Jump to content

Projected starting line up

kldm64

By kldm64
in The Haymarket Hardwood

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GhostOfJoeMcCray
GhostOfJoeMcCray

One thing that we need to remind ourselves is that part of coaching is just that, actually coaching basketball skills. We seem to get lost in thinking that Player A did this at his last school so that

Handy Johnson
Handy Johnson

From where we were after the A&M loss to where we are now I’d give Fred & his Entire Staff an A+ 

hhcmatt
hhcmatt

To me we're running a pseudo-zone out there and had a top-50 defense with Keisei and Wilcher on the court. Ability to understand our scheme and then just willingness to chase can make up for lack of n

hhcmatt

hhcmatt

Posted
Posted

At this point the depth chart is 

1. Worster/Ulis

2-4  - Everyone else

5. Morgan/Meah

 

 

At this time I see Essegian and Griffiths like I see Keisei and CJ: a couple of SGs where you play the guy with the hot hand. I think Essegian gets the nod because he's more experienced. 

 

I could see, with spots listed

Worster(1)/Ulis(1/2)

Essegian(2/3)/Griffiths(2/3/4)/Hoiberg(2/1)Janowski(2/1)
Williams(3/4/2)
Gary(4/3)

Morgan(5/4)/Meah(5)

 

Frager(Redshirt/3/4)

 

 

Art Vandalay

Art Vandalay

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, big red22 said:

I see a lot of people with Essegian as the 3...  I do not see him playing the 3 spot at all.  He is definitely a 2 through and through IMO

 

Starters Listed First

() - minutes at that position 

 

1 - Rollie(25)/Ulis(15)/Williams(Only gets minutes if there is foul trouble)

2 - Essegian(25)/Hoiberg(15)/Janowski(Redshirt or gets Hoibergs minutes)

3 - Williams(30)/Griffith(5)/Gary(5)

4 - Gary(30)/Griffith(10)/Morgan(Only gets minutes if there is foul trouble)

5 - Meah(20)/Morgan(20)

In Fred’s offense there is not really any difference in the 2-3 spots IMO. Doesn’t really matter except for who you can guard on the other end.

Art Vandalay

Art Vandalay

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

At this point the depth chart is 

1. Worster/Ulis

2-4  - Everyone else

5. Morgan/Meah

 

 

At this time I see Essegian and Griffiths like I see Keisei and CJ: a couple of SGs where you play the guy with the hot hand. I think Essegian gets the nod because he's more experienced. 

 

I could see, with spots listed

Worster(1)/Ulis(1/2)

 

Essegian(2/3/4)/Griffiths(2/3/4)/Hoiberg(2/1)Janowski(2/1)
Williams(3/4/2)
Gary(4/3)

Morgan(5/4)/Meah(5)

 

Frager(Redshirt/3/4)

 

 


Agree, I could definitely see Meah starting in some line up as well especially if you have a smaller 4 like Gary. You could have a Gary, Brice, GG lineup and Gary or Brice could guard the 4 spot as that is the only end positions really matters outside of the post because our offense is flexible.

big red22

big red22

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

At this point the depth chart is 

1. Worster/Ulis

2-4  - Everyone else

5. Morgan/Meah

 

 

At this time I see Essegian and Griffiths like I see Keisei and CJ: a couple of SGs where you play the guy with the hot hand. I think Essegian gets the nod because he's more experienced. 

 

I could see, with spots listed

Worster(1)/Ulis(1/2)

Essegian(2/3/4)/Griffiths(2/3/4)/Hoiberg(2/1)Janowski(2/1)
Williams(3/4/2)
Gary(4/3)

Morgan(5/4)/Meah(5)

 

Frager(Redshirt/3/4)

 

 

Essegian at the 4... I really hope we never have to see that lineup

hhcmatt

hhcmatt

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, big red22 said:

Essegian at the 4... I really hope we never have to see that lineup

 

You're right, I went overboard there. Going to revise.

