basketballjones

Go with your heart people NU 73 IU 72 4

Him kind of being a secondary point guard and primary distributor off the drive has been a revelation.

I’ll take the heat for what I am wrong about but I wonder if I’ll get credit for what I’ve gotten right...

My reverse jinx is a thing of beauty. I do have to defend my self a bit - my issues with Lat were rarely with his play. His attitude was becoming bothersome.

No....... Dangit.

He has, and they've worked on that and emphasized that. He's been pretty clear about that. Also, Shamiel doesn't start and gets yanked often.

Not if you've specifically told them not, and he still does it.

Carmelo Anthony is a Top 90 player all time in NBA Efficiency rankings. Stats don't always tell the entire story.

Can anyone provide clips of that "Greg from Myrtle Beach" segment? Tough to listen at work.

I have been saying this all year, with Stevenson. And with Lat's attitude towards refs, opposing players, and teammates lately (yelling at them in front of everyone, throwing his hands up, etc...) I would say it's time for him to get bumped. Also, I'd rather see this team attacking the rim to start the game versus shooting quick ones from 3. Stevenson gives us that.

NU 76 RU 71

Absolutely. Also - if Walker and Andre were eligible the entire year I don’t think we’d be “this bad.” Badish, still, just not this bad. Probably still playing on first day of big ten tourney.

Ha. Like that would be anything surprising haha

In my opinion, this Nebraska team has a lot of guys who are bad at the secondary fundamentals. For instance, Trey McGowens has probably been the top dude at every basketball camp his whole life. Probably won every award and 1on1 competition. He can’t run a 2 on 1, 3 on 2 break to save his life. Lat Mayen can probably win every shooting competition the team does. But he struggles to move his windows and pass within the flow of the offense. However, interestingly enough, Eduardo Andre kinda has poor basic fundamentals, but seems to have a very good feel for the secondary fundamentals of the game.

Thank for your input. Great write-up. My only disagreement is that I would probably swap these two. But that could just be a difference in semantics and where we draw the line on what a basic/secondary fundamental is. I think our guys are fine from a "basic, basketball camp" level fundamental perspective. I am just not sure you can even play at this level if you aren't. Personally, I feel our mistakes come from the mental side and poor secondary fundamentals. We turn it over because we drive into 3 man piles, like Coach has discussed. We don't seem to know where the help is coming from, what they're going to do, and have a player in a good window to accept a pass. Our spacing and execution of our plays and actions is often poor.

I really hope Kobe comes back if he really wants to. I love and appreciate Thor, but I think it's time to move on. I've said my piece.

NU 69 MU 65

Back in the day when I did basketball recruiting, we had a tool that we used to evaluate players and how much we would give in scholarships. How would you guys evaluate our current team or our recruiting class? By the way, this tool forced us to go beyond watching highlight tapes or open gyms. Makes you go see them in person or watch full game film. You can't analyze a lot of this by just open gyms or highlight tapes. 5 Areas: 1. Basic Fundamentals - Self explanatory. Dribbling, shooting, catching, 3rd grade basketball camp stuff. Grabbing the ball with two hands, outside hand passing. Being shot ready. Jump stops, pivots, proper finishing footwork. Head up while dribbling. Things like using ball screens, Euro-Steps, both hand finishes, etc... have kind of become basic fundamentals at the college level. Basic man2man principles. Common (2-3, 1-3-1) zone fundamentals. I could list more but I think you all get it. 2. Secondary Fundamentals - Knowing score and situation. Naturally spacing the floor. Knowing when to be selfish and when to not even hesitate about passing to the next guy. When/where to move on drives and give passers windows. Knowing what you're doing with the ball before you catch it. Executing at a snap of a finger whether you're going to rim drive or create drive based off of close-outs and teammates positioning. Passing while moving full speed into help. Hitting skips and opposite corners while driving. Executing different close-outs on moments notice and switches. Understanding of what other teams are trying to do offensively and defensively. 3. Size - Somewhat more complicated than just pure height, but obviously positionally related. Does the player have a "college athlete body," i.e., can they put weight on and get stronger (broad shoulders, long levers, big hands can be indicators). But Length plays a factor here, as does strength (in a way). For example, if you're 5'11" but you've got a 6'5" wingspan, usually something a coach can do with that. Or if you're short, but you're an absolute bowling ball, it can all factor in. 4. Functional Athleticism - Lots of guys are fast, quick, and can jump high. Can the player use it in the game? This can help "by the measurable" unathletic player too. Iowa and Wisconsin have had a ton of guys that wouldn't impress at a combine - but they have no problem finishing, driving by, getting their shot off, guarding, or getting rebounds. It actually works the other way too. I've been around many dudes who could put their face on the rim, but never dunked in a game because they just functionally did not know how to use their athleticism in a live situation. 5. Intangibles - Do they want it? Are they disciplined? Do they understand the weight room isn't a voluntary participation thing? How do they respond to criticism and hard coaching? How do they communicate with their teammates? Do they do well in school and treat people with respect? Do they bring energy or do they suck energy? Can they execute offensive sets, and those that have been drawn on the marker board?

What?

Sweet. Awesome. When that leads to us not being last place in the Big Ten please let me know. For now, my conclusion is still what I am going with - I don't think you can be a really good team if he is your best/go-to player.

Ding. Ding. Ding **Melo wasn't "Melo" in college. He played a role on that team, much like he does when he goes and does USA Olympic stuff.

I'm not sure that goes against my argument that he doesn't allow others to get in the flow. Wait, I said I'm done for the day! *logs out*

Sure hope you're right. But I'm not sure how great of a sign it is that your best player has to be "suspended," to get things right. And then after he's "got right" we're still 1-6. With that win coming from the 12th place team in the conference. Alright, I'm just arguing to argue at this point, so I'm out. Must have not got much sleep.

We had 38 points in the first half, 28 of his. When he scored 13 in the second half, the rest of the team scored 32.

Define hate....? I don't "hate," Teddy Allen. I am incredibly proud of the person he seems to have become after all the trials and tribulations of his youth and early career. He's also been the one fun thing to watch about this Husker squad this year. However - I do not believe that a team with Teddy Allen on it, taking most of your shots, and being your "guy," can ever be good. That's not hate. That's my opinion based off of experience and observation. He's streaky, inconsistent, and plays out of the flow of the offense. If he is not making shots, you're donezo because he's gonna keep shooting. And if he is, most of them just come at random times from random places, and no one else gets in the flow (see, Penn State from two nights ago).