Jump to content

A Norm Recruiting Poll: How'd We Do?

Norm Peterson

By Norm Peterson
in The Haymarket Hardwood

 Share

If 1 is we totally screwed the pooch and 10 is we knocked it clean out of the park, rank how we did in the portal and recruiting this time around.  

52 members have voted

  1. 1. Rank the roster turnover/replacements where 1 is total disaster and 10 is we assembled a Final Four caliber roster.

    • 1. Totally. Screwed. The. Pooch. Lost our only good players to graduation and the portal. Did not find anywhere near suitable replacements. Talent level is substantially lower than last year's bad team. This looks like Hoiberg's worst roster and we'll be lucky to log 5 wins.
      0
    • 2. It's bad, man. Lost way more to the portal and graduation than we gained. We'll backslide for sure this year. Maybe 5-7 wins.
      0
    • 3. It's bleak. Not optimistic. Did not find quality players for the players we lost. Looking like an 8-10 win season.
      0
    • 4. Not terrible but nowhere near good. Lost too much to portal and graduation and the portal was unkind in return. Some of the new guys have potential, but we're overall not as talented as we were last year. Guessing 11-13 wins.
      0
    • 5. We did OK, but only OK. We have returning talent but we didn't find any real position upgrades and the big needs at Center and PG look marginal. Maybe 14-15 wins.
      3
    • 6. Not bad. Bring back some talent. Didn't lose our best players to anything but graduation. Found replacements for the important pieces who could be alright. But probably not much better than a year ago. Maybe 16 or 17 wins. Possible NIT team.
      7
    • 7. Y'know, I'm not elated but I'm satisfied. We kept our best players who didn't graduate. We added suitable replacements for the guys who did graduate. And we upgraded the overall talent. This is looking like an NIT team. 18 or 19 wins.
      18
    • 8. Yeah, we nailed it. We kept the best players who still had eligibility. We found more than suitable replacements for the guys who graduated. We've upgraded the overall talent level and added some important depth. This is looking like an NCAA-caliber roster. 20-21 wins.
      24
    • 9. Dang. It. Huge upgrades across the boards. I can't even believe it. We are LOADED. This is a team that can reach the 2nd weekend of the Big Dance. Sweet 16, baby! 22-24 wins!
      0
    • 10. Apparently, I died and went to Heaven during the off-season. Or I'm dreaming. This looks like a blueblood roster. Get your Final Four tickets now because you won't want to miss this Husker team taking on Duke for a trip to the Title Game. 25-30 wins.
      0

Recommended Posts

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
Posted

Now that you've had a chance to kick the tires a bit, and check out the new guys, what do you think?

 

We lost a starting PG and big man to graduation. We lost a starting SG to injury AND graduation.

 

We lost a reserve forward to the portal. And we lost two projects, a PG and a post, to the portal.

 

But I'd argue we managed to keep everyone we'd have wanted to have back who still had eligibility.

 

This was for a team that was either the best of the worst in the league or the worst team in the middle of the pack.

 

Our crucial needs were to replace Walker and Griesel. Less urgently but still important, we had to find some front court depth. Then, we needed to generally find some talent upgrades.

 

And now we've added a big man off the portal who was the best player from the best team in the Mo Valley. We added another big who played 32 min/game and put up 8 and 7 on a roughly top 60 New Mexico team. We added a long wing who shot 40% from three at Charlotte. We got two PGs, one who started at Ball St and Missouri and another who started at Iowa (but might not be eligible.) And the two  true freshmen are long, athletic, and both appear to have pretty high upside.

49r

49r

Posted
Posted

it's #6 for me.  Probably could add a win or two on the total due purely to the cupcake-y-ness of our non-con schedule but otherwise it describes how I'm feeling about it.

HB

HB

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

Now that you've had a chance to kick the tires a bit, and check out the new guys, what do you think?

 

We lost a starting PG and big man to graduation. We lost a starting SG to injury AND graduation.

 

We lost a reserve forward to the portal. And we lost two projects, a PG and a post, to the portal.

 

But I'd argue we managed to keep everyone we'd have wanted to have back who still had eligibility.

 

This was for a team that was either the best of the worst in the league or the worst team in the middle of the pack.

 

Our crucial needs were to replace Walker and Griesel. Less urgently but still important, we had to find some front court depth. Then, we needed to generally find some talent upgrades.

 

And now we've added a big man off the portal who was the best player from the best team in the Mo Valley. We added another big who played 32 min/game and put up 8 and 7 on a roughly top 60 New Mexico team. We added a long wing who shot 40% from three at Charlotte. We got two PGs, one who started at Ball St and Missouri and another who started at Iowa (but might not be eligible.) And the two  true freshmen are long, athletic, and both appear to have pretty high upside.