GhostOfJoeMcCray

GhostOfJoeMcCray

Posted
Posted (edited)

Fred has been pretty consistent in his time at Nebraska with using an 8 or 9 man rotation, typically 9 or so in non-conference and 7 or 8 as the season gets down to February and injuries have happened. 

 

So let's ask it this way...if healthy, what's your order of confidence of a player being in the 8-man rotation at the end of the season?

 

1A. Williams (Brice and Juwan clear top 2)

1B. Gary (Brice and Juwan clear top 2)

3. Morgan (most skilled big man we have right now...has to play a lot)

4. Worster (I see no scenario where he ends up being on the bench given his well rounded game) 

5. Meah (whether he starts the game or not I don't know and it doesn't matter (unless we really want to win the tip)

6. Essegian (one of our most proven collegiate offensive players but will he play defense? And there's a world where Janowski outplays him) 

7. Griffiths (has a unique skillset but he'll need to shoot it better and play defense) 

8. Ulis (I barely have him ahead of Sam...I don't know what to think of Ulis, he was just OK at Iowa and we have two guys I listed below that are warriors) 

9. Hoiberg (I want to have him higher because I just feel like the dude will find a way to help us win games in February and March, and Ulis could be the one he bumps out) 

10. Janowski (if he is not in the rotation at the end of the season I think we will have had a very good year because I think he can play) 

11. Frager (if he is in the rotation at the end of the season we have likely had some bad injuries) 

 

 

Edited by GhostOfJoeMcCray
basketballjones

basketballjones

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, GhostOfJoeMcCray said:

 

When has a Nebrasketball season with high hopes ever worked out anyway? Seems our best seasons are the ones where expectations were cautiously optimistic. 

Well, if you want to phrase it that way, I would say that I am also not even cautiously optimistic at this point. 

Art Vandalay

Art Vandalay

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, basketballjones said:

Well, if you want to phrase it that way, I would say that I am also not even cautiously optimistic at this point. 


I guess we see it differently. To me we have more depth and potential than last year and last years team was pretty good. Morgan might not be Mast but the rest of the additions are or could be upgrades. Having a true PG (or 2) is a big deal to me as well. Doesn’t mean we will be better but gives me hope we can be better.

 

If we do get a good stretch 4, I think we are much improved over last year.

thrasher31

thrasher31

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

Connor Essegian is the guy I'm looking at next year. Seems like he has the chance to make a James Palmer type jump 

Offensive system we run is much more of a fit for him than Wisconsins, and they were a top 25 efficiency offense most of the year. Way they get their shots vs us fit his play style. Having positive size at that 2 spot also helps. I think one of him or Gavin need to take a leap to "day in day out contributor you can count on". Doesn't really matter who to me. There's reason to believe both could, but they just need to do it. 

B-town hoopsfan

B-town hoopsfan

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, basketballjones said:

Well, if you want to phrase it that way, I would say that I am also not even cautiously optimistic at this point. 

Rosters kinda clunky right now.  We have sacrificed some shooting for some length which I think we needed to do.  Don’t feel great about anyone after my perceived starting 5 + hoiberg though.  A 4 man that could play 20+ minutes a night would go a long ways to shoring things up. 
 

IF GG is the guy recruiting services thought he was out of high school and he can start at the 3 then slide Williams to the 2 a lot of this would be a moot point to.  Would just plain outscore people with enough length on defense to force a lot of turn overs and bad shots.  That feels like a big If tho 

Vinny

Vinny

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Fullbacksympathy said:

This won’t be the lineup but:

 

Brice 6’7”

GG 6’8”

Gary 6’7”

Morgan 6’10”

Meah 7’1”

 

Just once I want to see this monstrosity. 

Maybe when we play at Purdue. I’m sure they have a new giant ready to go now that Edey is gone.

big red22

big red22

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Art Vandalay said:


I guess we see it differently. To me we have more depth and potential than last year and last years team was pretty good. Morgan might not be Mast but the rest of the additions are or could be upgrades. Having a true PG (or 2) is a big deal to me as well. Doesn’t mean we will be better but gives me hope we can be better.

