Fred talks, the more other players are mentioned and not Ramel.  That makes me think he's not even currently in the top 7-8 rotational players, much less ready to be a breakout star.

 

Our best scoring options (CJ and Walker) require a playmaker to set them up for buckets, and I don't think we have that type of playmaker on the roster.  My vote goes for "we don't have that guy".

[basketballjones]

Bandoumel seems like the obvious choice to me. I mean, if someone is capable anyways. Springy athlete, and slippery ball handler who played with some other jacks on his previous team. Might be the only guy we have to dice up defenses and penetrate. 

[Jacob Padilla]

The answer probably needs to be Griesel for this team to have a chance at success. We don't know exactly how his game will translate to the Big Ten (he made a huge leap last season, but didn't get a chance to test his improved game against any high-major teams), but he's the most well-rounded player on the team. I think Nebraska is really going to struggle if Bandoumel has a better season than Griesel. Sam isn't just a token culture guy. 

[Jacob Padilla]

53 minutes ago, basketballjones said:

Bandoumel seems like the obvious choice to me. I mean, if someone is capable anyways. Springy athlete, and slippery ball handler who played with some other jacks on his previous team. Might be the only guy we have to dice up defenses and penetrate. 

 

 I did not see that at all on his tape. I'm pretty skeptical of him as a primary initiator. He's a decent passer who makes good pick-and-roll reads, but he struggles mightily to score with the ball in his hands. This is from the film study I did on him that I previously linked elsewhere on this board (https://hailvarsity.com/basketball/nebrasketball-film-study-emmanuel-bandoumel/).

 

 

Quote

 

More than half his possessions — 53.3%, to be exact — came in spot-up situations. As a reminder, this category includes both catch-and-shoot looks and any driving opportunities after the catch. He scored 0.892 PPP (50th percentile, “average”), though he shot just 32.4% overall.

Two-thirds of his spot-up possessions ended in catch-and-shoot 3s, and he converted them at a 36.6% rate overall. He opened and closed the season on a bit of a cold streak (6-of-24 and 4-of-20, respectively) but shot 38-of-90 (42.2%) in between. It’s clear Bandoumel is confident in his jumper and comfortable letting it fly, whether his defender is close enough to contest or not. However, his efficiency cratered when he had to put the ball on the deck.

Bandoumel shot just 3-of-25 on pull-up jumpers (1-of-12 on 3s and 2-of-13 on mid-range shots), and it was an adventure any time he tired to get all the way to the basket. He shot 7-of-23 around the basket with five trips to the foul line and 15 turnovers. Bandoumel is a good run-and-jump athlete, but he seems to lack touch and coordination, and any kind of contact can lead to some wild misses around the basket.

 

 

[basketballjones]

1 hour ago, Jacob Padilla said:

 

 I did not see that at all on his tape. I'm pretty skeptical of him as a primary initiator. He's a decent passer who makes good pick-and-roll reads, but he struggles mightily to score with the ball in his hands. This is from the film study I did on him that I previously linked elsewhere on this board (https://hailvarsity.com/basketball/nebrasketball-film-study-emmanuel-bandoumel/).

 

 

 

The topic was who's going to "surprise," Jacob!

[uneblinstu]

I picked Wilhelm. His recruiting ranking tells me it should be him.

[Fullbacksympathy]

I got Keisei.  Strick said he’s improved in every area.  
 

Strick also said he likes this team based on a scrimmage too.  That’s a good sign coming from the best perimeter defender ever at Nebraska. 

[OmahaHusker]

Just listened to Bahe’s podcast. Seems like we might be improved by effort alone but it might not be enough to keep Hoibergs job. That’s year 1 stuff. Also Creighton is miles ahead which is obvious. 

[Nighthawk]

I'm saying right now that we don't have that guy.  Let's see after a few actual games that mean something.  Chadron State and that school out west that is best known for having it's student section booted out of a football game don't count for anything.  Huskers could win both games by 50 and it means nothing. 

