Jump to content
  • hhcmatt
    hhcmatt

    Haanif Cheatham is N

    Sign in to follow this  

      6'5" Grad Transfer previous played for Florida Gulf Coast, Marquette

       

       

       

       

    Visiting April 19-21 per Jon Rothstein.  Need to find the tweet

    Edited by hhcmatt

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Guy has quite a bit of experience in high major ball. This is a real nice land. Hopefully his shoulder can hold up. 

     

    Man if we land Mack and one solid big guy we could he very interesting next year. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    21 minutes ago, huskerbaseball13 said:

    Guy has quite a bit of experience in high major ball. This is a real nice land. Hopefully his shoulder can hold up. 

     

    Man if we land Mack and one solid big guy we could he very interesting next year. 

    Cam Mack and Jayce Johnson. 

     

    What you think?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    32 minutes ago, khoock said:

    Cam Mack and Jayce Johnson. 

     

    What you think?

     

    Seems like a very realistic possibility.  Part of me thinks that is the floor with this staff recruiting.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    26 minutes ago, jayschool said:

    Sounds like a four-guard lineup to me:

    1. Mack

    2. Green

    3. Burke

    4. Cheatham

    5. Johnson

     

    Probably. Still have about 4 spots to fill so there's room for a true 4 to be thrown in. 

     

    Regardless, I like the lineup versatility we can present. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, huskerbaseball13 said:

    Guy has quite a bit of experience in high major ball. This is a real nice land. Hopefully his shoulder can hold up. 

     

    Man if we land Mack and one solid big guy we could he very interesting next year. 

    Probably steps right into the starting 3 spot this fall

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, B-town hoopsfan said:

    Probably steps right into the starting 3 spot this fall

    Over Burke or Green? Those 2 are starting regardless. If Mack comes aboard then there’s 1-3 taken and Cheatham likely a 4/wing.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, ShortDust said:

    Over Burke or Green? Those 2 are starting regardless. If Mack comes aboard then there’s 1-3 taken and Cheatham likely a 4/wing.

     

    I think there will be plenty of minutes to go around for those 4. I think they could add another backcourt player and still keep everyone happy.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

     

    I think there will be plenty of minutes to go around for those 4. I think they could add another backcourt player and still keep everyone happy.

    Was more talking about the starting roles (as of now). I’m sure that there will be plenty of minutes to go around.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    46 minutes ago, B-town hoopsfan said:

    A 4 at 195 pounds? 

     

    Fred won’t have the “traditional” bigs. He wants guys to run and shoot. The “bigs” will be guys who can run and are athletic freaks. 6’8/6’9 guys who can jump. Have a feeling that Doc will have defensive game plans with a lot of doubles and traps to keep teams honest. 

    I cannot wait to see this team on the court.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    7 hours ago, B-town hoopsfan said:

    A 4 at 195 pounds? 

     

     

    I don’t see Cheatham as a 4, but who knows?  His stats indicate a willing enough rebounder.  I can see Amir there for sure though (see Iowa), and he’d be hell for an opposing big to keep up with in transition and penetration.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If you use a little analytics you'll understand why he doesnt necessarily care about height.  In theory anyway.

     

    This isnt the pros where you are going against 7'0 like durant every night.

     

    You need enough height for some rebounds.  But you need shooting from everyone.  Shoot 40% from 3 from 4 positions and you'll be fine.  A 3 is 50% more efficient than a 2 by definition.  That forces the other team to shoot 60% from 2 to keep up.  Even with "bad" defense it isnt that easy.

     

    In theory anyway.

     

    It ends up being a lot more inconsistent is the issue.  But can be very fun to watch if you pull it off with a couple stretch 4s in your lineup.

     

    Biggest thing is emphasizing what you do well and not playing scared.  Classic ncaa tournament runs are usually defined by guard play for a reason.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    39 minutes ago, kleitus said:

    If you use a little analytics you'll understand why he doesnt necessarily care about height.  In theory anyway.

     

    This isnt the pros where you are going against 7'0 like durant every night.

     

    You need enough height for some rebounds.  But you need shooting from everyone.  Shoot 40% from 3 from 4 positions and you'll be fine.  A 3 is 50% more efficient than a 2 by definition.  That forces the other team to shoot 60% from 2 to keep up.  Even with "bad" defense it isnt that easy.

     

    In theory anyway.

     

    It ends up being a lot more inconsistent is the issue.  But can be very fun to watch if you pull it off with a couple stretch 4s in your lineup.

     

    Biggest thing is emphasizing what you do well and not playing scared.  Classic ncaa tournament runs are usually defined by guard play for a reason.

    Shooting 40% from three is a big ask. If I found the right page there was only 5 Division I teams that did that last year. Three-point shooting is not 50% more efficient if you don't shoot a high enough percentage from behind the line. You can crunch all the analytics you want but if you don't have enough players who can shoot the ball at a high rate consistently, the three starts to become a very inefficient shot very quickly. To be successful in today's game you have to shoot the three but if you want to win consistently that way you need to shoot consistently. I may be old school but I prefer the Michigan State way of hitting you from the outside and the inside.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 minutes ago, Dean Smith said:

    Shooting 40% from three is a big ask. If I found the right page there was only 5 Division I teams that did that last year. Three-point shooting is not 50% more efficient if you don't shoot a high enough percentage from behind the line. You can crunch all the analytics you want but if you don't have enough players who can shoot the ball at a high rate consistently, the three starts to become a very inefficient shot very quickly. To be successful in today's game you have to shoot the three but if you want to win consistently that way you need to shoot consistently. I may be old school but I prefer the Michigan State way of hitting you from the outside and the inside.

    Michigan State led the Big 10 in 3-point percentage last year, hitting 37.8 percent of their shots, which was just 32nd nationally.

    1. MSU 37.8 (32nd place)
    2. Purdue 37.4 (43rd)
    3. Iowa 36.4 (76th)
    4. Wisconsin 35.9 (105th)
    5. Maryland 34.9 (149th)
    6. Illinois 34.5 (167th)
    7. Michigan 34.2 (192nd)
    8. Ohio State 34.1 (198th)
    9. Nebraska 33.9 (215th)
    10. Penn State 32.0 (294th)
    11. Minnesota 31.7 (306th)
    12. Northwestern 31.3 (315th)
    13. Indiana 31.2 (316th)
    14. Rutgers 31.2 (317th)

    Clearly, Big Ten defenses defend well against the 3. 

    Nebraska's non-conference percentage was 35.5, and that was against a very competitive schedule.

    In conference, Nebraska shot 32.2 percent.

    Expecting any of these JUCO players or players from mid-major conferences to equal their shooting percentages in the B1G might be a bit of a stretch.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    30 minutes ago, Dean Smith said:

    Three-point shooting is not 50% more efficient if you don't shoot a high enough percentage from behind the line.

     

    He means that a 3pt basket is worth 1.5 2pt baskets.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    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
    Add a comment...

    ×   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.


×
×
  • Create New...