 

I don't have the time, or level of interest, to research and gauge what the other teams in the league did in all these respects.  While your thoughts on who we lost, who we replaced them with, and who else we have make sense and seem pretty spot on, ultimately it will get sorted out not by how this roster compares to the last one, but how it compares to the other teams in the league.   What are their additions and subtractions?  Are our returning guys and FNGs (new guys) better compared to the portal transfers and recruits of the other guys?   We could be a lot better and still not move up enough spots if the other teams still have better dudes than our dudes.  Hopefully that isn't the case but hard to know at this point. 

tcp

tcp

Posted
Posted

wrestling between #5 and #6. this is the least attention i''ve paid to the offseason in years for personal reasons, so I already know I don't know squat. 

 

I wound up going with 5 because I believe firmly that you gotta prove it to get a shift in presumption. 

 

I'll stop thinking of them as being bad when they stop being bad. 

 

 

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, HB said:

 

I don't have the time, or level of interest, to research and gauge what the other teams in the league did in all these respects.  While your thoughts on who we lost, who we replaced them with, and who else we have make sense and seem pretty spot on, ultimately it will get sorted out not by how this roster compares to the last one, but how it compares to the other teams in the league.   What are their additions and subtractions?  Are our returning guys and FNGs (new guys) better compared to the portal transfers and recruits of the other guys?   We could be a lot better and still not move up enough spots if the other teams still have better dudes than our dudes.  Hopefully that isn't the case but hard to know at this point. 

 

Fair. But we cannot control how good the other guys are. We can only control how good we are compared with where we were the year before.

 

And so that's the question: Have we improved year over year from last year to this?

HB

HB

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

Fair. But we cannot control how good the other guys are. We can only control how good we are compared with where we were the year before.

 

And so that's the question: Have we improved year over year from last year to this?

Gotta watch them play.   I've seen all kinds of crazy conclusions over the years prior to watching them play in D1 games.

Navin R. Johnson

Navin R. Johnson

Posted
Posted

Maybe the most important sports analogy I learned over the years was that it's not how good you are, but how good your competition is.  I'm with HB that "I gotta watch them play" first but I do like the effort our coaches put in this off season to find certain pieces to the puzzle.  

cipsucks

cipsucks

Posted
Posted

Another factor to consider is this coaching staff is in year 2. They don't have to get to know each other.  I look for improvement over last year and I have few complaints from last year.

 

The return of the staff nudged me into voting 8.  

Huskerpapa

Huskerpapa

Posted
Posted (edited)

#8...but we could go anywhere from 7 to 9.  

 

I still believe our not so secret weapon will be Josiah.  One of his greatest attributes will be his hustle and effort.  He may be the #2 fan favorite behind Keisei. 

Edited by Huskerpapa
Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
  • Author
Posted
23 minutes ago, Huskerpapa said:

#8...but we could go anywhere from 7 to 9.  

 

I still believe our not so secret weapon will be Josiah.  One of his greatest attributes will be his hustle and effort.  He may be the #2 fan favorite behind Keisei. 

 

Don't sleep on Eli Rice is all I'm saying.

HB

HB

Posted
Posted

No one mentioning Brice Williams, and I heard some really good things about him last spring.   Seems like we have more depth than we've had in many years.

HuscurAdam

HuscurAdam

Posted
Posted (edited)

I went with 7, but I'm the cautiously hopeful type. I just gotta see progress on the court before I can give them more credit than that. If Nebrasketball has taught me one thing (besides how to deal with disappointment), it is not to presume an NCAA berth is in the offing. 

Edited by HuscurAdam
Art Vandalay

Art Vandalay

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, 49r said:

it's #6 for me.  Probably could add a win or two on the total due purely to the cupcake-y-ness of our non-con schedule but otherwise it describes how I'm feeling about it.


Nice work, thought you’d be a 3 for sure.

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, hhcmatt said:

It's interesting after watching a year with a very talented Bryce McGowens (or Oho St last year) that talent and results are being used interchangeably here.

 

I could be wrong here, but I feel like if I could plot a graph of all 360someodd D1 basketball teams where the X axis represents talent and the Y axis represents wins, the bulk of the teams would fall pretty close to a diagonal line that extends upward from left to right, with a smattering of dots in the left upper quadrant and the right lower quadrant. But there seems to be a correlation between talent level and win/loss record. It's not a perfect correlation, but a strong one nevertheless.

OmahaHusker

OmahaHusker

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, MichHusker said:

Anyone voting 6 or lower would be anticipating a coaching change, no?

 

If we at least make the NIT, I don't think there's any way Trev would make a move. If we don't make the NIT, I think it's 50/50. 

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 hours ago, hhcmatt said:

It's interesting after watching a year with a very talented Bryce McGowens (or Oho St last year) that talent and results are being used interchangeably here.


Additionally, that particular year, Bryce McGowens was a freshman as were CJ, Willhelm, Keon Edwards and Eduardo. Keisei was a sophomore. And Derrick Walker was a junior.

 

I’m not sure that roster compares very favorably, talent-wise, with the current group. So …

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...