[millerhusker]

12 hours ago, Fullbacksympathy said:

I got Keisei.  Strick said he’s improved in every area.  
 

Strick also said he likes this team based on a scrimmage too.  That’s a good sign coming from the best perimeter defender ever at Nebraska. 

I'm here to argue in favor of Cookie Belcher

[NUdiehard]

 

Most likely answer is we don't have that guy.  With that said, if I had to choose one, I would go with Wilcher.  Last year, Wilcher got off to slow start and still managed to shoot over 40% from 3.  Fred recently said he shot around 50% from 3 during the last two months of the season.  I don't expect that pace to continue, but if he could shoot around 40% on a high volume of 3s, that could boost his point total, especially now that he will probably be playing more minutes (averaged 24.6 per game last year).  CJ can knock down open shots, question is whether this team will be able to get him enough open shots.  He would have to shoot 6-10 threes per game to really boost his point average into the middle double digits, and that is a lot of shots for one guy who can't really create his own shot and may struggle to get open.

 

There is solid chance Griesel could end up being Nebraska's "best" or "most important" player, but he is a pass first type player and it is unlikely he is going to shoot enough to put up enough points to be considered a "star".  Now, those who really follow the team and understand his value to the team may consider him the true "star" even if he is only averaging 10 points per game, but it is unlikely he would be recognized in any form of B1G all-conference award or anything like that IMO.  

 

Bando is a player I think fans are going like because of his defense, energy and occasional hot shooting but I sense he is also going to be a source of frustration at times.  Last year he shot a respectable 35% on 3s on high volume, but he shot just 3-of-25 on pull up jumpers and shot just 7-23 around the basket with 15 turnovers (credit to Jacob Padilla for his excellent scouting writeup).  He is not a true PG and though not his fault, he is going to be thrust into the backup PG role and it could be rough for portions of the season.  

 

[Cowboy Kermit]

Give me some Wilhelm stock

[tcp]

Lue has a couple of years of eligibility left, yes? 

 

 

[Nighthawk]

After this game?  The

[NUdiehard]

 

Wasn't sure where to put this, but found it interesting (humorous?) enough to share.

 

On a recent Pick Six Pocast, Sam McKewon asked Tom Shatel how many players do you have to go down Creighton's roster before you get to Nebraska's best player (in other words, how many Creighton players are better than Nebaska's best player). 

 

Shatel said . . . . 10

 

 

[hhcmatt]

1 hour ago, NUdiehard said:

 

Wasn't sure where to put this, but found it interesting (humorous?) enough to share.

 

On a recent Pick Six Pocast, Sam McKewon asked Tom Shatel how many players do you have to go down Creighton's roster before you get to Nebraska's best player (in other words, how many Creighton players are better than Nebaska's best player). 

 

Shatel said . . . . 10

 

I see your dilemma on how to classify this as it was neither interesting nor humorous.  

[basketballjones]

1 hour ago, NUdiehard said:

 

Wasn't sure where to put this, but found it interesting (humorous?) enough to share.

 

On a recent Pick Six Pocast, Sam McKewon asked Tom Shatel how many players do you have to go down Creighton's roster before you get to Nebraska's best player (in other words, how many Creighton players are better than Nebaska's best player). 

 

Shatel said . . . . 10

 

 

I heard that too. 
That's such a difficult question to answer. Especially when you consider an actual "rotation" or positions. 

Not to mention that Sam Griesel went toe to toe multiple times with Baylor. 

[Dead Dog Alley]

1 hour ago, NUdiehard said:

 

Wasn't sure where to put this, but found it interesting (humorous?) enough to share.

 

On a recent Pick Six Pocast, Sam McKewon asked Tom Shatel how many players do you have to go down Creighton's roster before you get to Nebraska's best player (in other words, how many Creighton players are better than Nebaska's best player). 

 

Shatel said . . . . 10

 

 

 

Not arguing whether that was right or wrong; butI have serious doubts that Tom Shatel can count to 10.