 

If we do get a good stretch 4, I think we are much improved over last year.

While I think any rational basketball fan would agree with you.  Having a true point guard is a big deal.  My counter to that statement... I think what made us so good last year was how different we were to the norm.  Mast was our main distributor IMO, and Morgan is not going to be that.

 

I am not going to downplay any of the guys we picked up, because I haven't seen them work together.  I also am not going to say what we got is better than Wilcher and Lawrence either.  With all that said, we could be very good or back to our old ways next year.  Rollie is the key, and if he is a good distributor I think Williams and Gary could be pretty dominant next year.  Oddly enough I think we may be better from behind the arc than our past season, but we won't have the same energy Keisei brought.

 

Just like football (on the field)... show me on the court.  The off season is for dreamers, I need actual proof before I say a group is an upgrade or not.  I guess I wish we waited a little bit, and pushed harder for Milicic.  I think part of the reason he committed to Tennessee is Morgan was already committed.  He was definitely more the style I think Fred likes than Morgan.  Obviously Fred took Morgan and sees something I do not, and I am going hold my hopes on that.

Edited by big red22
AGHANSEN

AGHANSEN

Posted
Posted

It was honestly kinda shocking how good we were last year without a trug pg.

Give a lot of credit to Fred and his staff for figuring out a way.

Just imagine how good we could have been last year if we would have had a true pg like Worster (top 25 team probably).

I'm really excited for the combo of Worster and Ulis.

I think they will completely change our offense in a positive way. 

Very few teams in college basketball find success without having a true pg.

Illinois was insanely talented, but their biggest flaw was they didn't have a true pg.

 

If you look at all the sweet 16 teams (except Illinois), all of them have this in common....a true pg.

 

 

AuroranHusker

AuroranHusker

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, big red22 said:

I see a lot of people with Essegian as the 3...  I do not see him playing the 3 spot at all.  He is definitely a 2 through and through IMO

 

Starters Listed First

() - minutes at that position 

 

1 - Rollie(25)/Ulis(15)/Williams(Only gets minutes if there is foul trouble)

2 - Essegian(25)/Hoiberg(15)/Janowski(Redshirt or gets Hoibergs minutes)

3 - Williams(30)/Griffith(5)/Gary(5)

4 - Gary(30)/Griffith(10)/Morgan(Only gets minutes if there is foul trouble)

5 - Meah(20)/Morgan(20)

 

The 2 & 3 at Nebraska are essentially "interchangeable parts."

 

AuroranHusker

AuroranHusker

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, AGHANSEN said:

It was honestly kinda shocking how good we were last year without a trug pg.

Give a lot of credit to Fred and his staff for figuring out a way.

Just imagine how good we could have been last year if we would have had a true pg like Worster (top 25 team probably).

I'm really excited for the combo of Worster and Ulis.

I think they will completely change our offense in a positive way. 

Very few teams in college basketball find success without having a true pg.

Illinois was insanely talented, but their biggest flaw was they didn't have a true pg.

 

If you look at all the sweet 16 teams (except Illinois), all of them have this in common....a true pg.

 

 

 

Illinois had several offensive initiators. They had plenty of options for that component. And they also got destroyed by eventual champ when given the opportunity at the Final Four. I'd say they acquiesced a successful season for themselves; nicely done, used car salesman coach.

 

Edited by AuroranHusker
big red22

big red22

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AuroranHusker said:

 

The 2 & 3 at Nebraska are essentially "interchangeable parts."

 

I just feel SF is meant for lean tall (6'6 to 6'8) dudes with guard like skills.  You know like Griffith, Gary and Williams.  And a PF is meant for dude like Morgan and Bolis.  Guys that are tall and built with less guard skills and more back to the basket skills.  SG is for dudes with a similar skill set as the SF, but could be 6'3 to 6'6 and a bit quicker.

 

Nothing is written in stone, but when thinking of how I'd like to fill the roster that is the ideal sizes and skill sets I'd look for at a D1 school.

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...